27 October 2007

Globalresearch.ca The radiatrion poisoning of America

The Radiation Poisoning Of America

From GlobalResearch.ca

By Amy Worthington

Prior to 1996, the wireless age was not coming online fast enough, primarily because communities had the authority to block the siting of cell towers. But the Federal Communications Act of 1996 made it nearly impossible for communities to stop construction of cell towers “even if they pose threats to public health and the environment. Since the decision to enter the age of wireless convenience was politically determined for us, we have forgotten well-documented safety and environmental concerns and, with a devil-may-care zeal that is lethally short-sighted, we have incorporated into our lives every wireless toy that comes on the market. We behave as if we are addicted to radiation. Our addiction to cell phones has led to harder “drugs” like wireless Internet. And now we are bathing in the radiation that our wireless enthusiasm has unleashed. Those who are addicted, uninformed, corporately biased and politically-influenced may dismiss our scientifically-sound concerns about the apocalyptic hazards of wireless radiation. But we must not. Instead, we must sound the alarm.

—-

Illa Garcia wore jewelry the first day she went back to work as a fire lookout for the state of California in the summer of 2002. The intense radiation from dozens of RF/microwave antennas surrounding the lookout heated the metals on her body enough to burn her skin. “I still have those scars,” she says. “I never wore jewelry to work after that.”

Likely Mountain Lookout, on U.S. Forest Service land with a spectacular view of Mount Shasta, is one of thousands of RF/microwave “hot spots” across the nation. A newly-erected cellular communications tower was only 30 feet from the lookout. “One antenna on that tower was even with our heads,” recalls Garcia. “We could hear high-pitched buzzing. There were also three state communications antennas mounted on the lookout, only 6 feet from where we walked. We climbed past them every day.”

Motorola company manuals for management of communications sites confirm that high frequency radiation from these antennas is nasty stuff. Safety regulations mandate warning signs, EMF awareness training, protective gear, even transmitter deactivation for personnel working that close to antennas. Garcia and co-worker Mary Jasso were never warned about the hazards. This, they say, demonstrates extreme malfeasance on the part of agencies and commercial companies responsible for their exposure.

By the end of fire season, Garcia and Jasso were so ill they were forced to retire and the lookout was closed to state personnel. Garcia, 52, is now severely disabled with fibromyalgia, auto-immune thyroiditis and acute nerve degeneration. Medical tests confirmed broken DNA strands in her blood and abnormal tissue death in her brain.

Dr. Gunner Heuser, a medical specialist in neurotoxicity, states that Garcia’s disorders are a result of chronic electromagnetic field exposure in the microwave range and that “she has become totally disabled as a result.” Dr. Heuser wrote, “In my experience patients develop multisystem complaints after EMF exposure just as they do after toxic chemical exposure.”

Jasso, who worked the lookout for 11 seasons, is also disabled with brain and lung damage, partial left side paralysis, muscle tremors, bone pain and DNA damage. Jasso discovered that all lookouts who worked Likely Mountain since 1989 are disabled. At only 61 years of age, she has lost so much memory that she cannot remember back to when her first three children were born. She fears that communications radiation may be a major factor in the nation’s phenomenal epidemics of dementia and autism.

Both women say they have been unjustly denied worker’s comp and medical benefits. Their pleas for help to state and federal agencies have been fruitless. Between them they have racked up over $150,000 in medical bills, although there is no effective treatment for radiation sickness.

Twenty-two other members of Garcia and Jasso’s two families received Likely Mountain radiation exposure. All now suffer serious and expensive illnesses, including tumors, blood abnormalities, stomach problems, lung damage, bone pain, muscle spasms, extreme fatigue, tremors, numbness, impaired motor skills, cataracts, memory loss, spine degeneration, sleep problems, low immunity to infection, hearing and vision problems, hair loss and allergies.

Jasso’s husband, who often stayed at the lookout, has a rare soft tissue sarcoma known to be radiation related. Garcia’s husband, who spent little time at the lookout, has systemic cancer that started with sarcoma of the colon. Garcia’s daughter Teresa was at the lookout for a total of two hours during her first pregnancy. Her daughter was born with slight brain damage and immunity problems. “That baby was always sick,” says Garcia. Teresa spent only three days at the lookout during her second pregnancy. Her son was born with autism.

Garcia and Jasso have a terminal condition known as “toxic encephalopathy,” involving brain damage to frontal and temporal lobes. This was confirmed by SPECT brain scans. Twelve others in the two-family group who also had the scans were diagnosed with the affliction. “

All of us with this condition have been told that we're dying,” says Garcia. “Our mutated cells will reproduce new mutated cells until the body finally shuts down.”

Nuclear bombs on a pole

Painful conditions endured by the families of Garcia and Jasso are identical to those suffered by Japanese victims of gamma wave radiation after nuclear explosions at Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945. Five decades of studies confirm that non-ionizing communications radiation in the RF/microwave spectrum has the same effect on human health as ionizing gamma wave radiation from nuclear reactions. Leading German radiation expert Dr. Heyo Eckel, an official of the German Medical Association, states, “The injuries that result from radioactive radiation are identical with the effects of electromagnetic radiation. The damages are so similar that they are hard to differentiate.”1

Understanding what happened at Likely Mountain is critical to understanding the public health threat posed by RF/microwave radiation in the United States. The families of Garcia and Jasso, plus previous lookout workers and multitudes of tourists who visited Likely Mountain for camping and sightseeing, were beamed by the same kind of high frequency radiation that blasts from tens of thousands of neighborhood cell towers and rooftop antennas erected across America for wireless communications. The city of San Francisco, with an area of only seven square miles, has over 2,500 licensed cell phone antennas positioned at 530 locations throughout the city. In practical terms, this city, like thousands of others, is being wave-nuked 24 hours a day.

The identical damage resulting from both radioactive gamma waves and high frequency microwaves involves a pathological condition in which the nuclei of irradiated human cells splinter into fragments called micronuclei. Micronuclei are a definitive pre-cursor of cancer. During the 1986 nuclear reactor disaster at Chernobyl in Russia, the ionizing radiation released was equivalent to 400 atomic bombs, with an estimated ultimate human toll of 10,000 deaths. Exposed Russians quickly developed blood cell micronuclei, leaving them at high risk for cancer.

What they wouldn’t tell us

RF/microwaves from cell phones and cell tower transmitters also cause micronuclei damage in blood cells. This was reported a decade ago by Drs. Henry Lai and Narendrah Singh, biomedical researchers at the University of Washington in Seattle. Dr. Singh is famous for refining comet assay techniques used to identify DNA damage. Lai and Singh demonstrated in numerous animal studies that mobile phone radiation quickly causes DNA single and double strand breaks at levels well below the current federal “safe” exposure standards.2

The telecommunications industry knows this thanks to its own six-year, wireless technology research (WTR) study program mandated by Congress and completed in 1999. Gathering a team of over 200 doctors, scientists and experts in the field, WTR research showed that human blood exposed to cell phone radiation had a 300-percent increase in genetic damage in the form of micronuclei.3 Dr. George Carlo, a public health expert who coordinated the WTR studies, confirms that exposure to communications radiation from wireless technology is “potentially the biggest health insult” this nation has ever seen. Dr. Carlo believes RF/microwave radiation is a greater threat than cigarette smoking and asbestos.

In 2000, European communications giant T-Mobile commissioned the German ECOLOG Institute to review all available scientific evidence in regard to health risks for wireless telecommunications. ECOLOG found over 220 peer-reviewed, published papers documenting the cancer-initiating and cancer-promoting effects of the high frequency radiation employed by wireless technology.4 Many corroborating studies have been published since.

By 2004, 12 research groups from seven European countries cooperating in the REFLEX study project confirmed that microwaves from wireless communications devices cause significant single and double strand DNA breaks in both human and animal cells under laboratory conditions.5 In 2005, a Chinese medical study confirmed statistically significant DNA damage from pulsed microwaves at cell phone levels.6 That same year, University of Chicago researchers described how pulsed communications microwaves alter gene expression in human cells at non-thermal exposure levels.7

Because gamma waves and RF/microwave radiation are identically carcinogenic and genotoxic to the cellular roots of life, the safe dose of either kind of radiation is zero. No study has proven that any level of exposure from cell-damaging radiation is safe for humans. Dr. Carlo confirms that cell damage is not dose dependant because any exposure level, no matter how small, can trigger damage response by cell mechanisms.8

Officials at the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and the National Institutes of Health closely reviewed the damning results of WTR studies, which also revealed microwave damage to the blood brain barrier. But these officials have chosen to downplay, obfuscate and even deny the irrepressible science of the day. Raking in $billions from selling spectrum licenses, the feds have allowed the telecom industry to unleash demonstrably dangerous technology which induces millions of people to become brain-intimate with improperly tested wireless devices9 and which saturates the nation with carcinogenic waves to service those devices. Dr. Carlo says that even the American Cancer Society is in bed with the communications industry, which infuses the Society with substantial contributions.10

Two ways to die

Medical science illustrates that there are two ways to die from radiation poisoning: Fast burn and slow burn. Nuclear flash-burned Japanese had parts of their flesh melt off before they died in agony within hours or days. People have also quickly died after walking through powerful radar beams, which can microwave-cook internal organs within seconds of exposure.

