Tuesday, October 27, 2009
A message for those looking to have a video professionally and reasonably produced.
It is my pleasure to announce this information to you and your readers in the Lower Mainland of BC [and the rest of the world for that matter].
Click on the photo to enlarge to read the message.
Kind regards
Johan Sandstrom BComm.
JohanPublisher@Gmail.com
www.youtube.com/whiterockreporter
www.whiterockreporter.com
Tuesday, October 20, 2009
How 'Blind Are You' When Walking or Driving While Talking On The Cell Phone, Mobile Phone? Loss of Concentration & Focus On Task At Hand.
Just How Blind Are You When Talking on a Cell Phone?
October 19, 2009...7:21 pm
http://neuronarrative.wordpress.com/2009/10/19/just-how-blind-are-you-when-talking-on-a-cell-phone/
Everyday in the news we see stories decrying the use of
cell phones while driving. Research reports aplenty have been released
estimating the percentage of ones attention siphoned by mobile jabber and how
little is left to focus on the highway.
That's exactly what the authors of a new study published in the journal Applied Cognitive
Psychology wanted to do. Researchers examined the effects of divided
attention when people are either (1) walking while talking on a cell phone, (2)
walking and listening to an MP3 player, (3) walking without any electronics, or
(4) walking in a pair.
The measure of how much attention is diverted during any of these
activities is called inattentional blindness“ not seeing what's right in
front of you, or around you, due to a distracting influence. If you've ever
watched the YouTube video of the gorilla walking through the crowd
of people passing around a ball, then you've seen an example of inattentional blindness (here is a great paper
on the effect downloadable as a PDF).
For the first experiment of the study, trained observers were
positioned at corners of a large, well-traveled square of a university campus.
Data was collected on 317 individuals, ages 18 and older, with a roughly equal
breakdown between men and women.
The breakdown between the four conditions
(with MP3, with cell phone, etc) was also roughly equal. Observers measured
several outcomes for each individual, including the time it took to cross the
square; if the individual stopped while crossing; the number of direction
changes the individual made; how much they weaved, tripped or stumbled; and if
someone was involved in a collision or near-collision with another walker.
The results: for people talking on cell phones, every measure
with the exception of two (length of time and stopping) was significantly higher
than the other conditions. Cell phones users changed direction seven times as
much as someone without a cell phone (29.8% vs 4.7%), three times as much as
someone with an MP3 player (vs 11%), and weaved around others significantly more
than the other conditions (though, interestingly, the MP3 users weaved the least
of all conditions).
People on phones also acknowledged others only 2.1% of the time
(vs 11.6% for someone not on a phone), and collided or nearly collided with
others 4.3% of the time (vs 0% for walking alone or in a pair, and 1.9% when
using an MP3 player).
The next experiment replicated the first, but only one measure
was tracked: whether or not walkers saw a clown unicycling across the square.
And this was an obnoxiously costumed clown, complete with huge red shoes,
gigantic red nose and a bright purple and yellow outfit. Interviewers
approached people who had just walked through the square and asked them two
questions: (1) did you just see anything unusual?, and (2) did you see the
clown?
The results: When asked if they saw anything unusual, 8.3% of
cell phone users said yes, compared to between 32 and 57% of those walking
without electronic devices, with an MP3 player, or in pairs. When asked if they
saw the clown, 25% of cell phone users said yes compared to 51%, 60% and 71.4%
of the other conditions, respectively. In effect, 75% of the cell phone users
experienced inattentional blindness. (The discrepancy between the 8.3% and the
25% might be because the clown didn’t register as something “unusual� — this is,
after all, a university campus.)
So, coming back around to the original point — if using a cell
phone impairs attention as drastically as this study shows for people just
walking, could it by any stretch of the imagination be a good idea to use one
while driving?
One caveat to that concluding question should be mentioned: As
noted in the results, people walking in pairs–most likely talking to each
other–were next in line for inattentional blindness. This jibes with research
(discussed in this TIME article) indicating that talking to someone in your car
while driving is significantly distracting–perhaps not quite as much as chatting
on a cell phone, but in the neighborhood. Auditory cues, whether from a phone
or from the person next to you, divert attention. The problem with cell phones,
however, is that a user lacks the other set of eyes his co-chatter has to offer,
which could very well be the difference between being in an accident or getting
home safely.
