Electromagnetic fields are finally being acknowledged as a potential biological hazard by the World Health Organization. The WHO have started an International EMF Project to perform research into the dangers of these EMF. The project’s aim is to study the potential health effects of a variety of EMF on humans as all humans are exposed to EMF no matter their location, it is just the severity that alters Therefore any affect on health, no matter how minimal, would have a major impact on public health and safety and EMF protection measure would have to be put into place.

Radio fields (RFs) are utilized in many ways to provide valuable and beneficial services, but as the usage of the cell phone has increased, so have the problems associated with RF exposure that is within close range, notably from the aerial of a cell phone. As technologies develop and are used more extensively we are faced with an increasing exposure to EMF and therefore we require EMF protection devices. All health effects must be thoroughly examined and the risks assessed due to the fact that there are an ever increasing number of magnetic medical devices being used and the possibility of a transportation system that will utilize a strong magnetic field.

The International EMF project was formulated in 1996 to examine all evidence of potential health impacts arising from exposure to EMF radiation within the frequency range of 0 to 300 GHz. Knowledge gaps being removed is a primary objective of the project and researchers are encouraged to do this with the backing of the WHO.

Some of the objectives of the project are as follows. The project intends to offer an informed, synchronized answer to global queries about the potential adverse effects on health due to EMF exposure. The project also aims to provide a report on potential adverse effects after studying and compiling the available knowledge. One of the tasks is also to decide where more investigation is needed in order to close current gaps in knowledge in order to ensure that dangers to health will be more accurately analyzed in future.

The project also aims to work in co-operation with funding agencies to ensure that an agenda is set for more focused studies to be made and more relevant information to be collected. All study results and additional information collected is to be integrated into the WHO’s Environmental Health Criteria monographs. Once the information is integrated it will be utilized to officially determine health hazards of exposure to EMF. They will also study currently available EMF protection devices

The aim of the WHO is also to assist the progress of the creation of globally satisfactory values in terms of levels of exposure to EMF radiation. Another part of their goals is to make available information in order to ensure that projects that are involved on behalf of local and nationwide authorities have their progress monitored and provide help to those who need it. This would include documents submitted on the subjects of EMF management as well the communication and risk perception aspects of EMF projects. In addition the project needs to provide any parties that request it with recommendations on the potential risks and adverse effects as a result of exposure to EMF as well as any measures to help improve the situation that they are consulted about.

This project will help to fill many gaps in current scientific knowledge by encouraging the appropriate groups to perform the necessary testing and thereby provide us with the answers we need to base our future decisions on. This project will for the basis of knowledge about this aspect of health and help guide our policies in a better informed direction. Analysis will also be done of EMF protection information and EMF protectors currently available to consumers.

It was sort of a funny story when we first heard about it a few years ago: A dairy farmer living in Wisconsin near high voltage utility company transmission lines couldn’t turn out the lights in his barn. Even with the switches in the off position, night after night after he had finished his chores, he’d go back out to the barn to find the light bulbs still glowing from the electrical charge hovering in the air. The cows were none too happy about it either, because the constant light prevented them from sleeping, and they gave less milk.

But the story doesn’t seem so funny any more — not after the spate of recent reports of children developing deadly illnesses or adults dying prematurely of rare diseases — all apparently because they had the misfortune of living near high amounts of electrical current.

A growing body of scientific evidence suggests that invisible electromagnetic fields (EMFs) — created by everything from high-voltage utility company lines to personal computers, microwave ovens, TVs and even electric blankets — are linked to a frightening array of cancers and other serious health problems in children and adults.

Though it received scant attention from the mainstream press, a report leaked last October from the U.S. National Council on Radiation Protection said there is a powerful body of impressive evidence showing that even very low exposure to electromagnetic radiation has long-term effects on health.

The report cited studies that show EMFs can disturb the production of the hormone melatonin, which is linked with sleep patterns. It said there was strong evidence that children exposed to EMFs had a higher risk of leukemia.

This follows on the heels of three epidemiological reports released in 1994. One indicated a tie between occupational exposure to EMFs and Alzheimer’ s disease. Another suggested a link with Sudden Infant Death Syndrome (SIDS). The third study indicated a tie with Amyotrophic lateralsclerosis.

Now a surprising new report released in February by physicists at Britain’s University of Bristol shows that power lines attract particles of radon — a colorless, odorless gas irrefutably linked with cancer.

What’s this all about? And why have the media failed to report with the appropriate emphasis the implications of these significant health risks?

Shortly after her son Kevin was diagnosed with leukemia, Julie Larm of Omaha, NE. began to notice other children at the local pool who had lost their hair or had surgical scars. As her suspicion rose, she began talking to other parents. One person she contacted was Dee Hendricks, whose son was also undergoing cancer treatment. Together they collected the names of eleven children in the area who had cancer.

When they plotted them on a map they were surprised to see that all lived within one mile of each other and an electric power substation.

“If there was nothing to worry about, why does our utility have an EMF committee…which was in effect long before we came and started making noise ?” asks Larm, a member of the Omaha Parents for the Prevention of Cancer. “Why do they need such things if theres nothing to it?”

