Washington Free Press  Washington State's Independent Journal of News, Ideas & Culture
home |  subscribe/donate |  article archive |  issue archive |  organization |  volunteer/submit |  activism calendar |  contact us
CLIMATE      SPORTS      SUBSTANCES      RIGHT BRAIN      MEDIA      TRUTH      LIES      MILITARY      HEALTH      BUSINESS      POETRY      TRANSPORTATION      IMMIGRATION      WORKPLACE      ELECTIONS      WORLD      TECHNOLOGY      POLITICS      ENERGY      EDUCATION      AROUND WASHINGTON      ENVIRONMENT      CULTURE      WAR      ECONOMY      HISTORY      RIGHTS      LAW      ACTIVISM      MEDICINE      MARIJUANA      SEATTLE      CARTOONS      WASHINGTON      VACCINES      TACOMA      GENETIC ENGINEERING      CORPORATIONS      FLUORIDATION      WIRELESS RADIATION      MINOR PARTIES      SPOKANE      CLIMATE      SPORTS      SUBSTANCES      RIGHT BRAIN      MEDIA      TRUTH      LIES      MILITARY      HEALTH      BUSINESS      POETRY      TRANSPORTATION      IMMIGRATION      WORKPLACE      ELECTIONS      WORLD      TECHNOLOGY      POLITICS      ENERGY      EDUCATION      AROUND WASHINGTON      ENVIRONMENT      CULTURE      WAR      ECONOMY      HISTORY      RIGHTS      LAW      ACTIVISM      MEDICINE      MARIJUANA      SEATTLE      CARTOONS      WASHINGTON      VACCINES      TACOMA      GENETIC ENGINEERING      CORPORATIONS      FLUORIDATION      WIRELESS RADIATION      MINOR PARTIES      SPOKANE     
search WFP via Google
PEACE & JUSTICE CALENDAR
compiled by
Jean Buskin

November
December
January
All Months


Cartoons of
Dan McConnell

featuring
Tiny the Worm


Cartoons of
David Logan

The People's Comic


Cartoons of
John Jonik

Inking Truth to Power

Latest Posts
click topics to search past content

MILITARY

Former US Attorney General Testifies for Plowshares Activists Ramsey Clark supports WA anti-nuke movement Ground Zero Center (Nov 28, 2010)

HEALTH

Hunger Up 36% in Washington State from Children's Alliance, cartoon by John Ambrosavage (Nov 28, 2010)

POLITICS

The Progressive Tea Party? Maybe when it comes to surveillance issues Doug Collins, cartoon by Dan McConnell (Nov 28, 2010)
Obama Wooing 'Economic Royalists' FDR was way gutsier Norman Solomon, cartoon by David Logan (Nov 28, 2010)

SUBSTANCES

The Dirty Secret Behind 'Demon Tobacco' Regulation doesn't cover cigarette additives Doug Collins, cartoons by John Jonik (Nov 28, 2010)

EDUCATION

America’s Education Gender Gap Bill Costello, cartoon by John Ambrosavage (Nov 28, 2010)

ELECTIONS

Washington State Votes Against Change Janice Van Cleve, cartoon by Dan McConnell (Nov 28, 2010)

FOLLOW FILE updates

DeCourseys v. Real Estate Giant; Amazon Prevails in Customer Privacy Doug Collins, cartoon by John Ambrosavage (Nov 28, 2010)

ENVIRONMENT

Poll: Southwest WA Supports Conservation Climate Solutions, cartoon by John Jonik (Nov 28, 2010)

CULTURE

What Color Is Your Santa? holiday cartoons by John Ambrosavage (Nov 28, 2010)

MEDICINE

WA Doctors Tell McKenna: Put Patients Before Politics Doctors for America (Oct 25, 2010)

ACTIVISM

No, Higher Consciousness Won’t Save Us Charles Reich got his second book right Norman Solomon (Oct 23, 2010)

LAW

Modern-Day Debtors’ Prisons in WA ACLU of WA, with cartoon by John Jonik (Oct 23, 2010)

RIGHTS

Report: Racial Profiling Pervasive Across America OneAmerica (Oct 23, 2010)

WORLD

Port Townsend Food Co-op Rejects Israel Boycott Jefferson County BDS, cartoon by George Jartos (Oct 23, 2010)

HISTORY

A Bellhop in the Swingin' Seventies Overly detailed resume plus cartoon by John Ambrosavage (Oct 20, 2010)
Johnny Horizon's Draft Physical Can he avoid Vietnam? John Merriam (Oct 20, 2010)

AROUND WASHINGTON

Gregoire passes the hatchet; Bears love garbage; Where does the PUD travel to? featuring cartoons by Dan McConnell (Oct 20, 2010)

ECONOMY

Now's the Time to Expand Social Security Good for both Americans and American companies Steven Hill (Sept 9, 2010)

