By B.N. Frank
On Dec. 19th, 2017, Popular Science published an article about recent cell phone radiation warnings announced by the California Department of Health, “Cell phones aren’t a public health risk, no matter what California says.”
NPR Radio followed up with an interview on Dec. 31st with Popular Science Editor, Sophia Bushwick. Her comments included:
…I think the scientific consensus right now is they haven’t found a strong connection between exposure to cell phone radiation and brain cancer or other health problems…
The guidelines are a little misguided. Because it’s creating a lot of fear around an issue that we’re not sure people actually need to be afraid of.
Apparently Ms. Bushwick and Popular Science have been living in an alternate reality. Warnings about cell phone radiation aren’t new or exclusive to the recent California Department of Health.
There has actually been credible U.S. military research that has proven harm since the 1970s. Other researchers – some funded by Motorola– also found evidence of harm in the 1990s. This 2010 GQ Magazine article provides more details here.
On November 9, 2009, America’s favorite doctor, Dr. Oz, sounded the alarm on Good Morning America.
On May 31, 2011, many media sources published stories on the World Health Organization announcement that research had determined cell phone and wireless radiation to be Class 2B Possible Carcinogen and in the same category as chloroform, engine exhaust, and lead. Here is the link to a CNN story.
Producers of The Colbert Report used the announcement and warnings to produce an amusing albeit disturbing skit on June 1, 2011.
Between 2011 and 2017, more announcements, research, and warnings have been released by experts and the media in regard to cell phone and wireless radiation whether Ms. Bushwick or anyone else at Popular Science wants to acknowledge this or not. Manufacturers have been including safety warnings in manuals of wireless devices for many years also – although they may be difficult to locate or understand.
So why is there still so much controversy?
Current laws and regulations regarding new technology are over 20 years old and based on outdated research. They do not apply to how most technology is being used today. http://ethics.harvard.edu/files/center-for-ethics/files/capturedagency_alster.pdf
Or to be perfectly blunt:
- Current laws and regulations protect the Wireless Industry, not the public.
- The Wireless Industry has plenty of money to pay lawyers to protect their interests.
We’ve all seen this type of thing before. Anyone else remember being on an airplane in the late 1990s? There were still smoking sections – even on international flights. Blech.
We have been and continue to be made aware about cell phone and wireless radiation.
Research has determined that cell phone and wireless radiation exposure harms pets, plants and wildlife.
Research has determined that it harms children: https://www.activistpost.com/2017/12/beyond-digital-addiction-kids-may-affected-wi-fi-electronic-devices-even-arent.html
Symptoms vary and misdiagnosis is common. And like with other toxins, cell phone and wireless radiation exposure may not be the primary cause of some health conditions, however, it may still make them worse. The same could be said about asthmatics that are exposed to 2nd hand smoke.
I’m not going to accuse Ms. Bushwick of trying to promote “popular” science rather than actual science. Instead, I’d rather believe that she is part of the 1/3 of the population who is “sensitive” to some degree to cell phone radiation and other sources of “Electrosmog” and this is affecting her judgment: http://www.nbcnews.com/id/34509513/ns/health-cancer/t/electrosmog-harming-our-health/#.WjhcmmeWywQ
New technology has proven to be beneficial in many ways. But it’s up to all of us as individuals to determine how much we want to use it considering all the research that’s out there.
Despite everything we know about the harmful effects of tobacco use, 20% of Americans still smoke. Some choose to smoke around their children and pets which is harmful but not illegal as long as they do this within their homes or vehicles.
Ms. Bushwick and Popular Science Magazine may find themselves alone in their alternate reality. That’s ultimately their choice too.
For more information, refer to the following links:
- EMF Safety Solutions: http://www.emfsafetysolutions.com/research.html
- Environmental Health Trust: https://ehtrust.org/?s=cell+phone+warnings
- Environmental Health Trust: https://ehtrust.org/key-issues/cell-phoneswireless/cell-phones/
- “Neurosurgeon Shows How Low Levels of Radiation Such As Wi-Fi, Smart Meters And Cell Phones Cause The Blood Brain Barrier To Leak”
- “Studies show radiation from wireless devices affect our brains”
- “Do You Really Believe Your Cell Phone (i.e. Microwave Transceiver) Is NOT Harming Your Health?”