The group’s efforts have been buttressed by Paul Brodeur, a campaigning environmental journalist who had in his day taken on asbestos and chlorofluorocarbons and is the author of two books on the subject of EMFs. Brodeur is convinced that EMFs are one of the greatest environmental threats facing the nation.

“Never before has there been this much epidemiological evidence of the carcinogenicity of any agent,” says Brodeur, “and that agent declared to be benign.”

Robert Becker, M.D., author of Cross Currents (Tarcher, 1990), who has studied this subject since the 1960s warns, “EMFs could turn out to be a far worse environmental disaster, affecting far more people, than toxic waste, radiation or asbestos.”

To some, especially the families of people with unexplained cancers, the sheer volume of research that has been carried out on this issue suggests there must be a cancer connection and perhaps a cover-up. Their suspicion is heightened by the fact that many of the studies are funded by the utility industry, which would be directly affected by the studies’ outcomes.

At the heart of the matter is a relatively simple and well-understood physical phenomenon: When an electric current passes through a wire, it generates an electromagnetic field that exerts forces on surrounding objects. Electric fields arise from the strength of an electric charge; magnetic fields, from the charge’s motion.

Unlike ionizing radiations such as x-rays — which pack sufficient wallop to knock electrons out of the molecules that make up the human body — EMFs do not produce charged particles, so experts always believed they posed no danger. Therefore, the Federal government has never regulated EMFs, and the electric industry was allowed to set its own standards.

But other recent experimental studies have shown that even weak magnetic fields can change the chemistry of the brain, impair the immune system, and inhibit the synthesis of melatonin, a hormone known to suppress several types of tumors and to be present in reduced amounts in men as well as women who develop breast cancer.

Some lab tests have confirmed that EMFs affect living cells in a variety of ways, most of them harmful. (Scientists are intrigued, however, by their ability to speed slow-healing fractures, enhancing bone formation).

What’s confusing is that the studies have produced widely divergent and often contradictory results. On the one hand, many scientists are convinced the study of electromagnetic fields is a massive waste of time and money — costing an estimated one billion dollars a year. After years of extensive study, Dr. Garry Boorman says, “We’re not sure what part of the field, if any, is toxic or important, or could be hazardous to your health.”

As a PBS “Frontline” documentary reported, scientists have been unable to locate a mechanism by which electromagnetic fields would trigger a biological reaction. The energy in the fields to which most of us are exposed is tiny tens of millions of times too small to break the molecules in cells. All living organisms evolved in the presence of the earths magnetic field, which is two hundred times larger.

Dozens of animal experiments have been carried out in which rats and mice are exposed to very large magnetic fields for long periods — some for their entire lives — but no animal has ever been proven to contract cancer due to this exposure. Generations of rodents raised in the presence of high magnetic fields do not show any increased evidence of birth defects or depressed immune systems.

With no animal data to support the claim and no physical mechanism to explain how it might affect the body, the main support for a connection has come from epidemiology.

As for clusters like the ones which motivated Julie Larm and her group in Omaha, many scientists are skeptical about their significance, if any, to the debate about EMFs. Because conditions like cancer are surprisingly common about one-third of the population gets cancer in their lifetimes random clusters of the disease are not unusual and are found close to and far from power lines.

Still, because of our reliance on electricity and the potential financial consequences for utilities and other companies, the regulation of EMFs is a politically sensitive issue. There is evidence to establish that the Bush administration tried to suppress findings of a study by the Environmental Protection Agency linking electromagnetic fields to certain health problems. The Clinton White House, meanwhile, has been largely silent on the issue.

Cover-Up?

Lending credence to claims that there is, indeed, a public health risk from EMFs and that the government knows about it is that an EPA report a few years ago raised suspicions of a causal link between electromagnetic fields and leukemia, brain tumors, breast and prostrate cancer, even birth defects.

Less-publicized but still significant are some of the foreign studies. Last July, Canadian researchers told the Lancet medical journal they had found a high rate of leukemia among children whose mothers had worked at sewing machines while pregnant.

Checks showed the operators were exposed to more electromagnetic radiation than people who work on power lines or in power stations.
In another study, Swedish researchers assessed the long-term exposure of people living near high-voltage transmission lines by taking spot measurements of the field strength in each home, and using them to confirm the accuracy of a computer model that calculated the strength of the fields emitted by each of the lines, according to distance from the lines, the wiring configurations, and the current level the lines were known to be carrying.

Then they programmed a computer with records of past current loads that had been maintained over the previous 20 years for each of the transmission lines. They were thus able to pinpoint with great accuracy EMF exposure for each cancer victim. What they found was a clear dose-response relationship between exposure to even weak power-frequency electromagnetic fields and the development of cancer, especially acute and chronic myeloid leukemia.

A second Swedish study, which also employed cases and controls, was conducted by epidemiologists. It confirmed that average magnetic field exposure over time was the critical factor in the development of disease. Interestingly, these studies were funded in part by the Swedish utility industry.