WAR

Obama's Speech for Endless War Normon Solomon, cartoon by Dan McConnell (Sept 9, 2010)

ENERGY

Yellowstone: The #1 National Security Threat Unless we turn Wyoming into a new energy Mecca Martin Nix (Sept 9, 2010)

TECHNOLOGY

Biodefense, Biolabs and Bugs Seattle City Council takes an important first step to safety Labwatch.org (Aug 9, 2010)

WORKPLACE

Teenage Microsoft Sweatshop 15-hour shifts under poor conditions at Chinese factory from the National Labor Committee (May 16, 2010)

IMMIGRATION

Why US Immigration Policy Needs Tweaking Bill Costello, cartoon by David Logan (May 16, 2010)
Arizona Immigration Brouhaha Various opinions from near and far, cartoons by Logan and McConnell (May 2, 2010)

TRANSPORTATION

The Coming Microcar Revolution Martin Nix (May 16, 2010)

POETRY

A Poetic Look at Tacoma Glass Art Museum; a limer-ICK Gerald McBreen (Mar 28, 2010)
Fall Is For Falling Out Of Love, etc. three poems Bob Markey (Mar 29, 2010)

BUSINESS

Who Rules America? Corporate conglomeration is leading to neofeudalism Don Monkerud, cartoon by John Jonik (Mar 27, 2010)

TRUTH

Architects and Engineers Ask for New Look at 9/11 Doug Collins (Feb 20, 2010)

MEDIA

Is Olympic Coverage Sexist? Media coverage rarely gives women equal treatment Univ. of Alberta (Jan 24, 2010)

RIGHT BRAIN

Why I Don't Come at Christmas Anymore not-so-jolly Saint Nick (Dec 18, 2009) Santa Gets Political art by Ambrosavage, Lande, and Dees (Dec 17, 2009)

SPORTS

A People's History of Sports BOOK REVIEW Doreen McGrath (posted July 24, 2009)

CLIMATE

Cashing In On Earth's Cycles: Part 3 Alan Cheetham & Richard Kirby (posted July 24, 2009)
Obama: How Serious About Climate Change? Doug Collins (posted July 24, 2009)


What is the Washington Free Press?

The Washington Free Press exists to carry under-reported news and thought-provoking opinion out to a wider audience. We specialize in news related to Washington State. In order to get the news out, we need your readership and support for basic costs. That's why we ask you to please subscribe and/or donate. If you would like to help us with writing, editing, or "scouting" for writers and articles, please contact us.

Doug Collins, editor

Support the WA Free Press. Community journalism needs your readership and support. Please subscribe and/or donate.


posted June 3, 2009, from March/April 2009 issue

Bookmark and Share

This microwave-emitting electronic “tag” has been sold to parents as a deterrent against child abduction. 

Generation X’d Out

Part 2 - We can see the damage

   

By Amy Worthington

  Part 1 of this article appeared in the Jan/Feb 2009 issue, p4. It is available at www.wafreepress.org/96/issue96.pdf. Numbered references appear at the end of the article. This article was originally published in the Idaho Observer. 

An estimated one in 20 babies born in the U.S. each year has an obvious birth defect. That equates to about 200,000 babies per about four million live births annually. Many additional childhood defects and impairments can be subtle, requiring years to become apparent. Millions of parents now cope with often inexplicable child health problems, including severe allergies, diabetes, body weight abnormalities, plus serious eye, ear and skin conditions.

  Perhaps the most alarming epidemic among our younger generations involves the increasing incidence of neurological and developmental delay disorders. The 2003 National Survey of Children’s Health found that one in five American children has a learning disability or attention deficit disorder. Studies through decades link these conditions to toxic environmental conditions, including microwave radiation exposure.41

  A recent study of over 13,000 Danish women confirms that women who had used cell phones during pregnancy produced children who were 54 percent more likely to manifest hyperactivity and difficulties with conduct and emotion by the time they entered school.

  Coordinated by American and Danish scientists, this survey found that if children exposed to cell phone radiation in the womb later used cell phones themselves, they were 80 percent more likely to suffer behavior and emotional problems than children who were not exposed.42

  In 2000, Dr. Ross Adey working at the University of California, Riverside, showed that pregnant rats exposed to Iridium cell phone radiation produced fetuses with significantly decreased brain activity, compared to non-exposed fetuses.43

  The incidence of human autism, a complex affliction manifesting a broad spectrum of brain abnormalities, has increased dramatically since the wireless age began. Scientists say clues are accumulating that radio frequency (RF) microwave exposure could be an important but overlooked factor in the autism epidemic.44

  There is also indication that the synergy between RF microwave radiation and chemicals or metals may be involved in autistic disorders. A 2007 report on autistic children and electromagnetic exposure concluded that the impact of this radiation “could be direct by facilitating early clinical onset of symptoms or indirect, including trapping heavy metals in cells and both accelerating the onset of symptoms caused by heavy metal toxicity as well as impeding therapeutic clearing [of these metals].”45

  In 2008, researchers announced that missing DNA snippets on chromosome 16 is a mutation that raises the risk of autism by 100 times. Some suspect that this aberration is the tip of the iceberg concerning genetic errors involved in the syndrome.46

  It is generally agreed that such chromosome aberrations can occur before fertilization, which brings us back to chemical and/or radiation-damaged sperm and ova. 

