Click to edit Master text styles
Second level
Third level
Fourth level
Fifth level
‹date/time›
‹footer›
‹#›
------=_NextPart_01C9DAB5.45D34820
Content-Location: file:///C:/EA37C9C5/ABCsCELLPHONESSAMPLE_files/master30.xml
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/xml; charset="utf-8"
![](3D"slide0024_image002.jpg")
And Other Hazards Of The Wireless Age&=
#13;
By William Thomas
ABC’s OF=
CELL PHONES
Cell Phone jam by William Thomas – Jerry Phi=
lips
on the cell phone industry today :33
Why Am I Saying This?
•After writing a
half-dozen books, e-books and special reports
•concerning cell =
phone
health hazards, and discussing this
•subject on radio=
shows
attracting millions of concerned
•listeners, I am =
no
longer blowing the whistle on this
•ubiquitous
technology.
•
•I am hitting the=
air
raid siren.
•
•Why? Because a m=
ajor
review of the latest scientific findings
•has pushed me cl=
ose to
panic.
•This is large, s=
ince
after two hurricanes at sea aboard a small
•boat, and a stint as an
environmental emergency responder
•in oil-shrouded
Kuwait, I do not frighten easily. But when it
•comes to wireles=
s,
I’m making an exception.
•It’s not w=
hat
you think. It’s not the “Big C”. Or even the
=
•possibility – many =
experts
say certainty – of a worldwide
•cull from
wireless-induced brain tumors 10 or 15 years
•from now that=
217;s
making this Paul Revere saddle his pony.
•
•No, what drives =
my
outrage and concern is the conclusively
•proven, 100% cli=
nical
certainty that brain damage begins the
•moment you plug =
in a
portable phone cradle, wireless
•computer router,=
or
wireless headset.
•
•Or bring a cell =
phone
to your grinning skull. 2.
•
•
![](3D"slide0002_image004.jpg")
![](3D"slide0002_image006.jpg")
No Worries?
•<=
/span>“There are more than 15,000 scientific studi=
es
reporting the cell phone health hazards. At least 66 epidemiological studies show that electromagnetic radiation increa=
ses
brain tumors in human populations.” [earthpulse.com]
•<=
/span>“11,000 Scandinavian cell phone users were s=
tudied
and they showed significant neurological effects in a dose <=
span
style=3D'position:absolute;top:24.25%;left:9.73%;width:98.5%;height:2.75%'=
>response manner… There is also a higher inci=
dence
of cardiac problems… The neurological effects are noticed within minutes of using a cell phone.” -Dr. Neil Cherry, biophysicist at Lincoln Universit=
y in
Christ Church, New Zealand
•
•<=
/span>“Physical testing to verify compliance is
relatively rare.” -FCC Radio
Frequency Safety
•
•“FCC officials are bribed by the industry wi=
th
such perks as expensive trips to Las Vegas.” [capitolhillblue.com May 22/03]
=
•“In the committee (that sets the standards),=
one
co-chair is from Motorola and the other is from the Navy, the military-industrial establishment.” <=
span
style=3D'font-size:25%'>-Dr. Om Gandhi [Uncensored (NZ) Nov 9/06]
•
•<=
/span>Completely ignored by FCC, IEEE, Code 6 and SAR
“safety” standards are the DNA-altering modulated carrier waves superimposed on broadcast frequencies to car=
ry
voice, images and text information. “Modulation is a <=
span
style=3D'position:absolute;top:55.75%;left:9.73%;width:97.19%;height:2.75%=
'>fundamental factor that should be taken into accou=
nt in
new public safety standards; at present it is not even a contributing factor.” [BioInitiative Report]
•"The FCC’s current exposure guidelines&=
#8230;
are thermally based, and do not apply to chronic, non-thermal exposure situations… Therefore, the generalization th=
at the
guidelines protect human beings from harm by any or all mechanisms is not justified." - Norbert Hankin, EPA Radiation Protection Division
•<=
/span>“Studies show there has been a 40%
across-the-board increase in the number of brain tumors in the past 20 years.” -Australia's
Senator Lyn Allison, after brain tumors became the leading cause of death =
in
children under 15. [Observer Mar14/99]
•
•<=
/span>“Perhaps putting a mobile phone repeatedly t=
o your
head is something that might not be good in the long term.”
• -Professor Leif Salford, lon=
gtime
cell phone researcher into impacts on brain through the blood-brain barrier
[BBC Feb 5/03]
•
•13.
Fetal Folly
•<=
/span>“The mother’s pelvic structure promote=
s deep
RF (Radio Frequency)
radiation penetration and that radiation
can be absorbed within the developing embryo or fetus.” [CSIRO June/94]
•<=
/span>When baby’s brain cells are killed by radiat=
ion
from cell phones, port=
able
phones, wireless routers or computers,
“the resulting neural deficit may not be restored.” [CSIRO June/94]
•
•<=
/span>All fetuses “showed growth retardation”=
; from
wireless exposure. [CSIRO June/=
94]
•
•<=
/span>“No one yet knows to what extent our devasta=
ting =
rates of childhood diabetes, allergy and learning =
impairment may be rooted in over-use of fetal monitoring by poorly trained technicians.” [Conflicts of =
Interest: Understanding the Safety Issue Around
Prenatal Ultrasound; opednews.com
Dec 10/08]
•
•<=
/span>“A number of studies show a possible correla=
tion between prenatal ultrasound exposure and dyslexia,=
delayed speech development, reduced birth weight, =
as well as many cognitive and developmental problems, ranging from learning difficulties to autism and epilepsy.” [Telegraph D=
ec15/01;
New Scientist Dec 10/01] =
•
•<=
/span>Baby likes mother’s soothing 60 decibel voic=
e. Ultrasound waves produce screeching 100 decibel intrauterine noise and may last up to an hour. [New Scientist
Dec 4/01; vaclib.org June 2/05; Safety of Diagnostic Ultrasound]
•23.
![](3D"slide0015_image008.jpg")
![](3D"slide0015_image010.jpg")
![](3D"slide0015_image012.jpg")