Chuck Norris warns utility companies aren't telling whole truth on electrosmog

Published: 07/08/2011 at 10:11 AM

by Chuck Norris This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it

Chuck Norris is the star of more than 20 films and the long-running TV series "Walker, Texas Ranger."

His latest book is entitled The Official Chuck Norris Fact Book." Learn more about his life and ministry at his official website, ChuckNorris.com.

Mr. Norris, I hear that the new smart meters, which are being placed on our homes to monitor our utility usage, are bad for our health. Do you know anything about these? – “Confused in California”

Smart meters are being installed stealthily by water, gas and electric utility companies on houses and buildings across the country. Despite that, the majority of the public still doesn’t know about their potential health risks.

From the moment smart meters began to be installed, a rash of serious health complaints in each community have followed – to date, largely going unheeded by officials. These aren’t hysteria or hype, but bona fide national health concerns about what is being emitted from smart meters and their cumulative effects on electrosmog in our homes.

Last week, I defined “electrosmog” and gave you a broad explanation of how our world is being bombarded by it. In short, electrosmog is pollution through electromagnetic energy. It is being produced by this vast post-Edison world, in which electromagnetic fields and flows have inundated the space around us. I ended the article not only recommending a dozen ways to reduce electrosmog in your life, but also saying that in Part 2, I would explain one of the newest and most pervasive emitters of electrosmog.

The smart meter is that example. It is basically a digital device that records electrical energy, water or natural gas used by a consumer and then transmits that information back to a utility company. It replaces the analog dial meter and therefore eliminates the need for a utility worker to read and record the data.

Utility companies pitch it as a regulation aid for consumers, but many are questioning the real value of that benefit, especially in light of the meter’s potential health risks. While utility companies promise rewards for customers who shift energy use to off-peak periods, health experts are saying there are no savings when your health is in jeopardy.

Of course, utility companies are downplaying the possible health risks. For example, Pacific Gas and Electric Co. explains on its website that its SmartMeter is “a small 1-watt radio that … transmits relatively weak radio signals [which resemble] those of many other products most people use every day, like cell phones, baby monitors and microwave ovens.”

PG&E cites a January report from the California Council on Science and Technology, which stated that no additional standards are needed to protect the public from smart meters.

But the company fails to note that in April, in the final version of the same report, the CCST concluded: “Not enough is currently known about potential non-thermal impacts of radio frequency emissions to identify or recommend additional standards for such impacts. … It is not scientifically confirmed whether or what the non-thermal effects on living organisms, and potentially, human health might be.”

The individual radiation levels of smart meters are not the only issue that warrants our attention; the cumulative level of all the electromagnetic-radiation-emitting devices within our proximity is important.

As the CCST report concluded, “Concerns about human health impacts of RF emissions from smart meters should be considered in this broader context,” especially because each one includes a second transmitter that will be initiated sometime for further monitoring.

Utility companies claim that radio frequency emissions from a smart meter are comparable to those from a microwave oven, but they fail to disclose that smart meters are, according to the CCST, “a relay among other smart meters and utility access points”; hence, unlike microwaves, they can be transmitting information and emitting RF waves 24 hours a day.

And experts have shown there are adverse effects to long-term exposure to RF emissions. For example, Dr. David Carpenter, who was the head of the New York State Department of Health for 18 years, administered a program studying the effects of electromagnetic fields. Carpenter, who is now the director of the Institute for Health and the Environment, recently rebutted utility companies’ claims that smart meters have no negative health effects by explaining, “We have evidence from a whole variety of other sources of radio frequency exposure that demonstrates convincingly and consistently that exposure to radio frequency radiation at elevated levels for long periods of time increases the risk of cancer, increases the damage to the nervous system, causes electro-sensitivity (and) has adverse reproductive effects and a variety of other effects on different organ systems.”

Smart meters pose not only an American health problem but also a global one. Since 2000, millions have been installed in Italy, Japan, Canada, the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, Australia, New Zealand and beyond. And since 2005 in the U.S., there has been an onslaught of smart meters. Millions have been fastened to the sides of our homes and businesses from sea to shining sea. If the wave of meters has not infiltrated your neighborhood yet, consider this article a fair warning for attachments coming soon to your home.