Hyman,
I., Boss, S., Wise, B., McKenzie, K., & Caggiano, J. (2009). Did you see the
unicycling clown? Inattentional blindness while walking and talking on a cell
phone Applied Cognitive PsychologyDOI:
10.1002/acp.1638
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A new study has shown that using a cell phone while walking is so
distracting that it causes inattentional blindness.
Washington, Oct 20 - ANI:
http://www.littleabout.com/news/40406,cellphone-usage-inattentional-blindness-walking.html#
Researchers at Western Washington University
investigated the effects of divided attention during walking.
Individuals were classified based on
whether they were walking while talking on a cell phone, listening to an MP3
player, walking without any electronics or walking in a pair.
In the first study, the researchers found
that cell phone users walked more slowly, changed directions more frequently,
and were less likely to acknowledge other people than individuals in the other
conditions.
In the second study, they
found that cell phone users were less likely to notice an unusual activity along
their walking route (a unicycling clown).
The study suggests that cell phone usage may cause
inattentional blindness even during a simple activity that should require few
cognitive resources. - ANI
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Increased Fatalities From Cellphones Whether Talking While Walking or While
Driving
Main Category: IT /
Internet / E-mail
Article Date: 05 Mar 2009 - 4:00 PDT
http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/141224.php#
Cell phones are a danger on the
road in more ways than one. Two new studies show that talking on the phone while
traveling, whether you're driving or on foot, is increasing both pedestrian
deaths and those of drivers and passengers, and recommend crackdowns on cell use
by both pedestrians and drivers.
The new studies, lead-authored by
Rutgers University, Newark, Economics Professor Peter D. Loeb, relate the impact
of cell phones on accident fatalities to the number of cell phones in use,
showing that the current increase in deaths attributed to cell phone use follows
a period when cell phones actually helped to reduce pedestrian and traffic
fatalities. However, this reduction in fatalities disappeared once the numbers
of phones in use reached a "critical mass" of 100 million, the study found.
These studies looked at cell phone use and motor vehicle accidents from
1975 through 2002, and factored in a number of variables, including vehicle
speed, alcohol consumption, seat belt use, and miles driven. The studies found
the cell phone-fatality correlation to be true even when weighing in factors
such as speed, alcohol consumption, and seat belt use.
Loeb and his
co-author determined that, at the current time, cell phone use has a
"significant adverse effect on pedestrian safety" and that "cell phones and
their usage above a critical threshold adds to motor vehicle fatalities." In the
late 1980s and part of the 1990s, before the numbers of phones exploded, cell
phone use actually had a "life-saving effect" in pedestrian and traffic
accidents, Loeb notes. "Cell-phone users' were able to quickly call for medical
assistance when involved in an accident. This quick medical response actually
reduced the number of traffic deaths for a time," Loeb hypothesizes.
However, this was not the case when cells were first used in the
mid-1980s, when they caused a "life-taking effect" among pedestrians, drivers
and passengers in vehicles. In those early days, when there were fewer than a
million phones, fatalities increased, says Loeb, because drivers and pedestrians
probably were still adjusting to the novelty of using them, and there weren't
enough cell phones in use to make a difference in summoning help following an
accident, he explains.
The "life-saving effect" occurred as the volume
of phones grew into the early 1990s, and increasing numbers of cells were used
to call 911 following accidents, leading to a drop in fatalities, explains Loeb.
But this life-saving effect was canceled out once the numbers of phones reached
a "critical mass" of about 100 million and the "life-taking effect" - increased
accidents and fatalities -- outweighed the benefits of quick access to 911
services, according to Loeb.
