-
Why does wireless radiation affect us and are we being protected? Part 1
If there’s one thing we know about wireless (radiofrequency) radiation, i...
-
Do current standards for wireless radiation adequately protect our families?
Not according to Uloma Igara Uche and Olga Naidenko, writing in the J...
-
Health, science and wireless radiation
One of the most respected figures in the world of research on radiofrequency (wireless) radiation has publi...
-
Aussie No-effects team finds no effects from 5G
There’s nothing to worry about from the high-frequency radiation used by 5G. Or is there?
Two ...
-
Swiss experts say that electromagnetic fields, at levels that comply with international standards, increase oxidative stress which is implicated...
-
The Australian standard and Guidelines of the International Commission on Nonionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP) are based on a number of premis...
-
The Advisors to the International EMF Scientist Appeal, representing 248 scientists from 42 nations, have resubmitted The Appeal (below) to the Uni...
-
There is abundant evidence that wireless radiation produces nonthermal effects on the body, yet international standards only recognise its thermal effects. This leaves not only individuals unprotected, but also the companies that manufacture wireless products, says Professor Martin Pall, writing in the September issue of the International Journal of Innovative Research in Engineering and Management.
-
Lyn McLean speaks with Frank Clegg, CEO of Canadians 4 Safe Technology You were President of Microsoft Canada and now you’re CEO of an organisation that promotes the risks of wireless radiation. What caused you to become concerned about this radiation? "I was approached by three different families from our local community who had cell towers right near their homes.
-
A new report by the BioInitiative Working Group finds increased evidence of risk from electrical and wireless sources. The 2012 Report by the BioInitiative Working Group has concluded that evidence of risk from EMR-emitting technologies justifies new standards that greatly reduce public exposure. ‘There is now much more evidence of risks to health affecting billions of people world-wide. The status quo is not acceptable in light of the evidence for harm,’ said Dr David Carpenter
-
Existing standards considerably underestimate the amount of radiation absorbed by a child’s head, say researchers from the US. Radiation absorption is assessed using a model of a head that is based on the head size of the top 10% of US military personnel and is usually referred to as ‘SAM’. This is not an appropriate model to assess radiation absorption of the population, say Om Gandhi and team, because smaller heads absorb more radiation.
-
A considerable lowering of guidelines and exposure to wireless microwave radiation, to a biologically-based precautionary level, with a peak-level maximum of 0.6 V/m as recommended by the BioInitiative report. Information and official warnings for the general public, regarding the health risks from wireless microwave radiation – with emphasis on increased risks for pregnant women and children.
Use left/right arrows to navigate the slideshow or swipe left/right if using a mobile device