Maria Feychting of Swedens Karolinska Institute looked at 127,000 children who lived near big power lines for over 25 years and found twice the risk of leukemia.

“In our study we found about a two-fold increase in the risk if the children were living close, within 50 meters (yards) of a big power line,” she told Britain’s Channel Four television.

The new study by the University of Bristol showing that power lines can attract cancer-causing gases like radon has heightened concerns.

Even scientists who have failed to find a reason for the apparent link refuse to say it is safe to live near a high-voltage power line.

Warning to Parents

Of critical importance to all parents is that some studies have suggested that children exposed to magnetic fields of between two and three milligauss or above experienced a significantly increased risk of developing cancer. Since ambient levels of two to three milligauss can routinely be measured in buildings within 50 to 150 feet of wires carrying strong electric current, these findings are especially troublesome.

The report leaked last October by the mellitus National Council on Radiation Protection recommended a safety limit of 0.2 microteslas, a very weak field compared to those generated by household appliances. A person standing one foot away from a vacuum cleaner or electric drill can be exposed to anywhere between two and 20 microteslas.

There is no way to block EMFs (they even penetrate lead shielding), and the only protection is distance from the source.

In our electronic age, its almost impossible to eliminate exposure to the myriad of electrical sources with which we come in contact on a daily basis.

Thousands of electric company substations are scattered throughout our cities large and small and they abut homes, apartments and office buildings — even schools. Since few of the high-voltage lines that lead into and out of these substations have been buried to prevent harmful emissions, magnetic fields of potent strength can be found virtually everywhere.

Concerns have also been raised about magnetic fields given off by faulty household wiring, by high-current conductors concealed in the walls, ceilings and floors of commercial office buildings and other large structures; and by high-voltage transformers that can be found in almost any large building.

The EPA Raises Questions

Concerns about so-called non-ionizing radiation began to mount in 1979, when a study of cancer rates among Colorado school children determined that those who lived near power lines had two or three times as much chance to develop cancer. The link seemed so improbable that power companies eagerly paid to have the study replicated. To their surprise, the subsequent scientific inquiry supported the original findings, which have since been buttressed by a variety of additional studies and reports of increased cancer rates among workers employed in the electric industry.

One such study, conducted by the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center in Seattle, WA. confirmed that telephone linemen, electricians and electric-power workmen are developing breast cancer at six times the expected rate.

But it was the Environmental Protection Agency’s scientific review that has had an explosive impact, lending the most credence to those who have been warning of EMF health hazards.

The report — a 367-page document entitled “Evaluation of the Potential Carcinogenicity of Electromagnetic Fields” — came to light in 1990, when someone in the agency leaked a draft version of it to Louis Slesin, editor of an influential newsletter called Microwave News.

Chief among the conclusions was one specifying that power line electromagnetic fields should be classified as a “probable human carcinogen.” William Farland, then-director of the EPA’s Office of Health and Environmental Assessment ordered this conclusion deleted from the report.

Then the Associated Press reported that the Bush administration tried to delay release of the EPA’s findings. Robert E. McGaughy, the project manager and chief author of the report, was quoted as saying that the White House “was concerned not about the accuracy of the report…[but] about how people would react to the news and how it would affect the electric power industry.”

Ultimately, after two major TV networks and newspapers throughout the country exposed the Bush administration’s efforts at censorship, the report was released. It contained a disclaimer that asserted “the controversial and uncertain nature of the scientific findings of this report” and declared that it should not be construed as “representing Agency policy or position.”

The Medical Connection

Just how EMFs affect humans is still not entirely known.

In the case of cancer, most specialists theorize that a malignant tumor forms in at least two stages. In the first, referred to as “initiation,” an outside agent damages the cell’s genetic material. Because EMFs are not strong enough to break molecular and chemical bonds, scientists are concentrating on the second stage of cancer, a series of steps called “promotion.” Researchers are tying to pinpoint ways in which EMFs might cause cells to grow and multiply abnormally.

Some studies suggest that EMFs may promote cancer by interfering with the transmission of calcium across the cell membrane, a flow that governs such processes as muscle contraction, egg fertilization, cell division, and growth. EMFs may also disturb a cell’s ability to process hormone, enzyme, and other biological signals that regulate normal growth.

EMFs are known to affect nerve impulses. Melatonin, a regulatory hormone secreted by the pineal gland near the brain, ordinarily stimulates immune responses and may suppress tumor growth. Reduced melatonin production has been linked to breast and prostate cancer. Melatonin secretion in turn is controlled by norepinephrine, a neurotransmitter in the brain. Receptors for its relative, the hormone epinephrine, are disturbed by EMFs.

Some doctors stated that their observations led them to believe that it was possible that magnetic fields stimulate the rate of cancer cell growth, or act as a cancer promoter.

A San Antonio researcher discovered human cancer cells exposed to 60 Hz fields (the frequency of a high-voltage line) grew as much as 24 times as fast as unexposed cells and showed greatly increased resistance to destruction by the cells of the body’s defense system.