The powers-that-be don’t want this information made public

  An impressive number of researchers through the decades have published studies linking RF microwave radiation to adverse effects on genetics and reproduction, even at very low, non-thermal exposure rates. In 1997, Dr. John R. Goldsmith of Israel’s Ben-Gurion University published a historical compendium of such studies. Dr. Goldsmith noted that scientists had known for decades that the three major human effects of microwaves are spontaneous abortion, blood cell mutations and increased childhood cancers.47

  When the results of RF microwave-damning studies were published, “offending” scientists throughout the years have consistently found their research programs prematurely terminated, their careers derailed and their reputations defamed. The latter is the case of the brilliant and accomplished Dr. Henry Lai.

  Working at the University of Washington, Dr. Lai and his colleagues raised the ire of the wireless communications industry after reporting that microwaves--at low exposure levels consistent with cell phone use--badly damage DNA. Lai was subsequently subjected to dirty politics and attempts to sabotage his career.48

  When Dr. Jerry Phillips, under contract to Motorola in the ‘90s, published his findings that cell phone frequencies have an important biological impact on DNA, he too was threatened and ostracized by the wireless industry. Phillips had earlier discovered that radio frequency fields can influence the growth of tumors.

  Today, almost all wireless health studies in the US are funded by a tangled web of special interest groups which directly or indirectly profit from the wireless industry. These tainted studies routinely give wireless radiation a clean bill of health. “A lot of studies done right now are done purely as PR tools for the industry,” confirms Dr. Phillips.49

  The wireless industry is enabled and subsidized by the US government, which also has an array of economic and political reasons for obfuscating microwave health issues. The reality is, the feds and the wireless industry are up to their proverbial necks in liability if the potent fetal damage caused by microwaves becomes widely understood. Therefore, those who increasingly microwave-pollute both military and civilian populations have thus far demonstrated their willingness to “lie and deny” regarding the dangers of RF microwaves.

  Author Paul Brodeur wrote in The Zapping of America that the “...government and the military have long suppressed information about true genetic effects of microwaves in human beings and covered up a number of potentially embarrassing situations in which such effects have been observed.”50 

The scientific evidence is convincing: cell phone radiation, even from phones on standby, greatly increases the risk of sterility and birth defects. Reasonable people should consider prioritizing children and the survival of the human race as more important than style, fashion and convenience. 

Babies have been sacrificed to protect the establishment

  One such situation was the Fort Rucker affair of the early 1970s.51

  At the time, Fort Rucker in Alabama had 46 radar installations within 30 miles of the base. Aviation radar technology, such as that emitting from Fort Rucker at the time, employs many bands of high frequency microwaves.

  In 1971, an expert with the University of Alabama discovered that a startling number of newborns delivered at the base hospital suffered congenital abnormalities, including club foot, cleft palate, genital, heart and respiratory problems. There was also a high fetal death rate. About the same time, researchers discovered a high fetal death rate near Elgin Air Force Base in Florida, another aviation base with a massive concentration of radar installations.

  A preliminary report on the Fort Rucker birth defect cluster completed by the Southern Research Institute for the US Environmental Protection Agency urged follow-up studies to determine how prenatal deaths and infant birth defects correlate with parental microwave exposure at aviation bases. Such a study was warranted because nearly a decade earlier, researchers at Johns Hopkins had found an apparent association between radar exposure and Down’s Syndrome.52

  Rather than acknowledge a possible radiation link to myriad illnesses among civilian and military personnel, or act to prevent irresponsible exposure, military networks derailed the investigation and quashed preliminary study results.

  Brodeur warned, “Above all, it provides a warning in bold relief to the Congress and to the American people. A national policy which gives the Department of Defense the power to control or thwart scientific research on the biological effects of microwaves is a policy that allows the fox to guard the chicken coop and make test animals of us all.”53 

Thirty years later the fox still rules

  And test animals we certainly are. The United States now has about two million licensed cellular communications installations and antennas blanketing the nation with pulsed data transmission microwaves. Wireless communications antennas operate in the same electromagnetic spectrum as radar antennas. Radar emissions can range from 3 megahertz to 110 gigahertz, which includes the numerous bands used for cell phone and other wireless services.

  Before the wireless revolution, radar exposure was contained mostly to military installations and airport areas. Now mobile communication installations expose nearly everyone to massive, incessant doses of chromosome-damaging energy within the radar spectrum.

