Health issues related to electromagnetic radiation exposure and chemical exposure

Category Archives: -Mailing List

EUROPAEM EMF Guideline 2016 for the prevention, diagnosis and treatment of EMF-related health problems and illnesses

The EUROPAEM EMF Guideline 2016 was written by the EUROPAEM EMF- WORKING GROUP and adopted by the EUROPAEM Board on 9 August 2016. The EUROPAEM EMF Guideline 2016 represents the current state of medical science.
Intention and core content of the EUROPAEM EMF Guideline 2016….. Rev Environ Health 2016

Abstract

Chronic diseases and illnesses associated with non-specific symptoms are on the rise. In addition to chronic stress in social and work environments, physical and chemical exposures at home, at work, and during leisure activities are causal or contributing environmental stressors that deserve attention by the general practitioner as well as by all other members of the health care community. It seems necessary now to take “new exposures” like electromagnetic fields (EMF) into account. SNIP

British bar installs Faraday cage to block phone signals / Cafe Thrives Without WiFi

From www.thegeek.com

By Matthew Humphries Aug. 3, 2016

t’s becoming increasingly difficult to disconnect. The smartphone we all carry will usually find a signal, be it 3G, 4G, or WiFi meaning you’re always connected and able to receive messages, chat, or surf the web in your own insular bubble. Getting away from that is tough and most of us wouldn’t want to anyway, but one British bar is forcing the disconnect on its patrons.

The Gin Tub cocktail bar in Hove is owned by Steve Tyler and he dislikes what the smartphone has done to social gatherings. So he decided to do something about it in his own bar by installing a Faraday cage that blocks all phone signals. The Gin Tub is a dead zone.
SNIP

Canadian Safety Code 6 inadequacies highlighted in new report

Excerpt

Report of the Standing Committee on Health

HESA 2015 Recommendations on Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Radiation and the Health of Canadians
On Tuesday June 9th, 2015 the Standing Committee on Health, whose mandate is to study and report on all matters relating to the mandate, management, and operation of Health Canada, unanimously adopted the final report into their study of Health Canada’s Safety Code 6. During three full days of hearings spread over two months, the ten MP member panel heard from both sides of the issue including leading scientists and doctors from around the world, Health Canada and the Canadian Wireless Telecommunications Association. (Full testimony and recaps can be found further down on this page)
SNIP

Do mobile phones give you brain cancer?

From Dariusz Leszczynski in the Conversation UK:

Excerpts:

It is a question any mobile phone user would be keen to have answered – and science does offer some clues. In 2011, for example, the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) classified mobile phone radiation as a possible human carcinogen, group 2B.

The classification was based predominantly on evidence from population studies. A study by the European Union-funded INTERPHONE group and another led by L. Hardell, a Swedish epidemiologist, showed an increased risk (40-170%) of developing glioma, a malignant brain cancer, in people who used a mobile phone for 30 minutes a day over ten years.

The idea of mobile phone radiation increasing the risk of cancer was strengthened by two other studies. The Cerenat study, published in 2013, confirmed observations of the INTERPHONE and Hardell studies. And an animal study in 2015 showed cell phone radiation enhanced the carcinogenic effects of chemicals…..

However, other studies show the number of people getting brain cancer has remained unchanged or only slightly increased. This is in spite of the dramatic increase in the number of users of mobile phones over the last ten to twenty years.

And so there is a contradiction between the evidence that shows an increased risk of brain cancer and the studies that show that the rate of brain cancer in populations “saturated” by mobile phones is fairly constant.

Which view is right? SNIP

Post Fukushima: US EPA approves vastly higher radiation limits in drinking water

After the 1986 Chernobyl disaster, with cesium 137 contamination in Sweden, Norway and to a lesser extent, Finland, they all faced a marketing nightmare for their food industry (especially for Raindeer meat) The stuff now was unacceptably radioactive according to the then existing “safe ” limits. Sweden’s ingenious solution to this dilemma was to simply increase the allowable limits so it was now okay to eat raindeer meat. More recently, post Fukushima, the Japanese government has done similar by significantly raising allowable radiation limits for both workers and children. Now we have the US EPA doing similar by raising the allowable level of radioactive contamination in America’s drinking water. WHY? Read on, SNIP

  • Recent Posts

  • Browse Categories