Female breast cancer has reached epidemic proportions, with one in ten American women developing it and one in four dying. Alarmingly, of women who develop the disease, 55% have no known risk factors. Breast cancer mortality rates are five times lower in Asia and Africa than in industrialized North America and northern Europe regions where EMFs are omnipresent.

Electric Companies On the Spot

A contention of the electric utility industry in the United States had been that the pathologies referred to in most of the studies might actually have been induced by exposure to pesticides, chemicals or other toxic agents in the environment.

For a time they contended that if power-line magnetic fields really did cause cancer, the fivefold increase in electrical usage during the past 30 years would have been expected to have produced an epidemic of childhood leukemia. The utility industry stopped making this statement in June of 1991, after the National Cancer Institute disclosed that a study it had made showed that in recent years there had been unexplained increases of nearly 11% in childhood leukemia, and of more than 30% in childhood brain cancer.

A study in the American Journal of Industrial Medicine reported a steep increase in brain-cancer rates over the past dozen years among the general population.

People working with computer monitors are developing primary brain tumors at nearly five times the expected rate.

Still, as Dr. Becker observes, “Companies wont admit that EMFs are risky, because they will become liable. And the government wont, because it is the largest user of the electromagnetic spectrum, especially for military communications. Our whole economy depends on them now.”

Not surprisingly, as people begin to focus on the problem of EMFs, property values near power lines and electric substations have been plummeting, and numerous lawsuits have been filed.

Have you thought seriously about the threat to our health posed by electromagnetic radiation, through equipment used at work, frequent use of cell phones or cordless phones, microwaves, many household appliances or overhead transmission lines? Do you think that it is too complicated and that it is best to leave it to the experts?

In an interview with Dr Neil Cherry about his work in this area he discussed some of his research and the evidence for his concern, and challenged us and our local bodies to take responsibility for our health and reduce the threats coming from electromagnetic radiation.

Being informed - a source of empowerment
Empowering people - that is the most important driving force for Neil’s energies at the moment. That is the integrating point behind what he is doing - sharing information, hopefully in ways that people understand it.

In his many roles, as a university lecturer, as a Regional Councillor, as a public speaker, and a media commentator. he is working to disseminate information power. There are so many vital issues that are complex, and people are being disempowered by being told, “This is too complicated. Trust us. We know what we are doing.”

As one of the people who is now an elected politician and who knows about the parliamentary system, Neil’s analysis is that in many ways those making decisions often don’t know what they are doing. They are people just like us. They have been given opportunities like anybody who has been elected, and it is their duty to use those opportunities with care and responsibility for the people who have put their faith and trust in them.

Neil’s expertise is something that has been built up year by year and integrated with the knowledge that has been acquired in the past. The knowledge is modified by the most extensive reading before Neil makes a public statement.

Electromagnetic radiation a threat to our health
Electromagnetic radiation is the big issue he is involved in at the moment?radio waves from radio and TV towers, microwaves from cell phones, cell sites, mobile phones, cordless phones, and microwave ovens (the last being a minor problem compared with the others). The background radiation has been rising significantly by factors of thousands in the general population since the Second World War. Cancer is partly genetic, but largely environmental. Our food, the toxins in the environment like air pollutants, benzine, toxins in food like saccharine, are shown to be potential carcinogens, all those PCVs and other fairly toxic chemicals, can damage cells, but evidence is very strong that electromagnetic radiation damages cells in a way that is potentially cancer causing.

The official position of those who make their money out of producing and using this technology is that we all know that the only thing that electro magnetic radiation can do is heat and if it doesn’t heat it can’t have any effect.

However, a different view comes from science from reading the people who have researched what happens to cells in laboratories in repeatable experiments. For example, a laboratory took human breast cancer cells, and exposed them to an infusion of melatonin, which is a natural neurohormone which we all have, which helps us sleep at night. Then they applied a very low level of varying electric field, 50 cycles field, and the oncostatic effect of melatonin was totally eliminated.

Every night when we go to sleep our melatonin levels rise and melatonin goes through our blood and cleans our cells up. For example, it scavenges out free radicals which are highly damaging chemicals. If the free radicals persist for very long they damage DNA and cause damaged cells and are shown to be carcinogenic. Melatonin is one of those agents that cleans us up every night to reduce the possibility that cells will become carcinogenic.

That experiment shows that electromagnetic radiation from power lines and appliances can reduce the melatonin cleaning-up effect on human breast cancer cells. The experiment was repeated in three other laboratories. It gave a very reliable and repeatable result. The strength of the signal they used was two to twelve milligauss - a very low level magnetic field magnitude in that wave.

The European standard for safety for ELF fields is “20,000 milligauss is safe”, whereas this experiment shows that 2 milligauss causes a significant reduction in the cleansing effect of melatonin on cancer cells.

Is there any other evidence that people who work with ELFs get breast cancer?
There are several papers in epidemiology which show that people who work with ELF fields get more breast cancer. The first paper that Neil read showed that there is a statistically significant increase in breast cancer among these people but there was no known mechanism, so it was not regarded as a significant result. This was breast cancer in men. This was a surprising result. Breast cancer in women working in the electrical industry was the subject of the next paper which gave similar findings.

