Remember when there were no cellphones?
      By Don Harkins
      
      As her friend and editor for over a decade now, I have gown 
alongside Amy in her research on chemtrails, depleted uranium and 
radiation. There is zero doubt in our hearts and minds that Amy’s 
references are sound, her interpretation of data flawless and her 
intentions purely honorable and compassionate. 
      
      That means use of cell phones, WiFi, WiMax and RFID is not only 
suicide, but complicity in a "slow burn" form of mass murder. If 
second-hand cigarette smoke bothers you, how does it compare to second 
hand radiation? Well, it doesn’t. Using a cell phone in proximity to 
others only increases the intensity of the ambient levels of radiation 
that are omnipresent to support wireless personal communication 
networks. Where nonsmokers can remove themselves or the smoker from the 
room, noncellphoneusers (one word) cannot escape radiation by going to 
another room. In other words, everyone is bathing in dangerous levels of
 cellphone "smoke" whether you are "smoking" or not.
      
      When the wireless age was growing in earnest in the late 90s, 
people kept telling Ingri and I, "You really need to get cell 
phones—they are so convenient."
      
      We opted not to for the same reason we have never acquired a 
laptop computer: If we are away from our desk that means we are 
(temporarily) FREE!—free of the phone and free of the computer.
      
      The next stage, by the early 00s, people began saying to us, "Don,
 Ingri, you really need to get cell phones so it will be more convenient
 for us to get ahold of you."
      
      Now, when the subject of our having resisted carrying cell phones 
to this point comes up in conversation, people say, "You are so lucky."
      It’s not luck—we just didn’t like the idea of being "on call" all 
the time and our lifestyles just didn’t evolve to include cell phones. 
We have only known for a couple years how deadly they are.
      
      But, for cellphoneusers (one word), the novelty of cell phones has
 been replaced with addiction and the convenience has been replaced with
 enslavement. In that sense, we are lucky.
      
      The three following comments represent the most common justifications people recite for using cell phones:
"But with my job, I have to have one."
"They are handy in an emergency."
"This way, the kids (the wife/husband/friends/business contacts) can always get ahold of me."
But consider these responses from noncellphoneusers:
"Is your job worth irradiating yourself and the world around you?"
"What did you do in an emergency BC (that’s "before cell phones")?" 
"Are you sure that you are so darned important that you can’t just have 
people leave a message on a land line recorder and check messages now 
and then?"
And one bonus retort: "If an industry is using your addiction to 
wireless toys as a means to finance the erection of a communications 
infrustructure that intends to control all life on earth en route to 
destroying it, should you choose to buy its services?" 
The truth is you can do your job without a cell phone—or find another one.
You can prepare in advance for emergencies like we used to. 
And, it is true, we aren’t so important that people can’t wait a few minutes or a few hours to talk to us. (DWH)
Notes:
      1. Interview with Dr. Eckel published by Schwabischen Post 
12-07-06. Find interview at www.hese-project.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.
      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.
      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. and 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, Reported by Swedish media 
about Swedish town Gotene. Hospital emergency room flooded with calls 
regarding headaches, difficulty breathing, blurry vision and heart 
problems. At least 5 people had to leave their homes.
      36. "How WiMAX Works," E. Grabianowski and Marshal 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.
    
Related
  ===============================================
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 the cancer cause 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 organisms…These 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
 need and 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 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? 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 be updated
 and that wireless emissions from transmitters be drastically reduced. 
We can demand routine compliance testing at all transmitter sites. We 
can see to it that people living and working near transmitters be given 
opportunity to report their illnesses in national surveys. Proper 
epidemiological studies must be conducted and their results published 
and broadly disseminated. Federal communications law must be rewritten 
so that local jurisdictions can regain their right to consider health 
and environment when reviewing wireless siting applications.
      
      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, the 
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. We can encourage others to contact us by land 
line 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 RF/microwave pollution in your environment. (See ad on page 14 of the hardcopy edition of The IO).
      
      
The Trifield Meter ($130), 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 
5 microwatts per cm2 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
      
      For a list of more expensive professional meters available, go to: 
www.microwavenews.com. On the left side of the home page find a link called "
Radiation Meters." 
      
      
The Zap Checker: 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 using a wireless phone or gadget.