"The cell phone effect on pedestrian
fatalities" (Transportation Research Part E, Elsevier, Vol. 45, Issue 1, January
2009, with William A. Clarke, Bentley University, Waltham, MA,) looked at
pedestrian fatalities related to cell phone use; the still-to-be-released "The
impact of cell phones and BAC Laws on Motor Vehicle Fatality Rates" (Applied
Economics, Loeb, Clarke and Richard Anderson, New Jersey City University),
examines all cell-related traffic fatalities. Loeb and his co-authors used
econometric models to analyze data from a number of government and private
studies, including those by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration,
the Department of Transportation, MADD, and the U.S. Census Bureau, among
others.
He and his co-authors recommend that governments consider more
aggressive policies to reduce cell phone use by both drivers and pedestrians, to
reduce the number of fatalities.
Source: Carla Capizzi
Rutgers University
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Recent research suggests that walking and talking on a cell phone can be
These phenomena have also been demonstrated recently in studies about cell
This is an excerpt from Motor
An Excerpt published her by courtesy of : http://www.whiterockreporter.com
Walking while talking on a cell phone can be dangerous
By Richard A. Schmidt, PhD, and Craig A. Wrisberg,
http://www.humankinetics.com/excerpts/excerpts/walking-while-talking-on-a-cell-phone-can-be-dangerous
PhD.
dangerous (Hatfield & Murphy, 2007). In that study, the behaviors of more
than 500 pedestrians were observed as they crossed a street. Pedestrians who
were talking on a cell phone moved more slowly and were less likely to wait for
cars to stop or even look at traffic before setting out compared with those who
were not using a cell phone. These findings suggest that talking on a cell phone
is a form of cognitive distraction that can put pedestrians at risk.
phones and driving (see Strayer, Drews, & Johnston, 2003). It is not simply
the buttonpressing that is distracting; the conversation itself is
distracting—especially when you consider that button-pressing is brief and
conversation may be lengthy. This casts doubts about the effectiveness of the
recent bans on handheld cell phones (but not hands-free phones) while driving in
various U.S. states; because it is not only the action of the hands that is
distracting, these bans might not have very much effect on driver safety.
Learning and Performance, Fourth
Edition.
Sunday, October 18, 2009
Biological Effects; from 2311 Studies. Electromagnetic hypersensitivity
Biological effects referring to 2311studies
Electromagnetic hypersensitivity
EHS is an expression created by the industry (as the nocebo effect...)
and spread around the world by the WHO, more specifically by M.Repacholi, to transfer the responsibility to people instead of admitting that they are environmental victims. EHS was known from long time as MICROWAVE SICKNESS or RADIO-FREQUENCY SICKNESS.
About that, you could download the 1972 report of the Naval Medical Research Institute in USA, admitting biological effects referring to 2311 studies !
You can download it at :
http://handle.dtic.mil/100.2/AD750271
http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=AD750271&Location=U2&doc=GetTRDoc.pdf
Very
Truly Yours.
Philippe Hug
PS : copy to all/DS
Published by
The 'White Rock Report'
JohanPublisher@gmail.com
Dr. Magda Havas Publishing 'hot off the press' website on electromagnetic pollution; 'children at risk in schools'. Alarming Reports.
Dear Audience.
This must be said before we go on.
In the midst of the reporting of all the bad news and hoaxes spreading like wildfire in North America; constant reports spiced to nurture sensationalism like the most recent from Colorado and a helium balloon and a six-year old alleged to have take a joy-ride over the skylines and supported by parents who should know better.
Hey..... this is ridiculous to notice CNN and News Reports and Larry King programming taking up so much valuable time wasted on totally useless and unproductive analysis and reporting which doesn't benefit anyone but the news agency and its advertisers, perhaps.
I ask CNN to 'Please come to order' and get your priorities straight.
So much for my negativity and constructive criticism this time.
'Electromagnetic Pollution and its damages caused in humans'.
The good news is that scientists are concerned and do forward their discoveries and theories in rapid pace.
Examples are the following interesting and verifiable and recognized sources of information.
On the topics of pollution, general and air, water and environmentally most contaminants are seemingly chemically induced and introduced into our models of lifestyles at our homes or work environments.