Neil put together the cell work and the epidemiology, finding a mechanism and a result, so it cannot now be said that we do not know how it happens. Such findings were supported by other tests.

What has been the international reaction?
Instead of these theories being accepted, big international studies have been conducted to disprove the connection. It is impossible to identify a particular given cause in each case. Research needs to be conducted over a large section of the population.

Those who work in the electrical industry are at risk, as the ELFs act as co-carcinogens preventing the repair mechanisms from working. Not only may cancer result, but also people may suffer from depressed immune systems.

People living in the U.S. embassy in Moscow were concerned that radar was being aimed at the top floor of the building. Tests showed that there were changes in the blood and an increase in cancer among those who lived there, including the children.

Air traffic controllers who were exposed to radar were tested and were found to have broken chromosomes. When they were taken away from the exposure the repair began, but the recovery rate was very slow.

Physiotherapists operating microwave equipment were the subject of research in 1993. In this group there was an increase of 50 - 60% in miscarriage rate, of which 48% occurred in the first seven weeks, yet they were exposed to the microwaves for a very brief time - at most two minutes per treatment.

Eighteen months later Australian Telecom responded saying that microwaves have difficulty penetrating the foetus, though short waves can. If it is not heat that causes the problem then the reason could well be that free radicals are damaging the DNA which causes damage to the chromosomes because of reduced melatonin. This could result in a deformed foetus which then aborts.

No records have been kept of the number of miscarriages in the general population, which means that there are no past statistics for comparison.

There have been problems among physiotherapists in Sweden and Denmark where there have been an increasing number of still births, cot deaths, deformity of children, and perinatal problems.

Cell phones are another cause of problems.
When the cell phone signal is held next to the brain there are changes in the brainwaves in 70% of people. This test was done at a level of about 2 microwatts per sq. cm., which is only a fraction of the actual exposure experienced from the cell phone. It is the level which is experienced at a cell phone site. In this, as in most aspects, people are not all the same. Some are more electro-sensitive. People who sleep with a cell phone by the bed have poor REM sleep, leading to impaired learning and memory. This is related to melatonin reduction.

In research at the University of Washington rats’ brains were exposed to a microwave signal and showed breaks in the DNA associated with increased free radicals and increased cell deaths - at levels of exposure about what a cell phone produces next to people’s heads. People are now suing cell phone companies because of brain tumours caused by high use.

In spite of this research one “world expert” in electromagnetic radiation and health has said that the worst thing about a cell phone is that it can cause an interruption during dinner in a restaurant.

What research in epidemiology suggests that the work on rats might have an applicability to people? The cells in rats’ brains are very similar to human brain cells.

The National Cancer Institute in the U.S. did a study of people in industries that exposed their workers to microwaves. They found that in seven industries in the Eastern U.S. there has been a tenfold increase in brain tumours among employees who have worked there for twenty years. The main cause appears to be electromagnetic radiation. Other possible causes have been checked, such as solder fumes which could have doubled the rate but not resulted in a tenfold increase.

In a controversial analysis, scientist Alasdair Philips argues that many everyday gadgets are filling our homes with electromagnetic fields - and doing untold damage to us all:

Picture a typical British household at tea-time on a weekday evening. The children are sitting in the lounge, multi-tasking, which means they are simultaneously watching a DVD on a gigantic flat-screen TV, wrestling with a GameBoy, and frantically texting on mobile phones.

Upstairs, Dad is sitting, face screwed-up, in front of a flickering screen, sending a few business e-mails via a high-speed broadband connection. In the kitchen, Mum is bringing a pan of pasta to the boil on her spanking new ceramic hob.

It’s hard to imagine that less than 100 years ago, the man-made energy that powers such labour-saving devices, communications equipment and entertainment systems was simply not available to the ordinary person.

Sinister side

But there is a more sinister side to the relentless winking lights, hum and high-tech glamour of the machines that have become such an essential part of our 21st-century lifestyle.

For those much-loved electronic appliances see not only that we are well looked after, but also that we are surrounded by a potent sea of electromagnetic fields (EMFs), a kind of ‘electrosmog’ that swirls invisibly around and through us every day.

This does not come just from domestic appliances, but also power lines, the wiring in our home, and telephone, mast and radio signals - and I believe it is getting more aggressive, more dangerous and harder to avoid every day. In fact, our exposure to electrosmog - the fields of force associated with electric charges in motion - has risen to a point where we are now experiencing levels that are millions of times higher than those encountered by anyone living at the start of the 20th century.

Back then, people had to contend only with natural electromagnetic fields - such as the earth’s geomagnetic field, which causes compass needles to swivel north. As a result, all of us have become guinea pigs in a great electromagnetic experiment that I believe is the cause of much of our daily stress, and may also be responsible for serious health problems for you and your family.

I first began thinking about electromagnetic fields in the context of human health in the Eighties when, as an electronics engineer and scientist, I was asked to look into claims that antinuclear war protesters on Greenham Common were being zapped with pulsed microwave radiation from prototype ‘non-lethal’ weapons then under development by the US military.