  The wireless industry says that it must continue to increase its nationwide network of microwave antennas in our neighborhoods, commercial centers, parks and school zones. It says that the emergence of broadband services -- which enable cell phone video/gaming/music plus data downloads for e-mail and business applications -- demands ever more network capacity.54

  To meet increasing consumer demand for an evolving array of third generation wireless products and services, the industry says it is dividing its service areas into smaller cells, requiring more transmitters in tighter spaces. Service providers are reducing the height of existing antenna poles, while rushing to attach thousands of new antennas to buildings and structures of all kinds, even utility poles. Meanwhile, WiMAX promoters are setting up powerful new WiFi networks across the nation.

  If informed Americans cannot reverse this trend, eventually no one anywhere will escape a tsunami of a pernicious, mutagenic radiation that permeates and punishes our bodies 24 hours a day. The FCC admits it has expertise in neither health matters nor radio engineering. It’s current and notorious exposure standards were developed by the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE), which bills itself as the world’s leading professional association for the advancement of technology.

  Louis Slesin, publisher of Microwave News states: “Essentially, the users of RF and microwave technology -- the military, its contractors and the communications industry -- wrote the IEEE RF standard. For example, of the two co-chairs of the committee that developed the most recent safety standard, one works for Motorola and the other for the US Navy and the Air Force.

  What are the odds that the safety standard serves their interests? I’d bet the ranch on it!”55

  Betting the ranch is one thing, but wagering the lives of millions of fetuses and infants on FCC’s outdated RF microwave exposure guidelines is genocidal. Scientists across the globe are adamant that these self-serving guidelines are scientifically indefensible, extremely dangerous and must be immediately and drastically revised.56 

How sound is ultrasound?

  In addition to incessant wireless radiation exposure, most fetuses are now routinely scanned several times during gestation by medical ultrasound imaging equipment. Scant weeks after a human embryo is implanted in-utero, at a time when the newly united cells are the most vulnerable, medical personnel engage in an ultrasound inquisition to determine its gestational age. A vaginal probe is often used to position a high frequency sound transducer as close as possible to the tiny new life form.

  Ultrasound technology vibrates a fetus with mechanical pressure waves at millions of cycles per second. A scan can last up to one hour. The power density used is around 720 milliwatts/cm2—eight times the power density allowed prior to 1993.57

  Secondary vibrations inherent in ultrasound waves are said to produce intrauterine noise as loud as 100 decibels, despite the fact that noise levels over 85 decibels are designated as harmful to human hearing. The fetus reportedly hears an ultrasound scan at a high pitch which is, comparatively speaking, as loud as a train pulling into a station.58

  The ultra powerful Doppler ultrasound equipment is especially brutal. One minute of Doppler is equal to 35 minutes of non-Doppler imaging. Doppler is often used on pregnant women transvaginally. Often employed for monitoring fetal circulation, Doppler equipment has potential to produce biologically significant temperature hikes in both bone and tissue interfaces.59

  One report notes that brain structures lying close to the fetal skull, such as the pituitary gland and the hypothalamus, are at special risk of over-heating, while on-screen temperature safety indexes can give false temperature readings.60

  Powerful 3-D and 4-D ultrasound equipment, which can produce cuddly 3-dimensional images, is used by opportunists to create fetal “portraits” and videos for profit.61

  These merciless, inflammation-producing scanning sessions can last up to 90 minutes. The FDA warns that such frivolous use of ultrasound is dangerous, but critics complain that the agency has yet to enforce a ban on this commercial exploitation of the fetus.

  In 1999, Irish researchers found that a 15-minute, 8 megahertz ultrasound scan of mice produced abnormal rate of cell division and abnormal cell death. Among these researchers was Dr. Patrick Brennan who suspects that the scans may be damaging human fetal DNA, resulting in a delay of cell division and repair, or in the switching on of a tumor suppressor gene that controls cell death.62

  In 2004, Pasko Rakic, chairman of the Neurobiology Department at Yale University, reported disruption of the normal migration of cells in the brains of fetal mice following ultrasound scans. Brain cells failed to grow into their proper positions and remained scattered in incorrect parts of the brain.63

  A number of other studies have established a possible correlation between prenatal ultrasound exposure and dyslexia, delayed speech development, reduced birth weight and non-right handedness.64

  Left-handedness is statistically linked to many cognitive and developmental problems, ranging from learning difficulties to autism and epilepsy.

  There are reports that the FDA has failed to ensure that medical sonographers are properly trained. Ultrasound expert Dr. Jacques Abramowicz of Rush University is quoted as saying that only two to three percent of ultrasound technicians understand the complexities of thermal and mechanical indexes.65

  While the American Institute of Ultrasound Medicine (AIUM) denies negative biological effects of ultrasound on fetuses, it admits to the possibility that negative outcomes may be identified in the future. No one yet knows to what extent our devastating rates of childhood diabetes, allergy and learning impairment may be rooted in over-use of fetal monitoring by poorly trained technicians. 