Slow-burn radiation mechanisms are cumulative, progressive, ongoing and continual. Thousands of Japanese nuke bomb victims died painfully years after exposure. The slow burn process of RF/microwave exposure is manifested by cancer clusters commonly found in communities irradiated by cell tower transmitters. Recent Swedish epidemiological studies confirm that, after 2,000 hours of cellular phone exposure, or a latency period of about 10 years, brain cancer risk rises by 240 percent.11

Communications antennas now blast the human habitat with many different electromagnetic frequencies simultaneously. Human DNA hears this energetic cacophony loud and clear, reacting like the human ear would to high volume country music, R&B plus rock and roll screaming from the same speaker. Irradiated cells struggle to protect themselves against this destructive dissonance by hardening their membranes. They cease to receive nourishment, stop releasing toxins, die prematurely and spill micronuclei fragments into a sort of “tumor bank account.” This is precisely how microwave radiation prematurely ages living tissues.

Nuking the crew

The constant roaming pain is intense for 32-year-old Kenneth Hurtado of Southern California. He’s been to hell and back, starting with a seven-pound tumor on a kidney, diagnosed in 2002. The cancer spread to his brain. His first brain tumor was removed by craniotomy, the second by the cyber knife. In 2005, cancer nodes were found in his lungs. By 2006, the cancer had metastasized to his legs. This year he is battling three excruciating tumors on his spinal cord. Hurtado hates his seizures. His last one came on while he was driving. “It’s like the devil taking over your body,” he says.

Now unable to work, Hurtado says he was relatively healthy in 1998 when he began a career as an installer for a large international corporation manufacturing electronics equipment for wireless providers. At the base of cell towers there is an equipment “hut” where installers assemble the radios, amplifiers and filters which generate man-made microwave frequencies and route them up to transmitter antennas through huge cables. Mounted on sector supports aptly named alpha, beta and gamma, the antennas send and receive these carcinogenic radio waves and their pulsed data packets at the speed of light.

Posted on locked fences around the huts are “danger” warning signs. Hurtado says, “You look around these sites and you find many dead birds on the gravel. They can’t take the radiation and they,ll just die. You don’t have to ponder that too long to figure it’s bad.”

Hurtado doesn’t know how much radiation he got on the job. He says there are at least four connection spots inside the hut where radiation can leak. He could not avoid the “heat” when he turned the radios on for testing and he wonders if his cancer is the result. “When I first got hired, we had safety meetings, but they pretty much minimized the hazards,” he remembers. He was issued no electromagnetic safety clothing and it was not until 2002 that he got a radiation meter to wear. “The meter is supposed to warn you if you are getting too much radiation,” he says, “but I put mine on a stick and placed it next to antennas and the alarm never went off.”

A medical report in the International Journal of Occupational and Environmental Health confirms that workers exposed to high levels of RF/microwave radiation routinely have astronomical cancer rates.12 The report notes that, for these workers, the latency period between high radiation exposure and illness is short compared to less exposed populations.

Hurtado says there are many industry workers who are dangerously over-exposed. “I’ve talked to guys on power crews who have to climb around the antennas and they,ve told me that before a work day is half over, they start feeling really sick.” He adds, “In my mind they are getting cooked.”

Hurtado suspects that, since the early days of the wireless buildout, there has been illegal activity related to public exposure from transmission sites. “I’m pretty sure,” he says, “that some of the carriers are exceeding FCC exposure limits. They can turn the radios and amplifiers up to get a bigger footprint and they don’t care if the alarms go on once the installers are gone.” Regulatory inspectors could identify violators because channels can be spectrum analyzed. “But,” he says, “there is just no one to check and I believe that the public is getting way too much radiation now.”

Regulators asleep at the wheel

The Federal Communications Commission (FCC), the single agency with authority to regulate the broadcast/communications industry, has neither money, manpower nor motive to properly monitor radiation output from hundreds of thousands of commercial wireless installations spewing carcinogenic waves across the nation. The FCC admits that physical testing to verify compliance with emissions guidelines is relatively rare.

Critics say that FCC appointees, with virtually no medical or public health expertise, represent an old-boy network and a cheering squad for the telecommunications and broadcast industries. The Center for Public Integrity found that FCC officials have been bribed by the industries with such perks as expensive trips to Las Vegas.13

Dr. Carlo confirms that there is no regulatory accountability. He says, “You have to go to those base stations and independently measure what is coming out of them because we have had many instances where you have an antenna that is allowed by law to transmit at 100 watts and we have seen up to 900 to 1000 watts. You can turn things up when nobody is looking.”14

Neighborhood groups monitoring the broadcast/communications antenna farm on Lookout Mountain near Denver, Colorado, have consistently found that, despite protests to the FCC over nine years, radiation on the mountain has been measured at up to 125 percent of exposure levels permitted by federal law.15

Lethal exposure guidelines

Even if there were reliable compliance monitoring, many experts say that FCC public exposure guidelines for RF/microwave radiation are deadly because they are based on the obsolete and unfounded theory that only power density hot enough to flash-cook tissues is harmful. This puts FCC at odds with current scientific knowledge regarding the minimum exposure level at which harm to living cells begins.

Myriad symptoms of radiation poisoning can be induced at exposure levels hundreds, even thousands of times lower than current standards permit. Russia’s public exposure standards are 100 times more stringent than ours because Russian scientists have consistently shown that, at U.S. exposure levels, humans develop pathological changes in heart, kidney, liver and brain tissues, plus cancers of all types.16

Norbert Hankin, chief of the EPA’s Radiation Protection Division, has stated that the FCC’s exposure guidelines are protective only against effects arising from a thermal (flash burn) mechanism. He concedes that, “the generalization by many, that these guidelines protect human beings from harm by any and all mechanisms, is not justified.”17

Thus, public microwave exposure levels tolerated by the FCC and its industry-loaded advisory committees are a national health disaster. Yet, for pragmatic and lucrative reasons, federal exposure limits have been deliberately set so high that no matter how much additional wireless radiation is added to the national burden, it will always be “within standards.”

The FCC regulatory mess comes into focus with the Likely Mountain case. Jasso says that when she and Garcia contacted the FCC regarding their radiation injuries, they were met with an appalling lack of expertise and concern. “FCC has no answers,” Jasso says. “Their exposure guidelines are convoluted and nonsensical. They refuse to address problems of multiple antennas, field expansion, human body coupling and blood reversal because they want to avoid regulatory problems at telecommunication sites.” She adds, “FCC will fine a licensee thousands of dollars for not having a light installed on top of a telecommunications tower, but they have not issued even a warning letter to their licensees for the injuries that occurred on Likely Mountain. They say injury cannot occur because their licensees are regulated.”

Catch 22

When Garcia and Jasso filed suit against companies operating microwave transmitters on Likely Mountain, they could find no attorney who would take their case and they were forced to proceed pro se. In August, 2007, a California district court denied their claim, mainly on the grounds that they had not proven that the defendants had exceeded FCC exposure guidelines. Under federal law the shattered health of 24 people, plus medical testimony, is not sufficient proof of negligence and liability.

Since FCC provides no enforcement monitoring at transmitter sites and since the radiation industry is not required to prove with consistent documentation that it is compliant, injured parties have little chance of proving non-compliance because the damage to their health often becomes obvious months or even years after their exposure.

The court worried that the Garcia-Jasso case highlights “the conflict between the FCC’s delegated authority to establish RF radiation guidelines and limits and plaintiffs, attempt to establish that wireless facilities like the one at Likely Mountain are ultrahazardous.”So, while current science provides ample evidence that FCC’s guidelines are ultrahazardous, the radiation industry hides behind FCC incompetence, simply because FCC retains exclusive authority to set the standards.

The FCC’s disastrous authority is calcified by the Telecommunications Act (TCA) of 1996. The telecom industry is infamous for lavish “donations” which keep legislators on its leash. Anticipating a national radiation health crisis and the public backlash that would follow, the telecom lobby blatantly bought itself a provision in the law that prohibits state and local governments from considering environmental (health) effects when siting personal wireless service facilities so long as “…such facilities comply with the FCC’s regulations concerning such emissions.” Many say the TCA insures that America’s war on cancer will never be won, while protecting gross polluters from liability.

On our own

After passage of the TCA, a group of scientists and engineers, backed by the Communications Workers of America, filed suit in federal court. They hoped the Supreme Court would review both the FCC’s outdated exposure guidelines and the legality of a federal law that severely impedes state and local authority in the siting of hazardous transmitters. In 2001, the Supreme Court refused to hear the case. The group’s subsequent petition to the FCC asking the agency to bring its exposure guidelines current with the latest scientific data was denied.18

This is where we stand today. The public has no vote, no voice, no choice. Chronic exposure to scientifically indefensible levels of DNA-ravaging radiation is now compulsory for everyone in America. This is why Garcia and Jasso are ill today; this why the industry enjoys unchallenged power to place dangerous transmitters in residential and commercial areas with unsafe setbacks and this is why untold thousands of Americans in buildings with transmitters on the roof are given no safety warnings, though they work and dwell in carcinogenic electromagnetic fields. In the meantime, the radiation industry rakes in $billions in quarterly profits, none of which is set aside for to pay for the national health catastrophe at hand.