By 1989 it had become clear that there were questions being asked all over the world about the safety of EMFs, and so I set up the independent lobbying organisation, Powerwatch, to look into it.

Wed discovered that some of the first warnings about EMFs were made as early as 1972, when scientists in the Soviet Union reported strange health effects in railyard workers who were exposed to high levels of electromagnetic fields. The workers experienced increased heart disease, nervous disorders, unusual changes in blood pressure, recurring headaches, fatigue, stress and chronic depression.

Now the phenomenon is much more widely recognised, particularly when it comes to mobile phone technology. There are mounting claims, for example, that people who use their mobile phone frequently or over long periods develop symptoms ranging from headaches and mild disorientation to cancers of the brain and neck. These claims have been disputed, but do we really know for sure?

And Sir William Stewart, the Government’s chief adviser on mobile phone safety, has called for a ban on erecting phone masts near schools and warned of the risks of allowing children, whose thin skulls can more easily be penetrated by radiation, to use mobile phones.

But it is not simply mobile phones of which we should be wary. One of the more alarming developments of the past few decades is the rise of microwave EMFs:

Microwaves which are very high - frequency and rarely found in nature - are used not just in microwave ovens and mobiles, but also for cordless telephones (often erroneously thought to be a safe alternative to mobiles because they are run off landlines) and video and data transmission, and I believe they are pulsed out in a way that can adversely affect your health.

Household equipment that carries a risk rated from 1 to 5 and how to reduce your exposure:

CORDLESS LANDLINE TELEPHONES
DANGERS: Cordless phones are now the standard in most households and, like mobile handsets, they emit microwave radiation - from both the base unit and the handset itself - that is alleged to cause brain tumours, breast cancer, dementia, DNA damage, concentration problems, memory loss, mood and behavioural changes and fertility problems.
SOLUTIONS: Install a landline telephone that plugs into the wall-socket and remains attached to it by a wire and try to use it for most calls. If you can’t do without a cordless phone, buy an analogue model, as their base units emit radiation only when the phone is active.
Avoid the newer digital phones (Digital Enhanced Cordless Telephones, or DECTs) as their base units emit radiation 24 hours a day, whether you are using them or not.
RISK RATING: 2 to 5 (analogue cordless phone score 2, older digital handsets 3, DECT 5)

MOBILE TELEPHONES
DANGERS: Mobile phones have long been the subject of claims that they are a health hazard. While conclusive evidence has yet to be produced to prove this, I believe they are a danger when used frequently or for long periods of time. They emit radiation even when they are on standby.
SOLUTIONS: Mobiles transmit at maximum power when you switch them on and off, when connecting and disconnecting a call, and while ringing, so hold the phone away from your body while dialling out, and don’t put it to your ear until the person you are calling has answered. Use a hands-free kit with air tubes whenever possible and keep calls short.
When texting, hold the phone away from your body when sending the message. Store a phone in your handbag or briefcase, not in a pocket and not in a baby’s pushchair. Don’t keep your phone on a bedside table at night, particularly if it is charging - because the charger unit gives off high levels of EMFs.
Avoid using music players built into mobiles at all costs. The signals produce microwaves while you are listening to music.
RISK RATING: 5

COOKERS
DANGERS: The magnetic fields from a ceramic or glass-topped hob can be lower than those from a traditional electric hob, but some halogen rings can give off particularly high levels.
SOLUTIONS: I recommend that as well as avoiding halogen rings, you avoid magnetic induction hobs because, although they are very energy efficient and fast to use, they produce significant levels of EMFs. Safest of all are gas cookers, or slow cookers which use very low power.
RISK RATING: Ceramic or glass-topped hobs 1, magnetic induction hobs 5.

MICROWAVE OVENS
DANGERS: There have been claims of serious biochemical changes to the structure of proteins and amino acids in microwaved food and I believe that, for safety’s sake, it is important to avoid meals cooked in this way if possible.
SOLUTIONS: Increasingly, there are allegations that the packaging of microwave-ready foods may release harmful toxins, so if a microwave must be used, put the food onto a plate before cooking it.
Be aware that radiation leaks from the seal of the microwave oven door, so children should not be allowed to stand nearby when it is on.
RISK RATING: 5

LIGHTING
DANGERS: Fluorescent lights, energy-saving bulbs and halogen lights all carry a risk.
SOLUTIONS: Use ordinary bulbs and non-halogen spotlights, which do not cause an EMF problem. Beware of cheap and old dimmer switches because their wiring can significantly raise the levels of electromagnetic pollution.
RISK RATING: 3 to 5, with dimmer switches being the biggest danger.