Protection, personal awareness and and vigilant observations and reporting are imperative components intended to 'report to prevent' and the call goes out to anyone concerned after reading a little on the most health focused challenges we may face today..the knowledge that we now stand the big risk of 'killing ourselves' by not heeding the dangers and warnings delivered on the topic 'electromagnetic pollution' and the fact symptoms are surfacing and establishing the illness and condition described as 'electro-magnetic hypersensitivity' in humans.
One source I can recommend and promote in this column, the 'White Rock Report', is Dr. Magda Havas, B.Sc., Ph.D. and she is involved and work with the Environmental and Resource Studies Program, Trent University
Peterborough, Ontario, Canada; Here is the contact info for your convenience:
Dr. Magda Havas, B.Sc., Ph.D.
Environmental and Resource Studies Program, Trent University
Peterborough, ON K9J 7B8, CANADA
email: mhavas@trentu.ca
phone: 705-748-1011 x7882
fax: 705-748-1569
Magda Havas is a scientist, researcher, author and writer on issues mentioned above. She is writing me this:
"Hi,
I have two new websites that are "hot off the press".
1. www.magdahavas.com deals primarily with electromagnetic issues intended for a general audience.
2. www.magdahavas.org is my academic website site that has my research on chemical contaminants and electromagnetic pollution.
Please visit the sites and let me know what you think of them. I plan to update them regularly (especially the general one) with hot topics and items in the news.
Feel free to link to these sites, as you see fit, and to send them to those who many be interested in the information provided.
-magda
____________________________
Dr. Magda Havas, B.Sc., Ph.D.
"
-end of quote -
It's a pleasure and my sincerest wishes this information is being processed, digested and made notes of in every home, by every family and parent anywhere.
I ask you to become part of the puzzle and the solution and the global network and movement to protect our children from the negative consequences caused by 'wireless; devices, cell phone towers and many more 'contraptions for convenience' that must be modified, re-developed and made safer
You will read and know about the fact supporting the claims and warnings to parents and their children at home and at school 'not to use wireless technology' not accept wireless Internet access in the school and home or work environments.
"Don't microwave your brain" and don't let your young ones become victims of 'tools of convenience' not yet tested, but still being sold in the global market places.
Pass this article on to anyone you may think would be concerned about juvenile health issues; child brain safety and more...
Johan Sandstrom, BComm.
Publisher
The White Rock Report
www.whiterockreporter.com
Johan@whiterockreporter.com
Saturday, October 17, 2009
Awakenings in White Rock, BC Available and Services for sale; Focal Point of the 'esoteric' and uncommon for most folks
Intuitive Fractal Readings - Fractal art, also known as Energy Art. Featured in magazines in Canada and the US. Fractals emanate and express energy. Wonderful for moving energy in the home or office. Perfect for Feng Shui remedies. Personal intuitive fractals created from an individuals unique energy pattern, aura and soul vibration. By Fractal Artist Cheryl Lee Harnish.
Orgone Generators by Reinhard Stanjek - Orgone Generators change negative EMF (ElectroMagnetic Energy) into pure, positive life energy. All living organisms find positive orgone beneficial to health and wellbeing. These devices purify the energy emitted from cell phones, computers, microwaves and more. Richmond - Vancouver, BC.
Feng Shui Consultant Vancouver Victoria Balancing Essentials - Offering solutions to your health, wealth and different wellness concerns through seminars, classes, corporate, home and business consultations. Marlyna Los is a classically trained Feng Shui Consultant who travels world wide to teach and consult. Office locations - Vancouver and Victoria.
Hypnotherapy Schools - Vancouver, Hypnotherapy Training Coastal Academy Of Hypnotherapy, “Helping Others To Heal” White Rock, BC. Train to become a Certified Clinical Hypnotherapist. Registered with the International Medical & Dental Hypnotherapy Association.
Hypnotherapy Surrey Langley BC Kim's Hypnotherapy, Quit Smoking, Lose Weight Naturally, Relationship Healing, Energy and Chakra Work and Past Life Regressions. Kim is a Certified Clinical Hypnotherapist who can help you make the changes you need through hypnosis. Safe and quiet environment. "Helping You Find Inner Peace".