The way I see it, we as consumers have a choice. Will we believe countless specialists who are saying smart meters are, at the very least, unnecessary health risks and contributors to overall electrosmog, or will we believe public utility companies and the feds, which have divested interests in the installation of smart meters and say they are harmless to our health and are being mandated by law to save us money?

For more information on keeping your family safe and healthy, please see SmartMeterDangers.org, SmartMeterDangers.com and SmartMeterSafety.com.

RSC Publishing

Edna Ben-Izhak Monselise, Aliza Levkovitz, Hugo E. Gottlieb and Daniel Kost

DOI: 10.1039/C1EM10031A
Received 11 Jan 2011, Accepted 26 Apr 2011
First published on the web 08 Jun 2011

Abstract

The 24 h exposure of water plants (etiolated duckweed) to RF-EMF between 7.8 V m^?1 and 1.8 V m^?1, generated by AM 1.287 MHz transmitting antennas, resulted in alanine accumulation in the plant cells, a phenomenon we have previously shown to be a universal stress signal. The magnitude of the effect corresponds qualitatively to the level of RF-EMF exposure. In the presence of 10 mM vitamin C, alanine accumulation is completely suppressed, suggesting the involvement of free radicals in the process. A unique biological connection has thus been made between exposure to RF-EMF and cell stress, in the vicinity of RF transmitting antennas. This simple test, which lasts only 24 h, constitutes a useful bioassay for the quick detection of biological cell stress caused in the vicinity of RF irradiating antennas.

ANI/Business Wire India

June 22, 2008

NEW DELHI: The studies and survey conducted by Australian Health Research Institute indicates that due to billions of times more in volume electromagnetic radiation emitted by billions of mobile phones, internet, intranet and wireless communication data transmission will make almost one-third of world population (about two billions) patient of ear, eye and brain cancer beside other major body disorders like heart ailments, impotency, migraine, epilepsy.

According to the reports the tissues of children are tender and are likely to be more effected by use of any wireless gadget and devices and they should not be encouraged to use mobile phone.

The fatal and volumetric effects of electromagnetic radiation are emitted mainly by mobile phones, mobile phone antenna, tower, mast, transmission tower, microwave oven, wireless devices, system and equipment.

These dangerous effects have been certified and confirmed repeatedly by many leading medical and scientific research institutions of the world including Ministries of health of various governments, W.H.O. and now have been admitted and confirmed by Govt. of India in their recent press releases.

The attached image shows and proves about the serious ill effects of E.M. radiation released by Radiation Nuclear and Safety Authority of FINLAND as to how E.M. radiation emitted by mobile phones damages the various body cells and causes incurable and fatal diseases.

EMR Politics & Research Pages

ARTHUR FIRSTENBERG / Sun Monthly 1 Jan 2006

In 2002, Gro Harlem Brundtland, then head of the World Health Organization, told a Norwegian journalist that cell phones were banned from her office in Geneva because she personally becomes ill if a cell phone is brought within about four meters (13 feet) of her. Mrs. Brundtland is a medical doctor and former Prime Minister of Norway. This sensational news, published March 9, 2002 in Dagbladet, was ignored by every other newspaper in the world. The following week Michael Repacholi, her subordinate in charge of the International EMF (electromagnetic field) Project, responded with a public statement belittling his boss’s concerns. Five months later, for reasons that many suspect were related to these circumstances, Mrs. Brundtland announced she would step down from her leadership post at the WHO after just one term.

Nothing could better illustrate our collective schizophrenia when it comes to thinking about electromagnetic radiation. We respond to those who are worried about its dangers — hence the International EMF Project — but we ignore and marginalize those, like Mrs. Brundtland, who have already succumbed to its effects.

As a consultant on the health effects of wireless technology, I receive calls that can be broadly divided into two main groups: those from people who are merely worried, whom I will call A, and those from people who are already sick, whom I will call B. I sometimes wish I could arrange a large conference call and have the two groups talk to each other — there needs to be more mutual understanding so that we are all trying to solve the same problems. Caller A, worried, commonly asks what kind of shield to buy for his cell phone or what kind of headset to wear with it. Sometimes he wants to know what is a safe distance to live from a cell tower. Caller B, sick, wants to know what kind of shielding to put on her house, what kind of medical treatment to get, or, increasingly often, what part of the country she could move to to escape the radiation to save her life.