Every citizen is now condemned to protect and defend himself against radiation assault as best he can. There have been a number of lawsuits against the radiation industry since cell towers began going up in backyards across the nation. In 2001, a group action lawsuit was filed in South Bend, Indiana, by families living in close proximity to towers. The complaint describes health effects suffered by the plaintiffs, including heart palpitations, interference with hearing, recurring headaches, short term memory loss, sleep disturbances, multiple tumors, glandular problems, chronic fatigue, allergies, weakened immune system, miscarriage and inability to learn.19

The South Bend suit was settled out of court on the basis of nuisance and decreased property values. Health claims don’t hold water if emissions are within FCC exposure standards. This case is valuable for understanding the lunacy of FCC standards. The sick families enlisted the help of radiation consultant Bill Curry, who honed his expertise as an engineer for Argonne and Livermore labs. Dr. Curry found that one of the towers was irradiating homes at over 65 microwatts per square centimeter.20 This power density is well within federal exposure standards, which allow any neighborhood to be zapped with at least 580 microwatts per square centimeter, or higher, depending on the frequencies. If the families were sick at 65 microwatts/cm2 what would they be at 580? Considering that the Soviets used furtive Cold War microwave bombardment to make US embassy personal radiation-sick at an average exposure level of only .01 microwatts/cm2, America’s clear and present danger is obvious.21

How radiation sick is America?

Since the wireless revolution began wave-nuking the U.S. in the 1990s, there have been no federally funded health studies to assess the cumulative effects of ever-increasing communications radiation on public health. There is no national database enabling citizens to study the location of transmitters in their areas. Local and state governments can offer no information on how much commercial wireless radiation is contaminating their populations. When trying to find out who owns a tower or which companies have transmitters on that tower, citizens usually hit a brick wall.

Dr. Carlo heads the only independent, post-market health surveillance registry in the nation where people can report radiation illness. 22 Dr. Carlo says the registry has heard from thousands of people who believe that their illnesses, including brain and eye cancers, are due to telecommunications radiation from both wireless phones and tower transmitters. In the last two years, the registry has seen an upsurge in reports as transmitters become ever more energetically dangerous in order to accommodate increased data flow for new, multi-media technologies.

We can only guess how many Americans are in their graves today from microwave assault. Arthur Firstenberg, who founded the Cellular Phone Task Force, wrote that, on November 14, 1996, New York City’s first digital cellular provider activated thousands of PCS antennae newly erected on the rooftops of apartment buildings. Health authorities reported that a severe and lingering flu hit the city that same week. In response to its classified newspaper ad advising that radiation sickness is similar to flu, the Task Force heard back from hundreds of people who reported sudden onset symptoms synchronous to microwave startup”symptoms similar to stroke, heart attack and nervous breakdown.

Firstenberg then gathered statistics from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and analyzed weekly mortality statistics published for 122 U.S. cities. Each of dozens of cities recorded a 10-25 percent increase in mortality, lasting two to three months, beginning in the week during which that city’s first digital cell phone network began commercial service. Cities with no cellular system start up in the same time period showed no abnormal increases in mortality. 23

Studies abroad

Recent health surveys in other nations confirm that people living close to wireless transmitters are in big trouble:

In 2002, French medical specialists found that people living close to cell towers suffered extreme sleep disruption, chronic fatigue, nausea, skin problems, irritability, brain disturbances and cardiovascular problems.24

German researchers found that people living within 1,200 feet of a transmitter site in the German city of Naila had a high rate of cancer and developed their tumors on average eight years earlier than the national average. Breast cancer topped the list.25

Spanish researchers found that people living within 1,000 feet of cellular antennas had statistically significant illness at an average power density of 0.11 to 0.19 microwatts /cm2, which is thousands of times less than allowed by international exposure standards.26

An Egyptian medical study found that people living near mobile phone base stations were at high risk for developing nerve and psychiatric problems, plus debilitating changes in neurobehavioral function. Exposed persons had significantly lower performance on tests for attention, short term auditory memory and problem solving.27

Researchers in Israel studied people in the town of Netanya who had lived near a cell tower for 3-7 years. They had a cancer rate four times higher than the control population. Breast cancer was most prevalent. 28

Europe in an uproar

A new European Union poll of more than 27,000 people across the continent reveals that 76 percent of respondents feel that they are being made ill by wireless transmitters.29 Seventy-one percent in the UK believe they suffer health effects from mast (cell tower) radiation. In April 2007, The London Times reported a startling number of cancer clusters in mast neighborhoods. One study in Warwickshire, found 31 cancers around a single street. 30 Some sick Brits send their blood to a lab in Germany, which uses state of the art methodology to confirm wireless radiation damage.

Radiation sickness is now so prevalent in Germany that 175 doctors have signed the Bramberger Appeal, a document calling the situation a “medical disaster.” It asks the German government to initiate a national public health investigation. This appeal closely follows the Freiburger Appeal, signed by thousands of German doctors who say they are dealing with an epidemic of severe and chronic diseases among both old and young patients exposed to wireless microwave radiation. The head of the cancer registry in Berlin found that one urban area with cellular antennas had a breast cancer rate seven times the national average.31

Sweden was one of the first nations to go wireless. Swedish neuroscientist, Dr. Olle Johansson, with hundreds of published papers to his credit, says that a national epidemic of illness and disability was unleashed by the wireless revolution. Long periods of sick leave, attempted suicides and industrial accidents all increased simultaneously with introduction of mobile phone radiation. Ninety-nine percent of the Swedish population is now under duress of powerful third generation masts. Johansson reports that people are plagued with sleep disorders, chronic fatigue that does not respond to rest, difficulties with cognitive function and serious blood problems. Recurrent headaches and migraines are a “substantial public health problem,” he says.32

Rooftop transmitters, which readily pass microwave radiation into structures, can be a death sentence. Across the world there are reports of cancer clusters and extreme illness in office buildings and multi-tenant dwellings where antennas are placed on rooftops directly over workers and tenants. In 2006, the top floors of a Melbourne University office building were closed after a brain tumor cluster drew media attention to the risks of communications transmitters on top of the building.33 Likewise, ABC’s Brisbane television complex, topped with satellite dishes and radio antennas, was the site of a well-publicized breast cancer cluster among workers.34

Deadlier death rays

In the meantime, the radiation cowboys of America are having a good ol time because they know there’s no sheriff in town. The commercial wireless industry is relentless in its drive to construct thousands of new transmitter sites in neighborhoods and schoolyards everywhere, while adding more powerful antennas at its older sites. Countless WiFi systems, both indoors and out, accommodate wireless laptop computers, personal digital assistants, WiFi-enabled phones, gaming devices, video cameras, even parking and utility meters. Hundreds of cities already have or are planning to fund WiFi networks, each consisting of thousands of small microwave transmitters bolted to buildings, street lamps, park benches and bus stops. Some networks are being buried under sidewalks. These access points or “nodes” blast carcinogenic energy at 2.4 to 5 gigahertz with virtually no warning signs about radiation exposure. WiFi radiation is unregulated by the FCC.

Sprint-Nextel and Clearwire are now rolling out in U.S. cities tower-mounted WiMAX transmitters providing wireless internet access “to die for.” WiMAX is WiFi on steroids. Upon startup of WiMAX transmitters near the Swedish village of Gotene, the emergency room at the local hospital was flooded by calls from people overcome with pulmonary and cardiovascular symptoms.35

WiMAX radiation could one day be cranked up to a bone-incinerating 66 gigahertz.36 A single WiMAX tower could provide internet coverage for an area of 3,000 square miles, although coverage for 6-25 square miles is the norm now. Promoters say WiMAX may some day replace all cable and DSL broadband services and irradiate virtually all rural areas. Yet, not a single environmental or public health study has been required as the industry unleashes infrastructure for this savage new wireless technology from which no living flesh will escape.

The commercial ray-peddlers are not alone in their quest to make the U.S. a radiation wasteland. In August, 2007, Congress approved new Homeland Security legislation which funds a program to “promote communications compatibility between local, state and federal officials.” We catch a glimpse of what this portends as the state of New York gears up to erect hundreds of new wireless installations for a “Statewide Wireless Network (SWN).” This system will blanket 97 percent of the state, allowing agencies at various government levels to communicate instantly while greatly adding to the fog of commercial wireless pollution.37 The New York Office for Technology says that the radiation power densities of the system will be within FCC limits. That assurance should give us the shivers.

Angela’s story

Angela Flynn, a 43-year-old caregiver, lives in Santa Cruz, California. Last spring she took classes at a local church where wireless antennas were concealed in a chimney on the building. She recalls, “Every muscle in my body felt sore. And my joints were feeling creaky. My instructor mentioned how people at the women’s center on church property had similar symptoms. During my sixth day I had a severe reaction. My short term memory was gone and I was disoriented and confused. When the instructor asked a question, I could not recall anything from the lecture.”