- “Sending Text Messages On Your Smartphone Changes The Rhythm Of Your Brain Waves” – Mayo Clinic
- “Cell Phone Brain Cancer – New Study Reports Doubling of Overall Risk”
- “Cancer Expert Declares Cell Phone and Wireless Radiation as Carcinogenic to Humans” – 7/31/2017
- Citizens for Safe Technology (http://citizensforsafetechnology.org)
- Clear Light Ventures (http://www.clearlightventures.com)
- Environmental Health Trust (http://EHTrust.org)
- In Power Movement (http://InPowerMovement.com)
- National Toxic Encephalopathy Foundation (http://NTEF-USA.Org)
- We Are The Evidence https://wearetheevidence.org/
The surveilance grid relies extensively on cell phones, wifi & the eletroradiation that these devices inevitably function on. It’s no wonder that the state protects these industries. Without it they would not have the surveilance capabilities they have. Not that they should be surveiling at all! But as far as they are concerned damaging people’s health is a small price to pay for collecting big data that they use to control the population…. & congress etc. besides it keeps the weaponised ” medical & big pharmacy industries” making a profit from all the illness they create.
I completely concur OverthBS. Diabolical is an excellent description.
Ahh, just part of the plan(s) of total domination, absolute control, and de-population agendas. And, a good source for profit the MIC(M=medical). You need cell phones in everyone’s hands for the internet of things and social engineering. I don’t have one and will not except on rare occasions when I pick up a throw away to call loved ones. Other than that, nope.I think we should move out of the cell phones and into short wave radios. But, the kakistocracy cannot track, social engineer, and ‘listen in’ and upload personal data as easy. I believe that is why we(society) went in this direction in the first place.
i now practice off-body carry since i began to experience twitching muscles on my left chest (shirt pocket) where i realised that i had been cooking myself
and sometimes, if i don’t have my phone, well too bad, no one can contact me!!!
One more of the articles, which supposedly try to expose more facts, while in fact, it is making them more confusing, reinforcing the lie in fact, for example in the sentence: “And like with other toxins, cell phone and wireless radiation exposure may not be the primary cause of some health conditions, however, it may still make them worse. ”
Many of the cited literature here state totally the opposite..
Or one more quote: “New technology has proven to be beneficial in many ways. But it’s up to all of us as individuals to determine how much we want to use it considering all the research that’s out there.”
Hey author, can you finally make up your mind and decide, whether wi-fi is ‘beneficial’ or not??? Sure, it is beneficial for those who make money out of it.
Who on earth writes all this nonsense?
And another one in this sentence: “Some choose to smoke around their children and pets which is harmful but not illegal as long as they do this within their homes or vehicles.”
The ‘some’ are the arrogant, ignorant, egoistic ass…, who do not care for anyone. According to the author, their act is ‘legal’ since it is on their own premises…
Writing this way, is ‘politically correct’ for everyone involved, while smearing the difference between good and bad.
“I think the scientific consensus right now is they haven’t found a
strong connection between exposure to cell phone radiation and brain
cancer or other health problems…”
Yes, lets totally ignore last May 2017, the National Toxicology Program released partial results – because they felt it was a public concern – of their huge rat study which should a statistically significant increase of brain and heart cancer in the rats they exposed to cell phone radiation.
Is that why 5G is being pushed fast and hard now? Will they move away from microwaves to millimeter waves and say the new stuff is better and not harmful? We’ll see. The evidence is adding up and the bodies will be hard to hide.
Also the smart phone is the planned “mark of the beast”.
You should be glad.
Nature will sort this one out for you.
The herd will be destined to the dust pan, and the smart ones will survive.
They will have the security of knowing they were with the collective.
Scientific Consensus !!!