America’s infants are on the wireless frontline

  Medical researchers from Italy’s University of Siena Department of Pediatrics, Obstetrics and Reproductive Medicine reported that Extremely Low Frequency (ELF) electrical currents given off by modern hospital incubators can interfere with newborns’ heart rates. The study, published in May, 2008, showed that ELF waves increase neonates’ risk for sudden infant death syndrome. The magnetic fields from these ELF waves were found to cut the “variability” of infant heart rates in half.

  Heart rate variability is healthy and shows that the nervous system is working correctly. Variability reduction, on the other hand, is known to be an indicator of heart disease, arrhythmia and stroke. The Italian study warns that interfering with heart rate variability can hinder nervous system development and recommends that incubator manufacturers take steps to shield babies from electrical fields caused by motors and fans.66

  How bizarre, then, is the fact that hospitals throughout U.S. are clamping high frequency radio tracking devices on the appendages of at least one million American newborns each year. High frequency radio “tags” are an accoutrement of so-called “infant protection” systems peddled by XMark Corporation of Ontario, Canada.67

  XMark is a subsidiary of the infamous VeriChip Corporation which markets the injectable VeriChip ID tag for humans. (See “Microchip implants cause fast-growing malignant tumors in lab animals,” for a report on the cancer-causing effects of implanted ID chips.)

  XMark offers two types of in-hospital tracking systems for newborns: “Hugs” and “Halo.” Medical institutions participating in these programs must transform their maternity wards into RF microwave “hot” zones, complete with a grid of wireless sensors linked to computers capable of processing information from numerous transmitters simultaneously.

  The Hugs system includes a mommy transmitter dubbed “Kisses.” Mother-and-child transmitters are programmed to work in sync so mom can recognize her child from his high frequency signals, which mesh with hers in an electronic lullaby. XMark promotional literature mentions nothing about the physiological effects of Hugs’ radio waves, which zap newborns with repetitive micro-blasts of 217 million hertz.

  The horrendous Halo transmitters propagate a whopping 433.92 million hertz, a frequency officially within the microwave realm. Halo radio tags for newborns are part of a wireless system programmed to deactivate automatic doors and elevators while the location and identity of staff and infants are instantly transmitted to command headquarters. The 433.92 megahertz employed by the Halo system is endorsed by the Department of Defense (DOD) as its active RFID standard. This frequency is used for a variety of DOD tracking and surveillance modalities.68

  Infant tracking is a radiation-rich glimpse into the portals of a Star Wars medical world which purports to make newborns “safe” by blasting them with continuous torrents of dangerous high frequencies. Microwave radiation is classified as a “chronic” poison by the National Institutes of Health.69

  Yet, Orwellian infant tracking systems such as Halo have been approved by the FDA with neither pre-market health research nor follow-up studies needed to assess the long term effects of such prolonged electromagnetic assault on infant immunity, neurological development and circulatory health. 

Many babies are condemned to radiation-toxic homes

  When an infant escapes his hospital transmitter, he may be taken to a home where wireless reigns. These days a baby’s first habitat may be a den of electromagnetic wave pollution gushing from wireless computer systems, microwave ovens, gigahertz baby monitors, home security systems and the nefarious, always-broadcasting Digital Enhanced Cordless Telephone (DECT) bases.

  Baby’s home may also be near communications transmitters which spew into his neighborhood--into his very bassinet--a torrent of microwave radiation heard as a high pitched scream by audio detection equipment. Microwave frequencies emitted 24/7 by neighborhood transmitters pass easily through most construction materials to enter dwellings, then resonate off objects to reverberate into human flesh.

  While still toddlers, the children of Generation X-ray will likely be encouraged to use cell and cordless household phones, devices which will deeply infiltrate tiny skulls with additional mega-doses of electro-dissonance. A most troubling aspect is the 2005 medical study completed in India which found that adults exposed to as little as one hour of cell phone radiation per day have an average of 40 to 60 percent of their cells manifesting damaged DNA.70

  What tragedies lurk in the future for Generation X-ray’s children who bear subtle DNA aberrations from before conception, then sustain additional DNA damage during their formative years in a full-throttle wireless world? How many generations can sustain 40-60 percent DNA damage before humanity becomes so genetically compromised that it is literally threatened with extinction? 

Is it a population reduction project?

  We have a number of important clues that microwaves could be used as an effective form of contraception, administered covertly to the world’s masses through seductive technological means.