The following is designed as a sort of a primer: first, to help everybody get more or less on the same page, and second, to clear up some of the confusions so that we can make rational decisions toward a healthier world.

Fundamentals

The most basic fact about cell phones and cell towers is that they emit microwave radiation; so do Wi-Fi (wireless Internet) antennas, wireless computers, cordless (portable) phones and their base units, and all other wireless devices. If it’s a communication device and it’s not attached to the wall by a wire, it’s emitting radiation. Most Wi-Fi systems and some cordless phones operate at the exact same frequency as a microwave oven, while other devices use a different frequency. Wi-Fi is always on and always radiating. The base units of most cordless phones are always radiating, even when no one is using the phone. A cell phone that is on but not in use is also radiating. And, needless to say, cell towers are always radiating.

Why is this a problem, you might ask? Scientists usually divide the electromagnetic spectrum into “ionizing” and “non-ionizing.” Ionizing radiation, which includes x-rays and atomic radiation, causes cancer. Non-ionizing radiation, which includes microwave radiation, is supposed to be safe. This distinction always reminded me of the propaganda in George Orwell’s Animal Farm: “Four legs good, two legs bad.” “Non-ionizing good, ionizing bad” is as little to be trusted.

An astronomer once quipped that if Neil Armstrong had taken a cell phone to the Moon in 1969, it would have appeared to be the third most powerful source of microwave radiation in the universe, next only to the Sun and the Milky Way. He was right. Life evolved with negligible levels of microwave radiation. An increasing number of scientists speculate that our own cells, in fact, use the microwave spectrum to communicate with one another, like children whispering in the dark, and that cell phones, like jackhammers, interfere with their signaling. In any case, it is a fact that we are all being bombarded, day in and day out, whether we use a cell phone or not, by an amount of microwave radiation that is some ten million times as strong as the average natural background. And it is also a fact that most of this radiation is due to technology that has been developed since the 1970s.

As far as cell phones themselves are concerned, if you put one up to your head you are damaging your brain in a number of different ways. First, think of a microwave oven. A cell phone, like a microwave oven and unlike a hot shower, heats you from the inside out, not from the outside in. And there are no sensory nerve endings in the brain to warn you of a rise in temperature because we did not evolve with microwave radiation, and this never happens in nature. Worse, the structure of the head and brain is so complex and non-uniform that “hot spots” are produced, where heating can be tens or hundreds of times what it is nearby. Hot spots can occur both close to the surface of the skull and deep within the brain, and also on a molecular level.

Cell phones are regulated by the Federal Communications Commission, and you can find, in the packaging of most new phones, a number called the Specific Absorption Rate, or SAR, which is supposed to indicate the rate at which energy is absorbed by the brain from that particular model. One problem, however, is the arbitrary assumption, upon which the FCC’s regulations are based, that the brain can safely dissipate added heat at a rate of up to 1 degree C per hour. Compounding this is the scandalous procedure used to demonstrate compliance with these limits and give each cell phone its SAR rating. The standard way to measure SAR is on a “phantom” consisting, incredibly, of a homogenous fluid encased in Plexiglas in the shape of a head. Presto, no hot spots! But in reality, people who use cell phones for hours per day are chronically heating places in their brain. The FCC’s safety standard, by the way, was developed by electrical engineers, not doctors.

The Blood-Brain Barrier

The second effect that I want to focus on, which has been proven in the laboratory, should by itself have been enough to shut down this industry and should be enough to scare away anyone from ever using a cell phone again. I call it the “smoking gun” of cell phone experiments. Like most biological effects of microwave radiation, this has nothing to do with heating.

The brain is protected by tight junctions between adjacent cells of capillary walls, the so-called blood-brain barrier, which, like a border patrol, lets nutrients pass through from the blood to the brain, but keeps toxic substances out. Since 1988, researchers in the laboratory of a Swedish neurosurgeon, Leif Salford, have been running variations on this simple experiment: they expose young laboratory rats to either a cell phone or other source of microwave radiation, and later they sacrifice the animals and look for albumin in their brain tissue. Albumin is a protein that is a normal component of blood but that does not normally cross the blood-brain barrier. The presence of albumin in brain tissue is always a sign that blood vessels have been damaged and that the brain has lost some of its protection.