At night, Angela could not sleep and she would lie awake, feeling her body buzz. She became hypersensitive to other sources of electromagnetic radiation. The symptoms became so bothersome that she canceled the rest of her course. Using a chart for calculating cumulative, non-ionizing, electromagnetic radiation exposure levels, she found that the classes”located only 100 feet from antennas in the building”had suffered the highest possible exposure during peak operation. “It took a month before I regained my health,” she reports.

When Angela wrote letters to the church inquiring whether it was monitoring the health of the people exposed to antenna radiation, church officials were “unresponsive and dismissive.” So Angela saw the light. She helped organize a community group to put pressure on county officials for answers. After hearing community testimony, officials directed the zoning department to create a comprehensive map of county transmitter sites and to put together a report on emissions testing.

Angela says, “We recently had a delay of an installation of a tower near a middle school. The superintendent has even come out against the tower and was instrumental in delaying the hearing on the site. He also arranged a school board meeting on the issue.” Angela’s efforts to share critical information with her community made a difference.

Conclusion

America must soon face its radiation cataclysm. The EMR Network says that millions of workers occupy worksites on a daily basis where operating antenna arrays are camouflaged and where no RF safety program is carried out. Thanks to shameless predatory advertising techniques, American youth are now literally addicted to “texting,” watching TV and accessing the Internet on tiny wireless screens. These are the toys that keep cell towers and WiFi hot spots buzzing. A nation that requires compulsory mass irradiation to fuel its trivial entertainment needs is surely destined to have a sickly and short-lived population.

Right now, 11.7 million Americans have been diagnosed with cancer. Because humans can harbor cancer conditions for years before detection, additional millions of cancer victims are yet undiagnosed. The Journal of Oncology Practice predicts that, by 2020, there will be so many cancer cases in the U.S. that doctors may not be able to cope with their caseloads. The report concludes the nation could soon face a shortage of up to 4,000 cancer specialists.38

A recent CBS news series on the raging American cancer epidemic left viewers with the mindset that trainloads of federal cash must flow if we are to find the cancer answer. But a proven cancer initiator now inundates our cities, roadways, schools, offices and homes. Any environmental stressor that jackhammers human cells at millions to billions of cycles per second is a cancer factor. Any wave-pollution that breaks the DNA and causes pre-cancerous micronuclei in human blood is a cancer factor. Logic tells us that there will be no “answer to cancer” until we eliminate the cancer factors.

Wireless communications radiation is to America today what DDT, thalidomide, dioxin, benzene, Agent Orange and asbestos were yesterday. Historically, the truth about the public health menace of extreme toxins is never told until thousands sicken and die.

Dr. Robert Becker, noted for decades of research on the effects of electromagnetic radiation, has warned: “Even if we survive the chemical and atomic threats to our existence, there is the strong possibility that increasing electropollution could set in motion irreversible changes leading to our extinction before we are even aware of them. All life pulsates in time to the earth and our artificial fields cause abnormal reactions in all organismsThese energies are too dangerous to entrust forever to politicians, military leaders and their lapdog researchers.” 39

Our mission to save the nation’s health and restore sanity in the wireless age seems daunting. The wireless juggernaut is an aggressive, mean machine. Federal regulators are clearly compromised and incompetent to protect the public health. Uninformed consumers dearly love their magic digital toys and don’t yet understand the connection between those toys and a national raging cancer epidemic that may consume us all.

Powerful economic interests have lied to us long enough. Americans deserve the facts. We need dialogue. Wireless radiation is a form of electronic trespass. America must decide whose rights are more important”idlers beaming death rays for piddling gibberish or the elderly with pacemakers who are made ill by cell phone and tower radiation wherever they go. Must we all prematurely perish so that wireless enthusiasts can capture cell phone photos and instantly send them for processing via carcinogen express? Must all neighborhoods become sick zones so that radiation addicts can receive recipes, ads and other frivolous text messages on their cell phone toys? Does a human being have the right to NOT be forcibly WiMAXED into a coffin, or do only wireless providers and their devotees have rights?

What can we do?

We can commit to join the growing radiation awareness movement and continue educating ourselves and others. We can employ digital and audio radiation detectors to help safeguard our personal health and to demonstrate the ceaseless brutality of ubiquitous wireless radiation which threatens the genetic integrity of future generations. We can promote emerging technologies that could make communications technologies safer.

We can demand that federal radiation exposure standards and setback requirements be updated to reflect the realities of modern science. Federal communications law must be rewritten so that local jurisdictions can regain their right to consider health and environment when reviewing wireless siting applications. We can insist that wireless emissions from transmitters be drastically reduced as they are in Austria and Russia. We can demand routine compliance testing at all transmitter sites. We can see to it that people who have been living and working near powerful transmitters be given opportunity to report their resulting illnesses in national surveys. Proper epidemiological studies must be conducted and their results published and broadly disseminated.

Each of us can break the seductive, but oppressive wireless habit ourselves. We can play no game, use no wireless Internet system, make no trivial phone call that necessitates enlarging America’s dense forest of wireless transmitters. If no one buys WiMAX-enabled devices and related services, this dangerous system will fail.

Whenever possible, we can go back to the old-fashioned, corded phones and message machines which made yesteryear a far more healthy time. Cordless household and office phones emit powerful megahertz or gigahertz microwave radiation, causing damage to hearing, eyesight and brain function. DECT cordless phones irradiate a huge area even when not in use. We can encourage others to contact us by conventional land line phones only. Can we enjoy a leisurely conversation knowing that an irradiated caller risks disease and disability for mindless chatter? What good is wireless convenience if it means being ultimately tethered to a hospital bed? We can teach our children that health is more important than passing convenience and instant gratification.

According to OSHA, no environment should be deliberately made hazardous. Backed by current scientific knowledge, we can refuse to work or shop in an environment which endangers our health. We can demand that megahertz and gigahertz cordless phones, walkie talkie radios, WLAN and WiFi systems be removed from schools, offices, hospitals and any public place where people are grossly irradiated without their informed consent. Second hand smoke is bad; second hand radiation is worse.

We wish to thank the courageous radiation victims interviewed for this report who have generously revealed the details of their personal suffering in order to warn others. Following their example, we must continue undaunted in the moral quest to protect the national health and restore the world to sanity before it is too late.

Meters and resources

The Electrosmog Detector allows you to HEAR the intensity of RF/microwave pollution in your environment. Developed by British radiation expert Alasdair Phillips, this battery-operated device will quickly allow you to identify dangerous RF/microwave hotspots, even where transmitters are concealed, and take action to protect yourself. This meter is $99 (price includes shipping) and can be obtained from HEARING IS BELIEVING, Box 64 Hayden, Idaho 83835. E-mail: gzz@icehouse.net.

The Trifield Meter ($145), produced by Alpha Lab, is used mainly to measure the milligauss of electromagnetic fields coming from 60 hertz sources. Use this digital meter to make sure your living and working spaces are under 2 milligauss. Alpha Lab’s Microwave Power Density Meter ($320) is a more sensitive digital microwave meter that will help you assess the kilohertz, megahertz and gigahertz radiation in our wireless environment. This easy-read meter measures microwave radiation in microwatts per cm2, allowing comparison of your readings to the power density used by the Russians to make our embassy staff sick. Remember, people inside the embassy reportedly received only about .01 microwatts per cm2. For more information, contact Alpha Lab Inc., 1280 South 300 West, Salt Lake City, Utah 84101; (800) 658-7030; www.trifield.com

Alan Broadband produces radiation detection devices with models ranging in price from $159 to $2,800. The $159 model, while not giving detailed readings, is an extremely sensitive and sturdy instrument that gives an accurate dial read on whether or not radiation is present and its relative intensity. It lets you know when you are being irradiated and serves as an excellent tool to illustrate exposure levels to others. For more information, contact Alan Broadband 93 Arch St., Redwood City, California 94062; (888) 369-9627; www.zapchecker.com

Books

Cell Phones: Invisible Hazards in the Wireless Age, Dr. George Carlo and Martin Schram, Carroll & Graf Publishers, 2001.

Cellular Telephone Russian Roulette, Robert C. Kane, Vantage Press, 2001.

Cell Towers: Wireless Convenience or Environmental Hazard? The Berkshire-Litchfield Environmental Council, Edited by B. Blake Levitt, 2000. Order from Barnes and Noble.

Websites

These websites provide excellent information on all aspects of health and other issues relating to electromagnetic fields and radio frequency/microwave radiation.

www.buergerwelle.com This excellent German (but in English) site features RF/microwave radiation news from all over the world. The science keeps pouring in and this is where to find it, along with lots of human interest.

www.cprnewsbureau.org This is an excellent source of up-to-date news on wireless issues.

www.emrnetwork.org This site has superb resources organized by professionals with expertise in all facets of our RF/microwave radiation problem.

www.safewireless.org This site features Dr. Carlo’s Mobil Telephone Health Concerns Registry where people can report ill health effects from living near microwave transmitters or from the use of wireless devices. It also features great news reports.

www.microwavenews.com This is home to Microwave News, an excellent monthly publication. It offers cutting edge science reports, plus a great archive.

www.sageassociates.net This site provides valuable information on how to make homes and offices safer in the wireless age.