  Research has shown that rodents exposed to cell phone radiation have less testosterone in their bloodstreams, resulting in diminished sexual activity.71

  In 2008, a public health agency in Norway published a study of navy personnel exposed to radio frequency electromagnetic radiation. It showed that the greater the exposure to this radiation, the higher the prevalence of involuntary childlessness.72

  Greek researchers studying the effects of radio frequency on rodent reproduction placed groups of mice in strategic locations to ensure their irradiation from a broadcasting RF antenna farm. Mice who received less than 1 microwatt/cm2 had a progressive decrease in newborns and became irreversibly sterile after five generations. The mice receiving a tad over 1 microwatt/cm2 regressed to sterility after only three generations.73

  A most interesting clue comes from a 1985 Chinese study titled “Effects of Microwave Contraception on Human Serum Testosterone and Luteinizing Hormone.” The study was conducted on human males and the abstract states that “...the microwave dose used for contraception seems to cause damage in Leydig cell function….and then influence(s) endocrine function of testis.”74

  It is not clear from this report exactly what microwave dose was found by the Chinese to be contraceptive. But the fact that today’s cell phone radiation is widely documented as damaging, even lethal to human sperm cells, suggests that our dangerously high emission and exposure standards could have been set specifically for their potent contraceptive potential.

  Greek researchers at the University of Athens confirmed in 2006 that GSM 900 and 1800 (digital) megahertz radiation has a radical impact on the ability of living creatures to reproduce. These frequencies are within the realm of wireless radiation being broadcast across America for mobile services. The drosophila (fruit fly) was chosen for this study because the insect’s cellular processes are identical to those of humans. Only a few minutes of exposure to this cell phone radiation per day—at power intensities now common in our environment—cut the insects’ ability to reproduce by 60 percent. Both sexes were affected.

  Of great importance was the finding that exposed male flies suffered DNA fragmentation in their gonadal cells and the females showed induced cell death in a large number of their ovarian egg chambers. The researchers warned, “…Digital mobile telephony radiation nowadays exert an intense biological action able to kill cells, damage DNA or decrease dramatically the reproductive capacity of living organisms.”75

  Chilling is the possibility that there might exist a mindset among ruling elites that humans who make it through the gauntlet of pre-conception radiation and radiation-induced spontaneous abortion should have their lives drastically shortened to spare societies the economic burden of elderly people.

  Governments and the wireless communications industry, which are both stampeding humanity into compulsory and continuous wireless exposure, are undoubtedly apprised of the hundreds of medical studies demonstrating that low-level communications microwaves not only initiate, but also nourish and promote human cancers.76

  The perpetrators must also be aware of the widespread circulatory and cardiac damage being unleashed by the wireless revolution. Cell phone radiation quickly causes red blood cells to clump together and also to leak hemoglobin. These abnormal blood conditions can precipitate heart disease, kidney stones and strokes.77

  A recent medical study found that both fetuses and newborns exposed to cell phone radiation while their mothers conversed for 10 minutes experienced significant increases in heart rate and worrisome decreases in cardiac output.78

  Thus we see that the wireless age endangers the life blood, even the very hearts of the tiny ones fated to be born as “Generation X’d Out.” 

What can we do to save the babies?

  An amoral and ravenous congressional-military-industrial complex has groomed the youngsters of Generation X-ray to become hard-core patriots of wireless technology in the same ruthless way the asbestos and tobacco industries seduced and murdered generations past. The Cellular Telecommunications Industry Association (CTIA) boasts on its website that teenagers, defined as a “huge consumer market segment,” are currently pumping $100 billion a year into the industry’s coffers.79

  Deceived and used as pawns, our youngsters are left utterly ignorant concerning the devastating wireless radiation hazards to themselves and their posterity. When young people are told about the hazards of anything, they traditionally discard the facts and pursue their chosen avenues of self gratification as predictable acts of rebellion.

  Generation X-ray is no different in its obsession with wireless conveniences; it seems content to live in a self-absorbed universe devoid of logic, critical thinking and accountability. Many youth appear incapable of caring about future generations. We are no longer a nation of healthy free-thinkers, but a nation of obsessive, sickly phone button punchers, virtual game players and compulsive text messengers.

  Given the science, such ignorance and apathy ensures that millions of new and innocent lives are destined for cruel suffering and impairment. Thanks to a silent but violent electromagnetic enemy that is destroying their fragile DNA, newborns tumbling into our barbaric wireless age are creatures of a zillion possibilities of chromosomal disarray, including nervous system damage, deformed limbs, endocrine disruption and unhinged metabolic function.

  Yet, hopefully, some of our young people planning to bear children are still morally and intellectually able to comprehend and act upon the latest scientific information gathered for this paper. We can also hope that older parents and grandparents apprised of these facts will exert their influence to protect the genetics of their progeny. Those who want healthy babies must take the minimal following steps:

  1. Accept the well-documented fact that microwave radiation from wireless devices is as mutagenic, teratogenic and dangerous to fetuses and infants as ionizing X-radiation and gamma waves.

  2. Never wear or use any wireless device near reproductive organs. If you are female and have been exposing your ovaries to years of near-field wireless radiation, think carefully before you decide to become pregnant. If you are a male, and plan to father children, make sure that you stop using wireless devices well in advance of fertilization to reduce the chance of procreation with damaged sperm.