Here is what these researchers have found, consistently for 18 years: Microwave radiation, at doses equal to a cell phone’s emissions, causes albumin to be found in brain tissue. A one-time exposure to an ordinary cell phone for just two minutes causes albumin to leak into the brain. In one set of experiments, reducing the exposure level by a factor of 1,000 actually increased the damage to the blood-brain barrier, showing that this is not a dose-response effect and that reducing the power will not make wireless technology safer. And finally, in research published in June 2003, a single two-hour exposure to a cell phone, just once during its lifetime, permanently damaged the blood-brain barrier and, on autopsy 50 days later, was found to have damaged or destroyed up to 2 percent of an animal’s brain cells, including cells in areas of the brain concerned with learning, memory and movement.1 Reducing the exposure level by a factor of 10 or 100, thereby duplicating the effect of wearing a headset, moving a cell phone further from your body, or standing next to somebody else’s phone, did not appreciably change the results! Even at the lowest exposure, half the animals had a moderate to high number of damaged neurons.

The implications for us? Two minutes on a cell phone disrupts the blood-brain barrier, two hours on a cell phone causes permanent brain damage, and secondhand radiation may be almost as bad. The blood-brain barrier is the same in a rat and a human being.

These results caused enough of a commotion in Europe that in November 2003 a conference was held, sponsored by the European Union, titled “The Blood-Brain Barrier — Can It Be Influenced by RF [radio frequency]-Field Interactions?” as if to reassure the public: “See, we are doing something about this.” But, predictably, nothing was done about it, as nothing has been done about it for 30 years.

America’s Allan Frey, during the 1970s, was the first of many to demonstrate that low-level microwave radiation damages the blood-brain barrier.2 Similar mechanisms protect the eye (the blood-vitreous barrier) and the fetus (the placental barrier), and the work of Frey and others indicates that microwave radiation damages those barriers also.3 The implication: No pregnant woman should ever be using a cell phone.

Dr. Salford is quite outspoken about his work. He has called the use of handheld cell phones “the largest human biological experiment ever.” And he has publicly warned that a whole generation of cell-phone-using teenagers may suffer from mental deficits or Alzheimer’s disease by the time they reach middle age.

Radio-Wave Sickness

Unfortunately, cell phone users are not the only ones being injured, nor should we be worried only about the brain. The following brief summary is distilled from a vast scientific literature on the effects of radio waves (a larger spectrum which includes microwaves), together with the experiences of scientists and doctors all over the world with whom I am in contact.

Organs that have been shown to be especially susceptible to radio waves include the lungs, nervous system, heart, eyes, testes and thyroid gland. Diseases that have increased remarkably in the last couple of decades, and that there is good reason to connect with the massive increase in radiation in our environment, include asthma, sleep disorders, anxiety disorders, attention deficit disorder, autism, multiple sclerosis, ALS, Alzheimer’s disease, epilepsy, fibromyalgia, chronic fatigue syndrome, cataracts, hypothyroidism, diabetes, malignant melanoma, testicular cancer, and heart attacks and strokes in young people. Radiation from microwave towers has also been associated with forest die-off, reproductive failure and population decline in many species of birds, and ill health and birth deformities in farm animals. The literature showing biological effects of microwave radiation is truly enormous, running to tens of thousands of documents, and I am amazed that industry spokespersons are getting away with saying that wireless technology has been proved safe or — just as ridiculous — that there is no evidence of harm.

I have omitted one disease from the above list: the illness that Caller B has, and that I have. A short history is in order here. In the 1950s and 1960s workers who built, tested and repaired radar equipment came down with this disease in large numbers. So did operators of industrial microwave heaters and sealers. The Soviets named it, appropriately, radio wave sickness, and studied it extensively. In the West its existence was denied totally, but workers came down with it anyway. Witness congressional hearings held in 1981, chaired by then Representative Al Gore, on the health effects of radio-frequency heaters and sealers, another episode in “See, we are doing something about this,” while nothing is done.