COMPUTERS
DANGERS: Computers and their monitors give off fairly low levels of EMFs, but if you are still worried, look out for the 2005 DELL Inspiron range of laptops which come with a three-pin mains cable and earthed adaptor and do not emit electric fields.
The biggest risk to computer users comes from broadband systems that allow ‘wireless access’ and in doing so fill your house with pulsating microwave radiation at all times.
SOLUTIONS: All VDUs - including TVs and office computers - give off a higher level of EMFs from the back and sides, so at work, it is important to make sure you are at least 3ft away from the rear of the monitor of the colleague who sits opposite you.
RISK RATING: computers 1, wireless internet connection 5

ELECTRIC BLANKETS
DANGERS: These can create a magnetic field that penetrates throughout the body. Most also produce an electric field.
SOLUTIONS: If you are concerned about EMF exposure, do not use one at all. If you must use one, always switch it off at the wall before you get into bed.
RISK RATING: electric underblankets 1, overblankets 4

DEEP FAT FRYERS
DANGERS: These pose a high risk because a deep-fat fryer will give off high EMFs as the oil is heated. Regularly reheated oil is likely to contain carcinogenic compounds generated at the high temperatures, which will then attach themselves to the fried food.
SOLUTIONS: You should avoid deep-fat frying.
RISK RATING: 5

PLASMA SCREEN TELEVISIONS
DANGERS: TVs with a plasma screen give off high magnetic and electric fields that reach a 6ft radius around them. However, battery operated remote controls are quite safe.
SOLUTIONS: Always sit at least 6ft from the screen - and remember that EMFs travel through walls. If you have a plasma screen TV in your bedroom, it should be at least 6ft from your pillows.                                                                                                                        RISK RATING: plasma screen TVs 4

The Sunday Times 22nd April 2007

By Daniel Foggo

SEVEN clusters of cancer and other serious illnesses have been discovered around mobile phone masts, raising concerns over the technology’s potential impact on health.

Studies of the sites show high incidences of cancer, brain haemorrhages and high blood pressure within a radius of 400 yards of mobile phone masts.

One of the studies, in Warwickshire, showed a cluster of 31 cancers around a single street. A quarter of the 30 staff at a special school within sight of the 90ft high mast have developed tumours since 2000, while another quarter have suffered significant health problems.

The mast is being pulled down by the mobile phone after the presentation of the evidenceoperator O2 by local protesters. While rejecting any links to ill-health, O2 admitted the decision was “clearly rare and unusual”.

Phone masts have provoked protests throughout Britain with thousands of people objecting each week to planning applications. There are about 47,000 masts in the UK.

Dr John Walker, a scientist who compiled the cluster studies with the help of local campaigners in Devon, Lincolnshire, Staffordshire and the West Midlands, said he was convinced they showed a potential link between the angle of the beam of radiation emitted from the masts’ antennae and illnesses discovered in local populations.

“Masts should be moved away from conurbations and schools and the power turned down,” he said.

Some scientists already believe such a link exists and studies in other European countries suggest a rise in cancers close to masts. In 2005 Sir William Stewart, chairman of the Health Protection Agency, said he found four such studies to be of concern but that the health risk remained unproven.

The Daily Mail 21st May 2007
by DANIEL MARTIN

Britain’s top health watchdog has called for an inquiry into the use of wireless Internet networks in schools because of concerns they could be exposing children to the risk of cancer.

The demand came after it was revealed that classroom “wi-fi” networks give off three times as much radiation as a typical mobile phone mast.

Guidelines from the Health Protection Agency already state that masts should not be sited near schools because of a possible cancer link and other health risks.

Now its chairman, Sir William Stewart, is seeking a review of the health effects of wi-fi networks amid fears they could pose even greater dangers.

Wi-fi works by transmitting information via radio waves from a telephone line to a computer and back.

Networks have been installed in nearly 50 per cent of primary schools and 70 per cent of secondary schools giving millions of children access to computers.

Researchers for the BBC’s Panorama programme visited a comprehensive in Norwich and measured the strength of a radiation signal from a classroom wi-fi laptop.

They found that the maximum signal strength was three times higher than that of a typical mobile phone mast.

Scientists believe children may be more vulnerable to radio-frequency radiation emissions than adults because their skulls are still growing and are thinner.

This raises questions over the safety of children bent over computers being exposed to radiation at very close quarters.

But Panorama spoke to 50 schools and only one had been alerted to possible health risks. Some had been categorically told that there was no danger.

In response to the findings, Sir William said: “I believe that there is a need for a review of wi-fi and other areas. I think it’s timely for it to be done now.”

In the past 18 months 1.6million wi-fi connections have been set up in the UK. This means children using computers at home could also be at risk.

The World Health Organisation, backed by the Government, says there are “no adverse health effects from low-level, long-term exposure” to wi-fi radiation.

But Sir William said there was growing evidence of possible harm from radio-frequency radiation.

He explained: “There may be changes, for example in cognitive function.

“There were some indications that there may be cancer inductions. There was some molecular biology changes within the cell.”

Philip Parkin, general secretary of the Professional Association of Teachers, said: “I am asking for schools to consider very seriously whether they should be installing wi-fi networks now and this will make them think twice or three times before they do it.”

The levels of radiation Panorama found were 600 times lower than those deemed dangerous by the Government, which bases its data on radiation safety limits provided by a group of scientists called ICNIRP.

But it does not take the biological effects of radio-frequency radiation into account, basing exposure limits solely on a “thermal effect”.