CAUTION: There are many devices on the market claiming to protect wireless users from radiation. These include: air tube headsets, ferrite bead clip-ons and an array of paste-ons advertised to cut down on thermal effects or deflect negative energy. Energy testing, kinesiology and meter readings indicate that these mitigation devices DO NOT adequately protect against the brutal force of near field microwave radiation. You can investigate the effectiveness of these devices by metering radiation levels while using them. If radiation pours from your “safe” headset, don’t bank your life on it. If practiced in the art of kinesiology, you can also “muscle test” the effectiveness of the radiation mitigation device. The human body becomes very weak when irradiated with any man-made frequency, especially microwaves. If a protective device is really working, you will not detect muscle weakness when the body is near a transmitting wireless phone or gadget.

OUR BEST TIP: If you want a safe household phone, find an AT&T corded speaker phone 950, available at most large office supply stores. It emits no microwave radiation, holds up to heavy use, has a great digital display screen and allows hands-free conversation.

NOTES

1. Interview with Dr. Eckel was published by Schwabischen Post 12-07-06. Find this interview at www.heseproject.org. See "The Cell Nucleus is Mutating."

2. "Neurological Effects of Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Radiation," a paper presented by Dr. Lai to the Mobile Phones and Health Symposium, October 25-28, 1998, University of Vienna. Also "DNA Damage and Cell Phone Radiation," www.rfsafe.com, 11-02-05.

3. Cell Phones: Invisible Hazards in the Wireless Age, Dr. George Carlo and Martin Schram, Carroll & Graf Publishers, 2001, p.151.

4. "Mobile Telecommunications and Health"Summary of the ECOLOG study for T-Mobile, 2000," Find this summary at www.hese-project.org.

5. "Cell Phone Radiation Harms DNA, Study Claims," (Reuters) MSNBC, 12-04-04. Also "Mobile Phone Radiation Harms DNA," R. Moss, CPR News Bureau, 10-16-06.

6. "RF-Induced DNA Breaks Reported in China," Microwave News, 09-29-05. This report comes from the Zhejiang University School of Medicine.

7. "2.45 GHz radiofrequency fields alter gene expression in cultured human cells," Lee S. et al, Department of Medicine, University of Chicago, PubMed 16107253.

8. "Health Social Services and Housing Sub-Panel Telephone Mast Review," a public discussion by Dr. George Carlo, 2-26-07. Find this excellent dissertation at www. safewireless.org.

9. Few Americans know that cell phones have never been safety tested thanks to the FDA, which exempted cell phones from pre-market testing based on a "low power exclusion" rule.

10. "The American Cancer Society is Misleading the Public," Dr. George Carlo, 8-5-07. Find this statement at www.buergerwelle.com.

11. "Long-Term Mobile Phone Use Raises Brain Tumor Risk: Study," Reuters, 03-31-06. This research was conducted by the Swedish National Institute for Working Life whose scientists studied 905 people with malignant brain tumors to confirm a 240% increased risk of brain tumors after heavy mobile phone use.

12. "Cancer in Radar Technicians Exposed to RF/Microwave Radiation: Sentinel Episodes," Richter E. et al, Int. J. Occup Environ Health 6 (3):187-193, 2000.

13. "FCC Lives Large off Lobbyist Bribes," Capitol Hill Blue, 05-22-03, capitolhillblue.com.

14. "Health Social Services and Housing Sub-Panel Telephone Mast Review," public discussion by Dr. George Carlo, 2-26-07. Find this excellent dissertation at www. safewireless.org.

15. See www.c-a-r-e.org for information about groups affected by Lookout Mountain broadcast antennas.

16. For an excellent chart comparing biological effects at power density levels and a list of international exposure standards, go to: "Radio Wave Packet," Arthur Firstenberg, Cellular Phone Task Force, Sept 2001; also find this power density list at: "Analysis of Health and Environmental Effects of Proposed San Francisco Earthlink WiFi Network, Magda Havas, Ph.D, Trent University, May 2007.

17. Quote from letter by Norbert Hankin, chief environmental scientist with EPA's Radiation Protection Division. This letter was received by EMR Network 7-16-02 and can be found at www.emrnetwork.org.

18. "Supreme Court Rebuffs Challenge to U.S. Tower Policy," Microwave News, Jan./Feb 2001; also EMR Network Petition For Inquiry To Consider Amendment of Parts 1 and 2 of the FCC's Rules Concerning the Environmental Effects of Radiofrequency Radiation, September 25, 2001. See also FCC order to deny application for review filed by the EMR Network, adopted July 28, 2003. These documents found at www.emrnetwork.org.

19. Hicks, Onnink, Barber, Pennington v. Horvath Communications, Cause No.71C01-0107-CP St. Joseph Circuit Court, St Joseph County, Indiana.

20. "Some Unexpected Health Hazards Associated with Cell Tower Siting," Bill P. Curry, PhD., Cell Towers: Wireless Convenience or Environmental Hazard? The Berkshire-Litchfield Environmental Council, edited by B. Blake Levitt, 2000. See chapter 6.

21. Practical Guidelines to Protect Human Health Against Electromagnetic Radiation Emitted in Mobile Telephony, Summary June 2001, Miguel Muntane Condeminas, industrial engineer for Consulting Comunicacio i Disseny S.L, Barcelona, m.co-di@eic.ictnet.es. See Section 4.3.1 "US Embassy in Moscow Study."

22. See www.health-concerns.org andhttp://www.safewireless.org. These sites provide a pathway to access Dr. Carlo's Mobil Telephone Health Concerns Registry where people can report ill health effects from living near microwave transmitters or from the use of wireless devices.

23. "Electromagnetic Fields, (EMF) Killing Fields," Arthur Firstenberg, The Ecologist, v. 34, n. 5, 6-10-2004.

24. "Study of the health of people living in the vicinity of mobile phone base stations: I. influences of distance and sex," R. Santini et al, Institut National des Sciences Appliquées"laboratoire de biochimie-pharmacologie, 2002.

25. "Cancer Risks from Microwaves Confirmed," Dr. Mae-Wan Ho, Institute of Science in Society press release, 5-24-07.

26. "The Microwave Syndrome"a preliminary study in Spain," Navarro E. et al, Biology and Medicine, 22 (2 &3) 161-169, 2003; also " The Microwave Syndrome"Further Aspects of a Spanish Study," Oberfeld G et al 2004, International Conference Proceedings, Kos, Greece 2004.

27. "Neurobehavioral Effects Among Inhabitants Around Mobile Phone Base Stations," Abdel-Rassoul et al, Neurotoxicology, 8-01-2006.

28. "Increase of Cancer Near Cell-Phone Transmitter Station," Wolf D. and Wolf, International Journal of Cancer Prevention 1-2, April 2004.

29. "Two in Three Believe Radiation from Phones Damaged their Health," Geoffrey Lean, 7-8-07 Independent on Sunday, U.K.

30. "Cancer Cluster at Phone Masts, " Times On Line, The Sunday Times, UK 4-22-07.

31. Report by Roland Stabenow, 9-21-06, head of cancer registry in Berlin.

32. "How Shall We Cope With the Increasing Amounts of Airborne Radiation?" Olle Johansson, Journal of the Australasian College of Environmental Medicine, Dec. 2006.

33. "Building Top Floors Closed After Brain Tumor Alert," Lisa Macnamara, The Australian, UK, 05-13-07. Read this report at www.rense.com.

34. "Cancer Strikes 12 Female Staffers," Tony Koch, Omega-News, 4-06-07.

35. "Swedes Hit Hard By WiMax, 6-12-06. This story says that the Swedish media reported that in the town of Gotene, the hospital emergency room was flooded with calls regarding headaches, difficulty breathing, blurry vision and heart problems upon WiMAX start-up. At least 5 people had to leave their homes.

36. "How WiMAX Works," E. Grabianowski and M. Brain, www.computer.howstuffworks.com.

37. "250-foot Tower Raises New Bellevue Fears, John Hopkins, Cheektowaga Times, 8-09-2007; See also "Congress Approves Homeland Security Bill," Spencer Hsu, Washington Post 08-07-07.

38. Journal of Oncology Practice, Vol. 3, No. 2, March 2007: 79-86.

39. Robert Becker, The Body Electric, 1986.

Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Centre for Research on Globalization.

To become a Member of Global Research

The CRG grants permission to cross-post original Global Research articles on community internet sites as long as the text & title are not modified. The source and the author's copyright must be displayed. For publication of Global Research articles in print or other forms including commercial internet sites, contact: crgeditor@yahoo.com

www.globalresearch.ca contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of "fair use" in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than "fair use" you must request permission from the copyright owner.

For media inquiries: crgeditor@yahoo.com

© Copyright Amy Worthington, Idaho Observer , 2007

The url address of this article is: www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=7025

Experts Urge Caution on Radiation Exposure, tests

With Rise in Radiation Exposure, Experts Urge Caution on Tests

From New York Times

Advances in radiology have radically transformed medical practice, with CT scans and nuclear medicine exams providing physicians with the ability to quickly pinpoint internal bleeding, diagnose kidney stones or confirm appendicitis, assess thyroid function and identify and open blockages in the blood vessels to the heart.The downside is that Americans are being exposed to record amounts of ionizing radiation, the most energetic and potentially hazardous form of radiation.