Today, with the mass proliferation of radio towers and personal transmitters, the disease has spread like a plague into the general population. Estimates of its prevalence range up to one-third of the population, but it is rarely recognized for what it is until it has so disabled a person that he or she can no longer participate in society. You may recognize some of its common symptoms: insomnia, dizziness, nausea, headaches, fatigue, memory loss, inability to concentrate, depression, chest discomfort, ringing in the ears. Patients may also develop medical problems such as chronic respiratory infections, heart arrhythmias, sudden fluctuations in blood pressure, uncontrolled blood sugar, dehydration, and even seizures and internal bleeding.

What makes this disease so difficult to accept, and even more difficult to cope with, is that no treatment is likely to succeed unless one can also avoid exposure to its cause — and its cause is now everywhere. A 1998 survey by the California Department of Health Services indicated that at that time 120,000 Californians — and by implication 1 million Americans — were unable to work due to electromagnetic pollution.4 The ranks of these so-called electrically sensitive are swelling in almost every country in the world, marginalized, stigmatized and ignored. With the level of radiation everywhere today, they almost never recover and sometimes take their own lives.

“They are acting as a warning for all of us,” says Dr. Olle Johansson of people with this illness. “It could be a major mistake to subject the entire world’s population to whole-body irradiation, 24 hours a day.” A neuroscientist at the famous Karolinska Institute in Stockholm, Dr. Johansson heads a research team that is documenting a significant and permanent worsening of the public health that began precisely when the second-generation, 1800 MHz cell phones were introduced into Sweden in late l997.5,6 After a decade-long decline, the number of Swedish workers on sick leave began to rise in late 1997 and more than doubled during the next five years. During the same period of time, sales of antidepressant drugs also doubled. The number of traffic accidents, after declining for years, began to climb again in 1997. The number of deaths from Alzheimer’s disease, after declining for several years, rose sharply in 1999 and had nearly doubled by 2001. This two-year delay is understandable when one considers that Alzheimer’s disease requires some time to develop.

Uncontrolled Proliferation

If cell phones and cell towers are really deadly, have the radio and TV towers that we have been living with for a century been safe? In 2002 Örjan Hallberg and Olle Johansson coauthored a paper titled “Cancer Trends During the 20th Century,” which examined one aspect of that question.7 They found, in the United States, Sweden and dozens of other countries, that mortality rates for skin melanoma and for bladder, prostate, colon, breast and lung cancers closely paralleled the degree of public exposure to radio waves during the past hundred years. When radio broadcasting increased in a given location, so did those forms of cancer; when it decreased, so did those forms of cancer. And, a sensational finding: country by country — and county by county in Sweden — they found, statistically, that exposure to radio waves appears to be as big a factor in causing lung cancer as cigarette smoking!

Which brings me to address a widespread misconception. The biggest difference between the cell towers of today and the radio towers of the past is not their safety, but their numbers. The number of ordinary radio stations in the United States today is still less than 14,000. But cell towers and Wi-Fi towers number in the hundreds of thousands, and cell phones, wireless computers, cordless telephones and two-way radios number in the hundreds of millions. Radar facilities and emergency communication networks are also proliferating out of control. Since 1978, when the Environmental Protection Agency last surveyed the radio frequency environment in the United States, the average urban dweller’s exposure to radio waves has increased 1,000-fold, most of this increase occurring in just the last nine years.8 In the same period of time, radio pollution has spread from the cities to rest like a ubiquitous fog over the entire planet.

The vast human consequences of all this are being ignored. Since the late 1990s a whole new class of environmental refugees has been created right here in the United States. We have more and more people, sick, dying, seeking relief from our suffering, leaving our homes and our livelihoods, living in cars, trailers and tents in remote places. Unlike victims of hurricanes and earthquakes, we are not the subject of any relief efforts. No one is donating money to help us, to buy us a protected refuge; no one is volunteering to forego their cell phones, their wireless computers and their cordless phones so that we can once more be their neighbors and live among them.

The worried and the sick have not yet opened their hearts to each other, but they are asking questions. To answer caller A: No shield or headset will protect you from your cell or portable phone. There is no safe distance from a cell tower. If your cell phone or your wireless computer works where you live, you are being irradiated 24 hours a day.