Printing - Digital Printers, Langley We are the professional's choice of printers. Digital printing of business cards, brochures, wedding invitations and more. Serving Langley, Surrey, Abbotsford and Vancouver, BC
Monday, October 12, 2009
Our Children Are In Danger; Cancer Kills; Electro-Magnetic Hypersensitivity; a New Epidemic...
"Martin,
I'm attaching an article from our local newspaper because it marks
the first time an Irish municipality has challenged county and
national bodies on the issue of EMFs following a visit here by Prof.
Olle Johansson in March. It took them long enough. Unfortunately, they
didn't challenge police authorities over the erection of a Tetra mast
at the local police station within 1,000 metres of 5 schools and 2,000
children.
Our website is
www.eirewaves.com
where you can find Prof. Johansson's presentation.
Kind regards,
John Weigel
-------------------
Note: The presentation by Prof. Olle Johansson is excellent and well worth
watching and listening to!
Martin"
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Radiation: A silent killer among us Published By Times Herald Posted: 10/11/2009 01:00:30 AM PDT
http://www.timesheraldonline.com/opinion/ci_13537635
Notice to all parents:
Since there exists no official agency empowered to regulate, monitor or enforce the public's exposure to dangerous microwave radiation, and our Federal Communications Commission has allowed the telecommunications industry to dictate the laws since 1996 and abdicated its duty to protect the citizens, the wireless industry is saturating our environment with deadly microwaves 24-7.
As new toys are invented, the relay transformers on existing cell phone towers are increasing and thousands more are being built.
Over the past years, many research studies around the world have proven beyond any reasonable doubt that our children, still developing their immune systems and brain cells, are extremely vulnerable to microwave radiation.
This is perhaps the most likely reason our country is suffering from cancer clusters among our children, an epidemic unprecedented in our history.
While the rest of the world, even China and Russia, have established strict guidelines of acceptable radiation exposures, which are hundreds of times lower than the United States' recommended levels, we ignore the issue because we are too busy buying cell phones for our kids (not allowed under 18 years of age in Europe), Blackberry's and other toys, building new cell towers, building more oncology clinics, selling more drugs for our pharmaceutical companies, and planning "walks" for cancer research.
Cancer is big business.
In measuring the microwave radiation levels around the existing cell towers in Vallejo, I am ready to move to the country. The energy from the fake tree on Springs Road and Springstowne Middle School is enormous, extending full strength across the entire playing-field. Our children play in this field every day.
There is also a violation of the "Radiation Hazard" sign required by the FCC, as it is obscured and cannot be read.
There are other areas that can be categorized as extremely intensive: The tower at Jesse Bethel High School, City Hall buzzing from the transformers on top of the senior care facility across the street, the top of the hill at St. Vincent's church,(is the mayor's office on the third floor?), Lemon Street, Valle Vista Street, and the intersection of Sonoma Boulevard and Highway 37.
American Canyon and Highway 29, meanwhile, are off the scale. Why are the cell phone transformers on top of the school gym at Vallejo Jr. High School? Why are they on the roof tops of the Benicia schools?
The worst case scenario is the horrific specter of being in a crossfire, confined in the center of two powerful cell phone microwave towers. Such is the case in Fallon, Nev., where there is a government conspiracy of silence in regards to the children's cancer cluster in this quaint high desert town.
Another area of concern is the Blue Oak School in Napa, three stories high, caught in the middle of the AT&T building and the powerful tower at City Hall. To add a measure of plausibility, review the latest lethal weapon of our military:
The "Microwave Gun" designed for crowd and riot control.Remember the American Embassy in Moscow when it was under continuous microwave radiation? Call the FCC in San Francisco and ask them who is in charge. Ask them why they allowed the law which states that the public "cannot protest the placement of a cell phone tower for health risk hazards, only for aesthetic reasons."
This is absolutely true. Call the California Department of Public Health, or the Solano County Health Department, and you will be talking to Laurel and Hardy. If you are in close proximity to one of these cell phone towers, you should be concerned.
Most countries prohibit these towers from being erected near schools, but we place them on school property. Parents, there are many credible sources for you to research and you will be amazed.
We must get involved because this is a critical health issue we simply cannot ignore.