This means radiation only counts if it is so strong it causes a heat effect.

Last month Professor Lawrie Challis, chairman of the government- sponsored mobile telecommunications and health research programme, warned of the dangers of children using wi-fi-enabled laptops on their knees.

He said the wi-fi transmitter is only 2cm from the child’s bodies – putting them at greater risk than if they were using a normal computer when the transmitter would be in the PC’s tower.

Yesterday he said: “Wi-fi exposures are usually very small and seem unlikely to pose any risk to health – the transmitters are low power and some distance from the body.

“They can be near to the body however when a laptop is on one’s lap and my own view is that just as we encourage young children not to use mobile phones we should also encourage them to use their laptops on a table rather than their lap if they are going online for a long time.”

Professor Malcolm Sperrin, director of medical physics at the Royal Berkshire Hospital, cast doubt on Panorama’s findings.

He said wi-fi radiation was about 100,000 times less intense than that emitted by domestic microwave ovens.

He added: “Research is still proceeding in this area at leading centres in many countries but evidence points to wi-fi transmissions being well below any likely threshold for human effects.”

A Department of Health spokesman said: “Current evidence does not suggest that there is a health problem with wi-fi but we look to the Health Protection Agency to advise Government on these issues.”

The Independent 20th January 2008

Phone makers own scientists discover that bedtime use can lead to headaches, confusion and depression.

By Geoffrey Lean, Environment Editor
Sunday, 20 January 2008

Radiation from mobile phones delays and reduces sleep, and causes headaches and confusion, according to a new study.

The research, sponsored by the mobile phone companies themselves, shows that using the handsets before bed causes people to take longer to reach the deeper stages of sleep and to spend less time in them, interfering with the body’s ability to repair damage suffered during the day.

The findings are especially alarming for children and teenagers, most of whom – surveys suggest – use their phones late at night and who especially need sleep. Their failure to get enough can lead to mood and personality changes, ADHD-like symptoms, depression, lack of concentration and poor academic performance.

The study – carried out by scientists from the blue-chip Karolinska Institute and Uppsala University in Sweden and from Wayne State University in Michigan, USA – is thought to be the most comprehensive of its kind.

Published by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology’s Progress in Electromagnetics Research Symposium and funded by the Mobile Manufacturers Forum, representing the main handset companies, it has caused serious concern among top sleep experts, one of whom said that there was now “more than sufficient evidence” to show that the radiation “affects deep sleep”.

The scientists studied 35 men and 36 women aged between 18 and 45. Some were exposed to radiation that exactly mimicked what is received when using mobile phones; others were placed in precisely the same conditions, but given only “sham” exposure, receiving no radiation at all.

The people who had received the radiation took longer to enter the first of the deeper stages of sleep, and spent less time in the deepest one. The scientists concluded: “The study indicates that during laboratory exposure to 884 MHz wireless signals components of sleep believed to be important for recovery from daily wear and tear are adversely affected.”

The embarrassed Mobile Manufacturers Forum played down the results, insisting – at apparent variance with this published conclusion – that its “results were inconclusive” and that “the researchers did not claim that exposure caused sleep disturbance”.

But Professor Bengt Arnetz, who led the study, says: “We did find an effect from mobile phones from exposure scenarios that were realistic. This suggests that they have measurable effects on the brain.”

He believes that the radiation may activate the brain’s stress system, “making people more alert and more focused, and decreasing their ability to wind down and fall asleep”.

About half of the people studied believed themselves to be “electrosensitive”, reporting symptoms such as headaches and impaired cognitive function from mobile phone use. But they proved to be unable to tell if they had been exposed to the radiation in the test.

This strengthens the conclusion of the study, as it disposes of any suggestion that knowledge of exposure influenced sleeping patterns. Even more significantly, it throws into doubt the relevance of studies the industry relies on to maintain that the radiation has no measurable effects.

A series of them – most notably a recent highly publicised study at Essex University – have similarly found that people claiming to be electrosensitive could not distinguish when the radiation was turned on in laboratory conditions, suggesting that they were not affected.

Critics have attacked the studies’ methodology, but the new findings deal them a serious blow. For they show that the radiation did have an effect, even though people could not tell when they were exposed.

It also complements other recent research. A massive study, following 1,656 Belgian teenagers for a year, found most of them used their phones after going to bed. It concluded that those who did this once a week were more than three times – and those who used them more often more than five times – as likely to be “very tired”.

Dr Chris Idzikowski, the director of the Edinburgh Sleep Centre, says: “There is now more than sufficient evidence, from a large number of reputable investigators who are finding that mobile phone exposure an hour before sleep adversely affects deep sleep.”

Dr William Kohler of the Florida Sleep Institute added: “Anything that disrupts the integrity of your sleep will potentially have adverse consequences in functioning during the day, such as grouchiness, difficulty concentrating, and in children hyperactivity and behaviour problems.”

David Schick, the chief executive of Exradia, which manufactures protective devices against the radiation, called on ministers to conduct “a formal public inquiry” into the effects of mobile phones.