To caller B: To effectively shield a house is difficult and rarely successful. There are only a few doctors in the United States attempting to treat radio wave sickness, and their success rate is poor — because there are few places left on Earth where one can go to escape this radiation and recover.

Yes, radiation comes down from satellites, too; they are part of the problem, not the solution. There is simply no way to make wireless technology safe.

Our society has become both socially and economically dependent, in just one short decade, upon a technology that is doing tremendous damage to the fabric of our world. The more entrenched we let ourselves become in it, the more difficult it will become to change our course. The time to extricate ourselves, both individually and collectively — difficult though it is already is — is now.

NOTES

1. Leif G. Salford et al., “Nerve Cell Damage in Mammalian Brain After Exposure to Microwaves from GSM Mobile Phones,” Environmental Health Perspectives 111, no. 7 (2003): 881–883.

2. Allan H. Frey, Sondra R. Feld and Barbara Frey, “Neural Function and Behavior,” Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 247 (1975): 433–439.

3. Allan H. Frey, “Evolution and Results of Biological Research with Low-Intensity Nonionizing Radiation,” in Modern Bioelectricity, ed. Andrew A. Marino (New York: Dekker, 1988), 785–837, at 809–810.

4. California EMF Program, The Risk Evaluation: An Evaluation of the Possible Risks From Electric and Magnetic Fields (EMFs) From Power Lines, Internal Wiring, Electrical Occupations and Appliances (2002), app. 3.

5. Örjan Hallberg and Olle Johansson, “1997 — A Curious Year in Sweden,” European Journal of Cancer Prevention 13, no. 6 (2004): 535–538.

6. Örjan Hallberg and Olle Johansson, “Does GSM 1800 MHz Affect the Public Health in Sweden?” in Proceedings of the 3rd International Workshop “Biological Effects of EMFs,” Kos, Greece, October 4-8, 2004, 361–364.

7. Örjan Hallberg and Olle Johansson, “Cancer Trends During the 20th Century,” Journal of Australian College of Nutritional and Environmental Medicine 21, no. 1 (2002): 3–8.

8. David E. Janes Jr., “Radiofrequency Environments in the United States,” in 15th IEEE Conference on Communication, Boston, MA, June 10–14, 1979, vol. 2, 31.4.1–31.4.5.

source: http://sunmonthly.com/Archives/01-06_issue/Firstenberg.htm 4apr2006

Source: Times of India

KOCHI: They don't use cell phones; yet they may be its worst victims. Next time you read a report on birds falling prey to radiation and consequently getting sick, you might as well guess that a cell phone tower could have caused it. It is not just humans but birds and bees too are beginning to feel the impact of 'electro-smog', the pollution from the electromagnetic fields (EMF).

Unlike most other known pollutants, electromagnetic radiation (EMR) is not readily perceivable to human sense organs and hence not easily detectable.

"There is no doubt that birds move out of their favourite areas when they sense undue pressure or get wrong signals from nature. It would be better if towers are not set up in places where birds congregate," V S Vijayan, ornithologist and former chairman of Kerala State Biodiversity Board, said.

He was commenting on the study released by the Ministry of Environment and Forests which found that EMR from mobile towers was interfering with the biological systems of birds.

The report which called for a law for the protection of flora and fauna stated that existing literature showed that EMR are interfering with the biological systems in more ways than one.

The Environment Ministry had constituted a 10-member committee headed by Asas Rahman, director, Bombay Natural History Society (BNHS) to formulate guidelines for the installation of mobile towers.

"There should be a rule to avoid setting these towers near the wetlands and dense forests which are often the breeding centres of several species. We have seen the impacts of towers on herons and water fowls," he said.

Stating that much needs to be done to formulate guidelines on the impact of communication towers on birds and animals, Dr Vijayan said that there were studies which had proved that radiation from towers had affected the reproductive system of rats.

The MoEF expert group reviewed 919 studies done in India and abroad on the ill-effects of mobile towers in animal, birds and insects.

Of the 919 studies, the team found that 593 showed the negative impact of mobile towers on birds, bees, human, wildlife and plants.