Source: Lyndon E. Lafferty
Compliments of the Editor.
JohanPublisher@Gmail.com
www.whiterockreporter.com
Friday, October 9, 2009
French Senate Moves to Ban Mobile Phones in Schools"
Quote:
"French Senate Moves to Ban Mobile Phones in Schools"
Credits/author; Peter Sayer, IDG News Service
http://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/article/173408/french_senate_moves_to_ban_mobile_phones_in_schools.html
Friday, October 09, 2009 9:00 AM PDT
Pupils at French primary schools and middle schools could be banned from using mobile phones in school under draft legislation approved Thursday by the French Senate.
The measure, proposed by the government, is just one clause of an enormous piece of environmental legislation that must still be debated by the National Assembly before it has any chance of becoming law.
The restriction on phones was the subject of vigorous debate on Wednesday, with one senator pushing for the ban to be limited to the classroom for older pupils, so that they could make calls in the corridors during breaks.
Many schools already ban the use of phones in their code of conduct.
Nevertheless, school teachers report that pupils regularly exchange text messages in the classroom, with some occasionally even making or answering calls there, making it difficult to maintain classroom discipline.
The proposed legislative ban, though, is for health rather than educational reasons, with the government wanting to apply the "principle of precaution" in the absence of guarantees that the electromagnetic radiation emitted by mobile phones is perfectly safe for young children.
The government is in the middle of a long consultation of the effects on health of emissions from mobile phones and transmitter masts. The French Agency for Environmental and Occupational Health Safety is expected shortly to publish the latest in a series of regular reports for the government on the health and safety of mobile phones.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"French Senate wants cellphone ban for kids"
Last Updated: Thursday, October 8, 2009 |
http://www.cbc.ca/consumer/story/2009/10/08/france-cellphone-ban.html
France's Senate wants to forbid children in primary and middle schools from using cellphones, amending a sweeping environment bill to include such a ban.
Senators added a line this week about cellphones to an article of the bill on exposure to communications equipment "posing a risk to health."
The measure would ban pupils up through about age 14 from using cellphones in school. It also approved a measure banning cellphone advertising that targets children under 14.
The changes would need approval by the lower house of parliament, the National Assembly. Both houses are dominated by President Nicolas Sarkozy's party UMP.
A poll published Tuesday says many French pupils use cellphones in class even when school rules forbid it.
An investigation by CBC's Marketplace last year found experts who raised concerns that excessive cellphone use was not safe for children. Studies have found cellphone signals penetrate farther in the brains of children.
In July 2008, Toronto's department of public health issued an advisory that teenagers and young children to limit their use of cellphones to avoid potential health risks.
The advisory — believed to be the first of its kind in Canada — warned that because of possible side effects from radio frequencies, children under eight should only use a cellphone in emergencies and teenagers should limit calls to less than 10 minutes.
"Teach them the ways to use a cellphone responsibly — to make shorter calls, to use other modes of communication; if it's possible, use a land-line," said Loren Vanderlinden, a health department supervisor and the report's author.
The Marketplace survey of 1,084 kids between the ages of nine and 13 across Canada found that just under 40 per cent of kids had their own cellphone. The average age of when they got their first cellphone was 10.5.
Only 7.5 per cent said they used a headset with their cellphone.
With files from the Associated Press
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Cell Phones and Cancer: How To Stay Safe"
by Dr. Andrew Weil
Founder and director of the Arizona Center for Integrative Medicine
Posted: October 9, 2009 03:13 PM
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/andrew-weil-md/cell-phones-and-cancer_b_315714.html
Do cell phones cause cancer? The question has nagged researchers and users for the entire time - roughly the last 20 years - that these phones have been in common use.
The Food and Drug Administration's website states,
"The weight of scientific evidence has not linked cell phones with any health problems."
The FDA emphasizes that cell phones emit low-level, non-heating radio-frequency (RF) energy, rather than electron-stripping ionizing radiation, the type proven to permanently damage tissues and disrupt DNA.