According to a new study, the per-capita dose of ionizing radiation from clinical imaging exams in the United States increased almost 600 percent from 1980 to 2006. In the past, natural background radiation was the leading source of human exposure; that has been displaced by diagnostic imaging procedures, the authors said.This is an absolutely sentinel event, a wake-up call, said Dr. Fred A. Mettler Jr., principal investigator for the study, by the National Council on Radiation Protection. Medical exposure now dwarfs that of all other sources.

The study, financed by the federal government, is to be published by early next year. It found a particularly sharp rise in the number of CT scans to 62 million in 2006, from 3 million in 1980. Though CTs make up only 12 percent of all medical radiation procedures, they deliver almost half of the estimated collective dose of radiation exposure in the United States. (????)

A CTscan exposes patients to far more radiation than a standard X-ray, and multislice CT scanners deliver higher doses of radiation than single-slice scanners.

Nuclear medicine exams increased to 18.1 million in 2006, from 6.4 million in 1980. They represent almost a quarter of the estimated collective radiation dose, with cardiac studies making up most of the dose.X-rays have been classified as carcinogens by the World Health Organization, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, because studies have shown that exposure causes leukemia and cancers of the thyroid, breast and lung.

Yet with the exception of mammography, scans remain largely unregulated. (The Food and Drug Administration regulates manufacturers of equipment but does not inspect facilities, which are licensed by states. Radiation doses for mammography are limited by federal law.) Radiation doses for the same procedure can vary drastically, as different machines in the hands of different practitioners deliver doses that vary by as much as a factor of 10, experts say.Radiologists say they do not want to scare people away from having scans and exams when necessary, but they want patients as well as physicians to carefully evaluate the benefits and risks of each scan or exam, make sure the procedure is appropriate and keep track of cumulative exposure levels. Full-body CT scans should be avoided unless there is a good medical reason.

Were not saying you shouldnt have X-rays or CT scans they;re wonderful, theyve totally revolutionized the practice of medicine,
said Dr. E. Stephen Amis Jr., a former president of the American College of Radiology who is chairman of radiology at Albert Einstein College of Medicine and Montefiore Medical Center in New York. But if you go into the emergency room with recurrent pain and get a CT scan every time you show up, thats not good. Use a little common sense. Studies of atomic bomb survivors in Japan found a statistically significant increase in cancer at high levels of exposure 50 millisieverts, or mSv, about 16 times the current annual average for Americans from medical exams. But that figure is controversial; it is not clear that lower levels of radiation exposure are safe. Nor would it be unusual for a patient to exceed this level, according to a recent paper from the American College of Radiology.

It is worth noting that many CT scans and nuclear medicine studies have effective dose estimates in the range of 10 to 25 mSv for a single study, and some patients have multiple studies; thus it would not be uncommon for a patients estimated exposure to exceed 50 mSv, the paper said, adding that the International Commission on Radiological Protections has reported that CT doses can indeed approach or exceed levels that have been shown to result in an increase in cancer.A single CT scan of the abdomen, body or spine can expose a patient to 10 mSv, according to the American College of Radiology patient information Web site (www.radiologyinfo.org, see Safety). Mammography, on the other hand, delivers only 0.7 mSv, and a bone-density scan is only 0.01 mSv.

There are several steps patients can take to protect themselves, and they should not be shy about asking questions, doctors and other experts say.They can always inquire of the referring physician, Is this test necessary?
said Richard Morin, chairman of the radiology colleges quality and safety committee, adding that exams are often done for reasons that are not quite appropriate.

Doctors should be familiar with the radiology college index of appropriateness criteria, which rates the imaging procedures for some 200 medical conditions. Dr. Morin suggests asking the doctor ordering the test about its rating for a given condition.Scores range from 1 to 9, he said, and if the number turns out to be 1 or 2, you should look for some other exam.

When undergoing a scan or exam, patients should try to use a facility accredited by the American College of Radiology. The accreditation, which is voluntary, means the machines are surveyed and calibrated to use the correct level of radiation and the technologists are certified. It also means the images are likely to be of higher quality, reducing the likelihood of having to repeat a procedure and suffer additional exposure.Research studies closely regulate and monitor radiation doses, so participating in a research study may provide some protection, Dr. Morin said. Hospitalized patients are also often scanned routinely once a day when they are very ill, he said, and its not unreasonable for someone to ask, Do I really need this exam every day?

Patients may also want to ask the radiologists or technicians whether the machines are routinely inspected by a medical physicist.

Women should tell the doctor or technician if they might be pregnant; generally, women, children and young people should try to avoid scans.If patients are given a CD of their scan, along with the interpretation, they should hold onto it, to avoid having to repeat a procedure. People who are undergoing multiple studies may want to keep a record tracking all the radiological procedures they have had, and inform their physicians of their history, said Dr. Amis, of Albert Einstein.

Patients should have a questioning demeanor when going in for any kind of health care, he said. Unfortunately, the majority do not.

Trends to watch: Radioactive Waste Management Committees

Reconstituted Committee on Radioactive Waste Management

(Media-Newswire.com) - Environment Minister Phil Woolas today welcomed the appointment of the reconstituted Committee on Radioactive Waste Management (CoRWM ).

The reconstituted Committee will play a key role in scrutinising Government�s and the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority's ( NDA ) plans for the long term management, including interim storage and disposal, of radioactive waste. It will provide ongoing independent advice to UK Government and devolved administrations.

The UK Government, in conjunction with the devolved administrations of Wales and Northern Ireland, is currently consulting on how implementation of geological disposal of higher activity radioactive waste could be taken forward and the consultation re-emphasises the commitment to ensure strong independent scrutiny of proposals, plans and programmes to deliver this.

Minister Phil Woolas said

The announcement today sets in place one of the key pillars for the planning, development and implementation of geological disposal of higher activity radioactive waste that of robust independent scrutiny and advice - and fulfils one of the commitments given in our response to the original CoRWM recommendations.

With a strengthened scientific and technical make up I am confident that the reconstituted Committee will continue the high standards of evidence-based advice, founded on openness, transparency and engagement, set by its predecessor.

Initially, the Committee will consist of the Chair and 12 members. Given the need for the strongest possible Committee, Ministers have decided to re-advertise for specific expertise in hydrogeology and civil engineering/underground construction technology as these areas will be central to development of storage and disposal facilities.

Appointments will be for a duration of three years and are made in accordance with the OCPA Code of Practice. All appointments are made on merit and political activity plays no part in the selection process. However, in accordance with the original Nolan recommendations, there is a requirement for appointees' political activity ( if any declared ) to be made public. All appointees declared no political activity.

Remuneration is450 per day for the Chair, with a commitment of on average 1 days per week, and 300 per day for members with an average time commitment of 1 day per week

The full committee is:

Professor Robert Pickard ( Chair )
Professor Robert Pickard is Chairman of the Consumers' Association Which?, Director-General of the British Nutrition Foundation, Emeritus Professor of Neurobiology at the University of Cardiff, Visiting Professor at the Royal Agricultural College, Cirencester, and Fellow of the Institute of Biology and the Royal Society of Medicine. For the Department of Health and the Royal Society for the Promotion of Health, Professor Pickard is also Chairman of the national NGO Forum, which facilitates the interface between government policymakers and 94 NGOs working for health improvements. He is an international authority on the biology of honeybees and pioneered the development of solid-state, neural microbiosensors in the UK.

David Broughton
David Broughton is a Chartered Engineer and a Member of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers. Recently retired from UKAEA he worked at Dounreay, Caithness from 1981. He has 26 years experience in professional engineering and management of complex nuclear projects.

He was responsible for Dounreay's major radioactive waste management projects. These included new low level waste disposal facilities, new intermediate level waste encapsulation and storage facilities, the future retrieval of waste from the Dounreay shaft and the current shaft isolation project. He is experienced in both engaging stakeholders in projects that have many options and technical issues to consider, and guiding projects through the regulatory and planning processes.

Margaret Burns
Margaret Burns is a part-time teaching fellow in the Law Department of the University of Aberdeen. She was a member of the Health and Safety Commission for nine years, representing the public interest and the devolved administrations. As a Commissioner she chaired HSC's Rail Industry Advisory Committee and the Partnership for Health and Safety in Scotland and had particular responsibility for the offshore oil industry and the nuclear industry. In 2003 she was awarded the CBE for services to health and safety. She has extensive experience of working with consumer organisations, such as the Scottish Consumer Council and Consumers' Association, and is presently a member of the National Consumer Council's Advisory Group.

Professor Brian D Clark
Brian Clark is Professor of Environmental Management and Planning at Aberdeen University. He is a Board Member of the Scottish Environment Protection Agency (SEPA ), Chairman of the North Region Board and the Planning & Finance Committee of SEPA and served on the first Committee for Radioactive Waste Management. With forty years experience, he is a specialist in environmental impact assessment ( EIA ), strategic environmental assessment ( SEA ) and urban and rural planning. Honoured in 1987 by being made a founder member of UNEP's Global 500 Award. He is a governor of The Macaulay Land Use Research Institute and was a founder member of the Institute of Environmental Assessment ( IEA ), now the Institute of Environmental Management and Assessment ( IEMA ) and chairs its Technical Committee.