The WHO's International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) had in a recent study this year classified electromagnetic fields from mobile phones and other sources 'possibly carcinogenic to humans' and advised the public to adopt safety measures to reduce exposures, like use of hand-free devices or texting.

Nearly 800 million Indians have mobile phones, making it the second largest mobile phone-subscriber population in the world after China.

Source Sydney Morning Herald

Tim Elliott September 3, 2011

This is a less than perfect transcript, not fully verbatim, but it captures the meaning of everything that occurred in the interview.

Transcribed from an interview by electromagnetichealth.org, by emrstop.org

Thomas M. Rau is the medical director of the Swiss Paracelsus clinic. It is world famous for understanding of the root causes of diseases and better outcomes for patients.

Dr Rau is very concerned about the proliferation of cell phone towers. They can interfere with the patient’s biology and particularly the unconscious (sympathetic/parasympathetic) nerve system.

These unconscious functions can be severely compromised by the radiation from towers. Patients do not necessarily feel the impacts of the EMR.

The Paracelsus clinic sees 3000 EHS patients from 10000 patients that they see annually. There is only a certain selection of patients that actually feel pain.

People with heavy metal loads in the body tend to suffer much more from electromagnetic radiation as compared to those who do not. The heavy metals might well be absorbing the EMR: root canals, amalgam fillings, implants, etc. can be the problem.

A large, solid 35 year old man became sick with trigeminal neuralgia. Many diagnoses saw it as "idiopathic", meaning they didn't know and he had to live with it. He even became suicidal.

The Paracelsus clinic saw that he had a root canal and amalgam filling. He did have the filling for 20 years before an antenna tower was installed near his home. He removed the amalgam filling and moved and had total remission from the sickness.

There is a village in Switzerland where they built a tower. They asked about diseases in two villages prior to the transmission--the one which has the tower, and another comparable village but with no tower. They asked about the diseases in the two cities after 1 and 2 years after transmission started. They found a very significant difference of problems in the town with the tower installed. Symptoms seen: Children's concentration problems, ADD, heart problems, significant increase in arrhythmia, significant increase in problems with the behaviours of school children.

Symptoms of EHS include headaches, deficiency of concentration, back pains from cervical and lower spine (tension of muscles becomes more spastic and continuous pressure/tension exacerbates the problems).

With migraine presenting, my first test is for "electromagnetic cloud". We work together with an institute that measures the cloud, then they either isolate from the outside cloud or remove problems devices. The portable house phones (DECT) are very significant for their "electromagnetic clouds". The patients get better.

Very frequently patients suffer sleeping disturbances. We have a tower in our private house which sends to the village. We insulated the house and walls, and we put our children out of the rooms which is directly exposed to the tower. On the day after changing they slept better. Before, our son fell out of bed nearly every night, and after, none of this behaviour.

We have a method, bioresonance, to measure scientifically the function of the unconscious, the parasympathetic and sympathetic nerve system. They should balance and yet they do not with EHS and electromagnetic cloud. This is like the Hartrite Variability. We have a more refined instrument but the same principle is used.

That was acute symptoms: what do we know about the connection between these invisible stressors and chronic conditions?

Our clinic treats a lot of patients with cancer patients in all stages. Since we know about the relationship, we now test them all for electromagnetic sensitivity. Nowadays I am really convinced that electromagnetic emissions/loads from different sources are a very important factor to the building of all cancers. What is very important is that the EMR load leads to a deficiency of the pituitary gland; sleeping disturbances for example; regulation of the thyroid and adrenal gland. The stress capacity decreases significantly and this is the major factor that makes patients weak when they have EMR exposure.

With all of our patients we have remediation from EMR. It is one of our trainings with cancer patients to avoid things like cordless phones in the house; they are even worse than mobile phones: television in the sleeping room and other things that contribute to EMR load.

Parkinson’s patients—we have several who profited a lot from our EMR advice. Alzheimer’s is difficult as it does not help so much even though EMR might be a factor of causation. Also mental problems, depression, anxiety, concentration deficiency, sleep disturbances --they profit very much from electromagnetic training.

What about Autism and EMR?

