How WiFi and Other EMFs Cause Biological Harm

wifi emfs

By Kevin Samson

Our modern world is an electromagnetic soup filled with pulses, radio frequencies, computer screens, wireless signals, and a host of wearable gadgets that are emitting damaging radiation.

Peer-reviewed scientific studies have drawn conclusions that should concern us all, but particularly for young children and pregnant women. Government agencies are even doing battle amongst themselves over outdated scientific information that still impacts current regulations.

Yet another credible voice is now sounding the alarm about the pervasive dangers of Electromagnetic Fields (EMFs) – Professor Martin Pall, PhD – professor of Biochemistry and Basic Medical Science at Washington State University, Pullman. His lecture can be viewed below, as well as a summary of his findings amid a flood of other scientific research.

It is worth noting that Pall’s concerns have been echoed by others throughout the field of biochemistry and health science.

    • A prominent neuroscientist recently went on record in a lecture to the medical community which gave strong credence to the concerns of everyday citizens.
    • Dr. Martin Pall is also a world-renown biochemist; he previously went as far as to say that wireless radiation is a biohazard and should be abolished in certain settings.
    • British ER physician and founder of Physicians’ Health Initiative for Radiation and the Environment (PHIRE), Dr Erica Mallery-Blythe, analyzed the exponential growth of damaging sources of EMFs – damaging to all life, as life could be defined as anything that possesses an electromagnetic field. She concludes her lecture (viewed here) with some practical solutions that can be taken to mitigate the effects of bio-active frequencies which can cause disruption of our DNA fractal antenna and promote a host of stress responses.

Professor Pall states unequivocally in his lecture in Oslo, Norway:

“I think this is going to be one of the major issues in the next few years. Most people are not aware of this, and the people who are mostly know the old data – and there’s a lot of new [information] on this that’s extremely, extremely important.”

Pall shows us how, with an increasing preponderance of so-called ‘smart’ meters, ‘smart’ phones and other microwave-emitting technologies and infrastructure, the health of the public is in danger; that our young are the most at risk and that urgent action to protect people is now required.

Prof. Pall’s extensive research over recent decades into this issue shows that:

  • Microwaves damage humans at levels far below present radiation limits, through mechanisms at the cellular level
  • These biological mechanisms can – completely or partially – be behind growing “unexplained illnesses” like sudden cardiac death, ME, weakened immune system, fibromyalgia, post-traumatic stress, and increased DNA breakage, etc.
  • The effects can, in principle, affect all multicellular animals, and is proven, for example, in mussels (molluscs)
  • You need neither New Age, tendentious science or conspiracy theories to justify this.

Now is the time to become informed and keep your friends and family up to date on new research that shows the threats some of our new technologies pose to the more vulnerable among us. How many times do we need to hear the assurances of the scientific establishment that they have covered all bases in advising governments to create health guidelines that later turn out to be woefully inadequate?

Additional source:
Stop Smart Meters! UK

  • JC

    I once saw a pie chart that said that 70% of studies NOT paid for by the telcom companies said there was a measurable negative effect of emf’s and 30% said there wasn’t AND another pie chart that said that 70% of the studies paid for by the telcom companies show no measurable effect and 30% of those did. Essentially the numbers were flipped depending on who backed the study, so I have to agree with you studies should be taken with a grain of salt along with who paid for it.

    • Guest

      Exactly and this chart showing 70% effect 30% was funded by people who will get profit from “showing” effects. I hold PhD in neurology/toxicology and by the same way as people”showing” effect either by cherry picking or funding, I can prove you that water is bad and smoking healthy. You dont get studies with a grain of salt only really learn basic(in field you read studies) and always check methodology(many studies by purpose or mistake contain so many flaws that affects results, probably 70% of studies are flawed) and funding indeed.

Thank you for sharing.
Follow us to receive the latest updates.

Like Us On Facebook
Follow Us On Twitter