Dr Mark Dutton
Mark Dutton served on the first Committee for Radioactive Waste Management. He has a doctorate in high energy physics and a 38 year career based at the National Nuclear Corporation. Specialising in design and safety case issues associated with radiological protection, nuclear safety and radioactive waste management he continues to work as a nuclear consultant. He is a Fellow of the Institution of Nuclear Engineers, co-author to two Safety Guides published by the International Atomic Energy Agency of the UN and has reviewed the safety of reactors in Iran and Pakistan on behalf of the Agency. He is a member of the Defence Nuclear Safety Committee of the Ministry of Defence and a member of the Presidential Nuclear Safety Committee of Armenia.

Professor Fergus Gibb
Fergus Gibb is Professor of Petrology & Geochemistry in the Department of Engineering Materials, University of Sheffield with over 40 years lecturing & research experience in mineralogy, petrology and geochemistry. A specialist on igneous intrusions, he is a Former Vice-President of the Mineralogical Society and an Elected Fellow of the Mineralogical Society of America. A long-standing interest in the geological disposal of nuclear wastes has led to over 25 papers and national and international recognition as an authority on deep borehole disposal. Professor Gibb is employed by the University of Sheffield. His current post is part funded by the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority on the strength of potential strategic importance of the research work involved but the conduct of this work is independent of the NDA and the nuclear industry.

Professor Simon Harley
Simon Harley is Professor of Lower Crustal Processes in the School of GeoSciences at the University of Edinburgh. An international expert on the evolution of continental crust, his research integrates geological mapping with experimental and microanalytical studies of the stabilities of minerals and their behaviour at high temperatures and pressures. He has conducted geological mapping projects in diverse and complex basement areas in Australia, India, Norway, Greenland, Scotland and Antarctica. Professor Harley is a Fellow of the Royal Society of Edinburgh and in 2002 was awarded the Imperial Polar Medal in recognition of his contributions to Antarctic Earth Science.

Marion Hill
Marion Hills early career was at the National Radiological Protection Board ( now part of the Health Protection Agency ) and most recently a background in consultancy. She has over 30 years experience in standards for and assessments of the radiological impact of the nuclear industry on the public and the environment. She specialises in policies, strategies and standards for the management of radioactive wastes and radioactively contaminated land. Her experience includes national and international work on policy and regulatory topics, and environmental impact assessments for nuclear installations in the UK and overseas. She is a member of the Health and Safety Commissio's Nuclear Safety Advisory Committee (NuSAC ) and is leader of its regulatory framework task force.

Professor William Lee
Professor Bill Lee is Head of Materials at Imperial College London. He has a Physical Metallurgy BSc from Aston, a DPhil in Radiation Damage Studies from Oxford and has held academic positions in the USA ( Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland and Ohio State University ) and UK notably at Sheffield University where he was Director of BNFLs University Research Alliance on Waste Immobilisation. He has over 300 publications including An Introduction to Nuclear Waste Immobilisation ( Elsevier, 2005 ). He is a member of the International Commission on Glass Technical Committee on Nuclear and Hazardous Waste Vitrification and Chair of the International Ceramic Federation Technical Committee on Ceramics in Nuclear Applications. He is a Fellow of the American Ceramic Society and of the Institute of Materials.

Professor Francis Livens
Francis Livens has held a radiochemistry position at the University of Manchester since 1991. He worked for over 25 years in environmental radioactivity and actinide chemistry, starting his career with the Natural Environment Research Council, where he was involved in the response to the Chernobyl accident. At the University of Manchester, he has worked in many aspects of nuclear fuel cycle research, including effluent treatment, waste immobilisation and actinide chemistry. He was the founding director of the Centre for Radiochemistry Research, established in Manchester in 1999, and has acted as an advisor to the nuclear industry both in the UK and overseas.

Leslie Netherton
With over 30 years local government experience, Leslie Netherton, specialised in health and safety, food safety, environmental protection and emergency planning. As Head of Service with Plymouth City Council from 1998-2007 he had responsibility for civil protection, waste management, cemeteries, building control, consumer protection, sustainability and environmental health. As lead Authority officer for the nuclear submarine refitting facility at Devonport Royal Dockyard, he was involved with major planning applications, Discharge Consent consultations, offsite emergency planning and extensive stakeholder engagement. He is Chair of Interim Storage Of Laid Up Submarines ( ISOLUS ) project Advisory Group and sits on the Ministry of Defence ISOLUS Steering Group. He currently runs an environmental health consultancy company and has been an active member of the Chartered Institute of Environmental Health.

John Rennilson
With over 37 years experience in local government planning, John Rennilson is Director of Planning & Development at the Highland Council. He was County Planning Officer of North Yorkshire County Council ( 1984-1996 ) and has extensive experience of planning issues at a strategic level and of balancing development needs with public concerns. An Executive Committee Member of the Scottish Society of Directors of Planning he also chaired the Society from 2000 to 2001.

Professor Lynda Warren
Lynda Warren is Emeritus Professor of Environmental Law at Aberystwyth University and a member of the Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution. She has postgraduate degrees in marine biology and law and has pursued an academic career first in biology and latterly in environmental law. She has over 100 academic publications, including a number on radioactive waste management law and policy. Lynda has 15 years experience of radioactive waste management policy. She was a member of previous CoRWM and, before that, a member of RWMAC chairing its working group on Dounreay. She is currently a member of SEPA's Dounreay Particles Advisory Group and an associate of IDM, a consultancy engaged in environmental policy advisor, mainly in the nuclear sector.

Editors' Notes
1. The UK Government and the devolved administrations set up the independent Committee on Radioactive Waste Management ( CoRWM ) in November 2003. The Committee's remit was to review the options for the long term management of high and intermediate level radioactive wastes in the UK and to recommend the option or combination of options that can provide a long term solution. The Committee announced an integrated package of recommendations on 31 July 2006. The terms of appointment of its membership will expire in August 2007.

2. The Government�s response to CoRWM's recommendations on 25 October 2006 accepted the primary recommendation on geological disposal and its recommendations for safe and secure interim storage. It also committed to a reconstituted CoRWM with modified terms of reference and stated that planning and development of the geological disposal option would be based on four key pillars:

a strong and effective implementing organisation, with clear responsibilities and accountabilities;
strong independent regulation by the statutory regulators - the Health and Safety Executive, the environment agencies and the Office for Civil Nuclear Security;
independent scrutiny and advice to Government on implementation; and
a partnership with the host community.

3. The UK Government and the Welsh and Northern Ireland devolved administrations are currently consulting ( closes on 2nd November 2007 ) on a framework for the long term management of higher activity radioactive waste. This is set out in the consultation document entitled Managing Radioactive Waste Safely: a Framework for Implementing Geological Disposal that includes the terms of reference for the reconstituted Committee as an annex.

4. CoRWM's sponsoring Ministers will be from the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, the Department for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform and the devolved administrations, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. Appointments are made following the Office of the Commissioner for Public Appointments ( OCPA ) Code of Practice and, as Chair Designate, Professor Pickard played a full part in the appointment of members.

5. The reconstituted CoRWM will not be representative of organisation or sectoral interests and the skills and expertise which will need to be available to the Committee will vary depending on the programme of work.

26 October 2007

Alan J. Roland and URUK NET on depleted uranium plus comments


AMERICA'S GREATEST CRIME IS RADIOACTIVE GENOCIDE

Allen L Roland's Radio Weblog

leukemia.jpg

October 13, 2007


America's greatest crime against humanity is radioactive genocide particularly against the children of Iraq who are the innocent victims of our illegal war, occupation and economic rape of Iraq ~ We have the blood of countless innocent children on our hands and it will take generations to remove the stain of our illegal and inhumane transgressions : Allen L Roland


Currently, more than 50 percent of Iraqi cancer patients are children under the age of 5, up from 13 percent. Children are especially vulnerable because they tend to play in areas that are heavily polluted by depleted uranium.

America's greatest crime against humanity is radioactive genocide, and prepare to be shocked when you see the pictures of these maimed and disfigured Iraqi children ~ who are the innocent victims of our illegal war, occupation and economic rape of Iraq. http://tinyurl.com/adoq2

We have the blood of countless innocent children on our hands and it will take generations to remove the stain of our illegal and inhumane transgressions.

Allen L Roland
http://blogs.salon.com/0002255/2007/10/12.html




Nothing depleted about 'depleted uranium'

Abel Bult-Ito

du-baby18.jpg

January 21, 2006

Iraqi and visiting doctors, and a number of news reports, have reported that birth defects and cancers in Iraqi children have increased five- to 10-fold since the 1991 Gulf War and continue to increase sharply, to over 30-fold in some areas in southern Iraq. Currently, more than 50 percent of Iraqi cancer patients are children under the age of 5, up from 13 percent. Children are especially vulnerable because they tend to play in areas that are heavily polluted by depleted uranium.

The Pentagon has been using radiooactive weapons for at least a decade and a half with full complicity of at least three White House administrations and Republican and Democratic congressional legislators. Conservatively, at least 300 tons and 1,700 tons of depleted uranium were used in the Gulf War and the current Iraq War, resectively. This is about 70 grams of depleted uranium per Iraqi citizen, and if inhaled or ingested, it is enough to kill them all.