I doubt very much that many children are born with autism; they normally regress. At birth we can't judge. They are vaccinated, and we think vaccination has a very bad effect for building autism. And combine that with the EMR and it blocks the brain activity, it loads the brain, and this is just ‘fatal’ to the child. It is very important that the autistic child keeps away from the electromagnetic cloud.

What degree of impairment happens in patients?

All facets are possible. Some patients are invalid, some are compromised. We ask patients when do they have symptoms? What is it like when you go on holidays? Do you use your mobile phone? Do you have tinnitus? Tinnitus is maybe 90% related to EMR.

How does EMR affect microorganisms?

We have more organisms than cells in our bodies. Cultures of normal human endogenous bacterial cultures grow much less when exposed to EMR. They grow less when they are around a mobile phone, a tower or cordless phone.

Growing less good bacteria in your body means you will have an overgrowth of bad bacteria that can result in things like Lyme's disease. Especially from the east coast of the USA, we have many patients with Lymes. Antibiotics only make it worse. We look how the good flora responds and how they grow, recolonise. We have to reimplant the good bacteria. Within six weeks the Lyme's patients get well or much better.

Toxic mould in homes grows much faster under the load of high electromagnetic loads. They grow much faster in a disturbed milieu. Mercury / heavy metals can also exacerbate the growth.

What is going on in Europe with EMR awareness?

Lichtenstein put the resolutions into law restricting EMR. An area in South France is creating a white zone for EMR.

Why? Is it worse there? In the USA we seem to be unaware.

In Europe, we have different radio stations and a multiplexity of opinions, and it is more difficult to wash one opinion away. France and Italy are very behind with EMR. They have the highest concentration of atomic power stations (France). The northern countries (Scandinavia) are very much advanced. For example in Sweden they have stricter laws on power stations, and amalgam is forbidden to be put in teeth. Things got much better lately, and good information proliferated as patient groups got much more activity, and with the actions of institutes such as our geopathological institute. Actions of advocates against EM clouds.

In the US there have been antennas put up on properties and people get money for it. Does that happen in Europe? It seems crazy to do it if it impairs concentration and learning.

It is criminal, unethical to expose children to EM clouds in this way. We know that power stations for EM waves like mobile phones are helping illness, so putting it in schools is very bad. The children’s IQ will decrease. Does the society really want to have intelligent well educated children or not? You will have more ADD children. You will have more reflection of this on the reduced ability to teach children, we will have more dull and dumb children. This is absolutely clearly my opinion that we will be dulled, dumbed, in the future from this EMR.

What about depression & the emotional balance and the effect of EM fields. We have seen a skyrocketing of depression in the last 15 years.

There are many causes, I would not say EMR was specific but it is one of many causes. Many causes add up to the fatal effect. Wrong nutrition, toxins in the air, the water, the teeth toxins, the sugar, the wrong bacteria and on top of all of this, the horrible situation with the EM cloud.

Does it affect people's ability to interact with each other?

With EMR the sympathetic action increases, the parasympathetic decrease. By increasing the former you get more animosity, more aggression, a less peaceful approach. This interferes with the whole of society very, very much.

What needs to happen? Are our governments responding to the crisis?

If the politicians were listening and fulfilling their duty, not only the suggestions of the industry, then they would have the duty to reduce EM loads. It is not only the politicians that are bad guys, it is also the individual which is very undifferentiated in using all of these technologies. I ask patients about their use of mobiles, DECTs, TVs, and do you take minerals and trace elements? Have you ever been to a biological doctor who has tested your resistance to EMR. I see that they do nothing, so who wonders when they are sick. It is like running on a road with lots of traffic... do you look left and right before you cross? Yes, they do that with the road, but not with other issues that can hurt you.

It's a level of denial?

It's a high level of ignorance of the population and the politician.Yes it's denial because they would have to do something different.

Do you think this is a species type of issue, like people are focussed on global warming... this EMR is affecting DNA, lessens quality of life, what is the trajectory of all of this?

That is a difficult and very interesting question! High toxicity and EM load for sure, changes the DNA on a long term, and even in a life time. It can make the expression of the genes different.

Dr Thomas Rau, thank you very much for being with us at electromagnetichealth.org, we appreciate your insight.

Thank you very much and all the best to you.

Transcribed by emrstop.org