  3. Learn to test your personal environment for wireless microwave contamination. If you are pregnant or plan to be, remove yourself from microwave-contaminated areas at any cost. Never stand near a microwave oven when pregnant, as all such ovens leak radiation and can affect a large area.

  4. Prudent avoidance of routine pregnancy ultrasound scans is the best policy, says Internet health advisor Dr. Joseph Mercola. These scans should be used only in the event of medical necessity, he advises.

  5. Refuse to have your newborn radio-tagged by your birthing hospital. Since a tracking system requires a fog of ambient RF microwave radiation which could affect even non-tagged infants, it is prudent to choose a hospital which does not employ wireless systems in the maternity ward, or have your baby at home.

  6. Make sure that your infant is nurtured in a microwave-free home. Remove all DECT cordless phones, wireless security systems, wLAN wireless communications systems and microwave ovens. Never microwave-heat infant formulas or food.

  7. Make sure that cell tower or roof top communications antennas are not poisoning your home. If you discover that your neighborhood lies in the down beam of microwave antennas, which are saturating the interior of your home with a dangerous carcinogen, either take steps to apply expensive radiation barrier materials, or move to a radiation-free zone.

  8. Never use any wireless device while near an infant or young child. Drastically reduce the use of all personal wireless devices, and reserve their use for emergency communication. The more people use cell phones in their homes, the more transmitters will be placed in our neighborhoods.

  9. Retain your home and office landlines. Telecom companies are using pricing incentives to encourage the elimination of landline connections because air interface is more profitable. Unless we can educate enough people in time, our options for safe landline communications may vanish, leaving our kids at even more risk.

  The scientific evidence is massive and irrefutable. Our little ones face a lifetime of disability, pain and deprivation from ever-increasing torrents of man-made, commercial radiation capable of destroying human genetic integrity. If you believe that humanity should NOT be reduced to a species of genetic freaks on the way to extinction, assist the radiation awareness movement by doing your own research and then sharing with others the documented information on wireless hazards to human DNA.

  There is no time to waste while confronted with the life-and-death issues associated with the brazen wireless radiation assault upon our kids. Our mission requires persistence, patience and sacrifice. It is high time that we speak up and take action now—for the sake of the helpless and the unborn. What we do and say today will hugely affect generations to come. 

  Note: For the latest report from Professor Lennart Hardell concerning the 5-fold risk of brain tumors in kids who begin using mobile phones in childhood see: “Mobile Phone Use ‘Raises Children’s Risk of Brain Cancer Fivefold’,” The Independent, UK, 9-21-2008. Hardell is with the Department of Oncology, University Hospital, Orebro, Sweden. For the latest cancer statistics on American kids, see CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians, published bi-monthly by the American Cancer Society. 

REFERENCES

(References numbered 1-40 appeared in Part 1 of this article).

41. Neurological Effects of Radio Frequency Electromagnetic Radiation, Lai, op. cit. This paper contains an excellent discussion of laboratory studies showing damage to brain cells, plus memory deficits and learning disabilities due to microwave exposure.

42. “Warning: Using a Mobile Phone While Pregnant Can Seriously Damage Your Baby,” G. Lean, The Independent UK, 5-18-2008.

43. “Fetal Rat Brain Ornithine Decarboxylase (ODC) Activity and Polyamine Levels Following Exposures to Iridium Cell Phone Fields in Late Pregnancy,” Ross Adey, Department of Biochemistry, University of California, Riverside. This presentation was delivered February 4, 2000 at the Bioelectromagnetics Society.

44. “A Possible Association Between Fetal/Neonatal Exposure to Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Radiation and the Increased Incidence of Autism Spectrum Disorder,” R. Kane, Medical Hypothesis, Vol. 62, Issue 2, pp. 195-197, February 2004.

45. “Wireless Radiation in the Etiology and Treatment of Autism: Clinical Observations and Mechanisms,” T. Mariea and G. Carlo, J Aust Coll Nutr and Env Med, Vol 26, No. 2, August 2007.

46. “Rare Genetic Glitch Hikes Risks of Autism,” AP/MSNBC, 01-09-2008.

47. “Epidemiologic Evidence Relevant to Radar (Microwave) Effects,” John Goldsmith, Environmental Health Perspectives Vol. 105, Supplement 6, 12-01-1997.

48. “Wake-up Call,” R. Harrill, Columns, University of Washington Alumni Magazine, March 2005.

49. Phillips quoted: “Is Her Cell Phone Safe?”, R.Cribb and T. Hamilton, TheStar.com, 11-07-2005.

50. The Zapping of America, Paul Brodeur, 1977. See Chapter 11: The Genetic Time Bomb.

51. Ibid.

52. “Radiation Exposure of Parents of Children with Mongolism,” A. Sigler et al., Johns Hopkins Hospital Bulletin, 117:374.39 (1965).