But damage from RF energy may be cumulative over very long periods. Since cell phones show no signs of going away - indeed, most American children today face a lifetime of exposure - it's vital to focus closely on the most recently published studies, the ones that show the effects of longer-term exposure.
I am not persuaded that the FDA has done that sufficiently.
Recently, the Environmental Working Group (EWG), a Washington, D.C.-based nonprofit organization that advocates for health-protective policies, has reported on key studies (including, crucially, several recent ones, published from 2007 to 2009) that link radiation from long-term cell phone use with increased risks of brain and salivary gland tumors, migraines and vertigo, as well as behavior problems in children, including hyperactivity.
Among the findings cited:
* An analysis of 25 earlier studies by two research groups showing a 50 to 90 percent increase in the risk of glioma (a brain tumor that is frequently malignant) on the side of the head favored for cell phone use in individuals who had used cell phones for more than 10 years. It also showed a 60 percent increase in acoustic neuromas, benign but troublesome tumors of a cranial nerve among long-term cell phone users
* A 50 to 60 percent increased risk of salivary gland tumors among people who used cell phones frequently.
* A 10 to 20 percent increased risk of hospitalization for migraine and vertigo among long-term cell phone users.
* An 80 percent increased risk for emotional and hyperactivity problems among young children who use cell phones and whose mothers used cell phones during pregnancy.
All of this sounds very alarming, and it is not good news, but it is important to keep the numbers in perspective. When speaking in terms of a percentage increase in risk, bear in mind that if, for example, one person out of 100 is normally at risk of a brain tumor, a 100 percent increase in risk means that two people out of 100 would be at risk.
It does not mean that as a cell phone user, you have a 100 percent chance of developing a brain tumor. The actual risk to a given individual indicated by these studies is quite small.
Still, I believe prudence is warranted.
The EWG report maintains that current U.S. government radiation standards are outdated. It noted that in 2008, the European Parliament passed a resolution urging member countries to develop lower radiation limits for cell phones - no such steps have been taken in the U.S.
Here, particular concern is focused on the amount of radiation that could penetrate a child's softer, thinner skull (roughly twice the amount that could penetrate an adult skull) and that long-term cell phone use starting in childhood could pose even bigger risks than those already documented.
Experts in the U.S. and Europe have advised limiting youngsters' cell phone use.
Fortunately, the smart response to this report is not necessarily to abandon or even curtail cell phone use, but rather to use them more carefully.
The saving grace of cell phones is that, like all point-sources of radiation, they obey the inverse-square law: the strength of an electromagnetic field is inversely proportional to the square of the distance from the source point.
This means that if you move the phone twice as far away from your head, you get one quarter the RF; move it three times farther, you get one-ninth the RF. So rather than clasping the phone to your ear (roughly one inch from your brain), use the phone in speaker mode (roughly 15 inches from your brain) and you'll drop the RF to your brain to a mere 1/225th of the against-the-ear dosage.
Aside from that, the EWG check list for safe cell phone use is similar the safety tips I've been recommending for some time:
* Save long conversations for land-line phones.
* Use a headset or the speakerphone setting, and keep the phone itself away from your body.
* Find out how much radio-frequency energy your cell phone emits. This measurement is called the Specific Absorption Rate or SAR. The SAR permitted in the United States is 1.6 watts per kilogram. The FCC maintains a list of the SAR of various phone models; the EWG also has a simple tool to check your phone's emissions.
Specific Absorption Rate or SAR. The SAR permitted in the United States is 1.6 watts per kilogram. The FCC maintains a list of the SAR of various phone models; the EWG also has a simple tool to check your phone's emissions.
The EWG also contends that the U.S. government should require phones to be labeled with their radiation emissions at the point of sale. I agree.
Andrew Weil, M.D., is the founder and director of the Arizona Center for Integrative Medicine and the editorial director of www.DrWeil.com. Become a fan on Facebook and follow Dr. Weil on Twitter.
Read more at: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/andrew-weil-md/cell-phones-and-cancer_b_315714.html
Above is a contribution/distribution text voluntarily posted for your pleasure and information.
Compliments of:
Johan@whiterockreporter.com
http://www.whiterockreporter.com