Is this not radioactive genocide, especially when our troops used and continue to use most of the depleted uranium munitions in densely populated areas such as Baghdad and Fallujah? Depleted uranium has a half-life of billions of years. Consequently, Iraq will be a wasteland forever and essentially uninhabitable for anyone.

After the 1991 Gulf War, about 1 in 4, or 150,000, U.S. veterans came down with what is referred to as "Gulf War Syndrome." Most of the ailments characteristic of Gulf War Syndrome are consistent with radiation or heavy-metal poisoning. Veterans' children are now also born with higher proportions of birth defects and other genetic disorders, according to sporadic accuonts. The Pentagon continues to deny the harmful effects of depleted uranium or its role in Gulf War Syndrome.

As described by a report of the World Health Organization Depleted Uranium Mission to Kosovo, uranium can be found in rocks and soil and contributes to natural background levels of radioactivity. Depleted uranium is a waste product of uranium enrichment for nuclear reactors and is about 60 percent as radioactive as naturally occurring uranium. Depleted uranium is considered weakly radioactive.

Nevertheless, depleted uranium is considered nuclear waste and has to be disposed of accordingly, which is expensive and a potential environmental hazard. The nuclear industry must be very pleased the U.S. military has found a way to get this stuff off their hands cheaply.

Depleted uranium is really a misnomer, because the potentially harmful effects are by no means depleted. Research reports have found that when depleted uranium is ingested or inhaled, it can cause cancers and birth defects. It has considerable heavy-metal toxicity.

As stated in the WHO report, because of its high density, depleted uranium is used in armor-piercing ammunition and as reinforcement against conventional weapons. Upon impact, the depleted uranium fragments burn at intense heat, and 10 to 35 percent of it becomes aerosolized. This aerosolized uranium "dust" is the most harmful component because it can easily be ingested or inhaled.

Wind and people walking through it also easily disperse the depleted uranium dust. This dust is a predominant byproduct of military use of depleted uranium, in contrast to, for example, exposures in uranium mines or nuclear reactors.

Our troops in Iraq will be severely affected by this radioactive war, not only because a lot more depleted uranium has been used and continues to be used, but also because they have been there a lot longer than during the Gulf War. Hundreds of thousands of our troops will come down with Gulf War Syndrome as a result of depleted uranium poisoning, and thousands will die from it. Thousands of their children will be born with genetic diseases, cancers and birth defects.

The continued use of depleted uranium harms our own troops and innocent civilians exposed to our war machine, is un-American, and a crime against humanity. We need a worldwide ban on depleted uranium use.

You have probably noticed Fairbanks Daily News-Miner staff writer's reports as an "embedded journalist" with the 172nd Stryker Brigade Combat Team in Mosul, Iraq. Her "feel-good" stories do not tell you the reality of what is happening in Iraq. Will she report on depleted uranium poisoning as a result of heavy U.S. bombing of Mosul?

Sadly, she and those of the 172nd Stryker Brigade Combat Team, if they survive the war, will have a high chance of coming down with Gulf War Syndrome. How much support do you think they will then get from our government or their employers?

Abel Bult-Ito is an associate professor of biology at the University of Alaska Fairbanks and is a member of the Fairbanks Coalition for Peace and Justice.





Photos of Babies Deformed at Birth as a Result of Depleted Uranium (DU) 2003

photos: Dr. Jenan Hassan












































:: Article nr. 37167 sent on 13-oct-2007 16:49 ECT
www.uruknet.info?p=37167

Link: blogs.salon.com/0002255/2007/10/12.html#a1844

:: The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of Uruknet .



C




Comment pos ted: by audrey on 13 Oct 2007 - 23:11
F+++ing HELL!!!!
I guess American, English elites are proud now. People of the world it is time t o say stop, time to die for justice, time to ACT! I am sick and tired of their evil deeds going unpunished!
please have pity of those poor souls!
I pray for them, may god delivers them from this evil world!


Comment pos ted: by aspendougout on 14 Oct 2007 - 01:31
Dr. Al-Ali, the leading British trained oncologist of Basra said nine members of his family have cancer, several with multiple cancers. This is unprecedented. Dr. Asaf Durakovic, UMRC founder said the U.S. DOD asked him to lie about the ef fects of DU. His research team in Afghanistan said the level of contamination in some areas and the levels of radioactivity in the victim's bodies were, "beyond their wildest imagination." In places where the dust is around, it is unsafe even to breathe. The ultimate form of tyranny.


Comment pos ted: by candu on 14 Oct 2007 - 02:08








This is genicide, war crimes against humanity,High crimes.
America pre epmtively Attacked a third world nation that was defenseless. Using world war 3 tactics and munitions,including prohibited munitions.They executed this attack in a manner that
put Iraqi civilians the elderly,woman and children in direct
contact with uranium dust . Did not follow their own manuals that
prescribe a complete clean up of the residue dust from said munitions.
Americans have been lead to believe as all other empire people were led to belie ve, that they are some how superior to others.
That is why it is so hard to accept a defeat like Viet nam, upcoming Iraq defeat . The trouble is those that think
themselves superior to their enemies will do anything to assure victory,torture, rape, murder,genocide.
the superior thinking indevidual will think nothing of murdering an Iraqi in col d blood.
This is what is going on in Iraq today,Why Black water and American troops can d o these things they do ,The same way they killed
10 million native Americans ,yet still only minimal outrage among the people.
It is that which enabled hitler to exterminate people as if they were rats,Today they are like the germans ,Romans, british all of
which saw themselves as superior In their time of empire. they have forsaken the ir forefathers and forgotten their Constitution. they have become death destroye r of worlds.


"i've been down on the bottom of a world full of lies
every move of my body so vacant and numb
no it's not dark yet but it's getting there"

"I don't need your organization, I've shined your shoes,
I've moved your mountains and marked your cards
But Eden is burning, either brace yourself for elimination
Or else your hearts must have the courage for the changing of the guards."

Bob Dylan

I pray for the iraqi people, they are the innocents that are being murdered,I pr ay that the American people see themselves in the mirror
and reflect upon what they are doing.
It is no longer an option to say that the American people are not responsible fo r this,And that it is their leaders. No today we must realize that the people do not hold accountable their leaders, so it is themselves as much a part of the p roblem as their leaders are.
I condemn the Americans ,in time the world will open the doors of la hague,Or Al mighty God will open the gates of hell for them all.



Comment pos ted: by hetzer on 14 Oct 2007 - 02:22
These deformities remind me of the Nazi and Japanese experiments of World War II . Most Americans are just suckers and are readily able to think up excuses for such atrocities. We may come to see these horrors in the U.S. as well, when win ds distribute D.U. all over the world. As long as we allow these pentagon atroc ities to be done in our name, we will eventually pay the price for our lazy cowardice.


Comment pos ted: by dragonslayer on 14 Oct 2007 - 22:10
United States Goverment Leadership is on a DEAD END ROAD

US Policies of aggression, nuclear arms, nuclear weapon development, nuclear wea pon use threats, and missile shields will only serve to antagonize China, Russia , and some Middle Eastern countries. The inevitable event will be one or many nu clear weapons fired against the United States in the very near future. The only thing that can stop this is for the globalization movement to stop its power grab and for native peoples to be given equal voice in institutions like the United Nations. The native peoples are the moral reserve of humanity, not the rich overbloated bankers, politicians and royalty. The world needs to come together to end racism against religions and ethnicities. We should start with Iran and immediately. The Third Major shaking of the earth on US soil was prophesized by the Cherokee long ago. Its time to listen to the native wisdom again, and let go of the snake oil politicians who are only concerned about themselves. "

America has lost its self-determination as the government has been hijacked from its inhabitants by elite factions in Israel, Saudi Arabia and Europe. America n o longer operates with self-preservation as a goal. In parallel, Israel is leadi ng and sometimes following on the same suicide path.

Most americans have forgotten the old adage, "If you live in a glass house, you shouldn't throw rocks." The lack of collective wisdom and common sense as a nati on will be our demise.

According an AP article, "The Iranian parliament said the US Army and the CIA we re terrorists because of the atomic bombing of Japan; the use of depleted uraniu m munitions in the Balkans, Afghanistan and Iraq; support of the killings of Pal estinians by Israel; the bombing and killing Iraqi civilians and the torture of imprisoned terror suspects." A statement signed by the 215 members who voted for the resolution reads, "The aggressor U.S. Army and the Central Intelligence Agency are terrorists and also nurture terror.

Depleted Uranium will serve the purpose of turning the world community against t he US in future world confict certainly after the coming US-Iran war. In light o f the use of DU in the Middle East and Afganistan, the world community will dest roy the United States and Israel. This is ultimately the plan that will serve th e interests of the One World Government and New World Order.

Although DU has about 60% of the radioactivity of the natural uranium for an equ al mass of substance (Cantaluppi and Degeto, 2000), elevated uranium activity co ncentrations have been observed in most of the surface soil samples and all of t he biological samples collected in Kosovo. In some soils, elevations of even sev en thousand times higher than the background uranium level have been observed.