53. The Zapping of America, op. cit. pp. 149-150.

54. CITA website: “Why Wireless Antenna Siting is Important,” www.ctia.org.

55. “An Interview with Louis Slesin,” by the Institute for Inquiry, Box 335, Davenport, California.

56. BioInitiative Report op. cit. See “Summary for the Public and Conclusions.”

57. “Conflicts of Interest: Understanding the Safety Issue Around Prenatal Ultrasound,” M. Fuller and J. Eaton, 06-02-2005. Find this article at vaclib.org.

58. “Fetuses Can Hear Ultrasound Examinations,” New Scientist, 12-04-2001.

59. “Conflicts of Interest: Understanding the Safety Issue Around Prenatal Ultrasound,” op. cit.

60. “Sensitivity to Diagnostic Ultrasound in Obstetrics,” S.B. Barnett and G. Kossoff, eds., Safety of Diagnostic Ultrasound (Carnforth, UK: Parthenon Publishing, 1998).

61. “FDA Concerned About Scrapbook Ultrasounds,” M. Mendoza, AP, 03-27-2004.

62. “Ultrasound Linked to Brain Damage,” R. Matthews, The Sunday Telegraph, UK, 10-01-2001.

63. “Ultrasound Can Affect Brain Development,” AP, 08-07-2006.

64. “Ultrasound Safety Review Over Brain Damage Fears,” R. Matthews, The Telegraph, UK, 12-15-2001. Also: “Ultrasound Scans May Disrupt Fetal Brain Development,” New Scientist, 12-10-2001. A Swedish research team found a 32% higher rate of left-handedness among males whose mothers had been ultrasound scanned in the 1970s.

65. Dr. Abramowicz quoted in: “Conflicts of Interest: Understanding the Safety Issue Around Prenatal Ultrasound,” M. Fuller and J. Eaton, 06-02-2005.

66. “Increasing the Engine-mattress Distance in Neonatal Incubators: A Way to Decrease Exposure of Infants to Electromagnetic Fields,” C. V. Bellieni, et al, University of Siena, Italian Journal of Pediatrics, 2003; 9:74-80.

67. See XMark.com; Also: “From the Ground Up, Building Patient and Staff Security into a New Hospital,” S. Elder, HC&O News, September/October 2006.

68. “US Department of Defense, ‘Endorses’ Active RFID Standard,” A. Gonzalez, ARC Advisory Group, 12-01-2006.

69. Haz-Map: Occupational Exposure to Hazardous Agents, National Institutes of Health (2008). Both ionizing radiation and microwaves are listed under the chronic poison category as causes of occupational cataracts. See section titled: “Cataract, chemical or radiation induced.”

70. “Genetic Damage in Mobile Phone Users: Some Preliminary Findings,” Ghandi, G., Indian J Hum Genetics, 2005, 11:99-104.

71.”Beware--Using A Mobile Phone Can Ruin Your Sex Life,” Sunday Mirror, 04-16-2000.

72. “Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Fields: Male Infertility and Sex Ratio Offspring,” V. Baste et al, Department of Public Health and Primary Health Care, University of Bergen, Norway, Eur J Epidemiology, 04-16-2008.

73. “RF Radiation-induced Changes in the Prenatal Development of Mice.” Magras, IN, Xenos, TD, Bioelectromagnetics 18 (6); 455-461, 1997.

74. “Effects of Microwave Contraception on Human Serum Testosterone and Luteinizing Hormone,” Hu et al, Shengzhi Yu Biyun, May 1985; 5 (2) 32-4.

75. “Mobile Telephony Radiation Effects On Living Organisms,” D. Panagopoulos and L.Margaritis, Department of Cell Biology, University of Athens. This report is Chapter three in Mobile Telephones: Networks, Applications, and Performance, Nova Science Publishers, 2008. See also the study’s abstract: “Cell Death Induced by GSM 900-MHz and DCS 1800-MHz Mobile Telephony Radiation,” 2006.

76. “Summary of the ECOLOG Study for T-Mobile, 2000,” www.hese-project.org. In 2000, upon commission by T-Mobile, the independent Ecolog Institute in Germany gathered 220 peer-reviewed and published papers documenting cancer-initiating and cancer-promoting effects of high frequency electromagnetic fields used by mobile telephone technology.

77. “Scientists Add Kidney Damage to the List of Mobile Phone Ills,” S. Harris, Daily Mail, UK, 12-13-1999.

78. “Fetal and Neonatal Responses Following Maternal Exposure to Mobile Phones,” A. Rezk, et al, Saudi Med J, Feb;29 (2): 218-23, (2008).

79. “Teenagers; A Generation Unplugged: A National Survey by CTIA: The Wireless Association and Harris Interactive,” www.ctia.org.

Bookmark and Share