Saturday, April 26, 2014

Experimental evidence for involvement of nitric oxide in low frequency magnetic field induced obsessive compulsive disorder-like behavior.

 2014 Apr 26. pii: S0091-3057(14)00115-4. doi: 10.1016/j.pbb.2014.04.007. [Epub ahead of print]

Experimental evidence for involvement of nitric oxide in low frequency magnetic field induced obsessive compulsive disorder-like behavior.


It is well documented that extremely low frequency magnetic field (ELF MF) produced effects on the function of nervous system in humans and laboratory animals. Dopaminergic and serotonergic pathways have been implicated in obsessive compulsive disorder (OCD). Recently involvement of nitric oxide (NO) in OCD-like behavior is suggested. Hence, the present study was carried out to understand the involvement of dopamine, serotonin and NO in ELF MF induced OCD-like behavior. Swiss albino mice were exposed to ELF MF (50Hz, 10G) for 8h/day for 7, 30, 60, 90 and 120days by subjecting them to Helmholtz coils. OCD-like behavior was assessed in terms of marble burying behavior (MBB) test. Results revealed that ELF MF induced time dependant MBB, on 7th, 30th, 60th, 90th, and 120th exposure day. Further, levels of dopamine, serotonin and NO after 120days of ELF MF exposure were determined in regions of the brain. The neurohumoral studies revealed that exposure to ELF MF increased NO levels in cortex, hippocampus and hypothalamus, and levels of dopamine and serotonin remain unaffected. As OCD-like behavior after ELF MF exposure was associated with higher levels of NO with no significant change in serotonin and dopamine, the effect of such exposure was studied in groups concurrently treated with NO modulators, NO precursor, L-ARG (400mg/kg) or NOS inhibitor, L-NAME (15.0mg/kg) or 7-NI (10.0mg/kg). These treatments revealed that NO precursor exacerbated and NOS inhibitors attenuated ELF MF induced OCD-like behavior with corresponding changes in the levels of NO.
Copyright © 2014. Published by Elsevier Inc.


Dopamine, Extremely low frequency magnetic field, Marble burying behavior, Nitric oxide, Obsessive compulsive disorder, Serotonin

Friday, April 25, 2014

Wi-Fi hotspot grab coming to a city near you

Wi-Fi hotspot grab coming to a city near you

With dozens of cities proposed for gigabit fiber, Google, AT&T and others are expected to rush to tack on Wi-Fi to offer ads and services

April 25, 2014 01:12 PM ET

Computerworld - A mega-battle is brewing between corporate giants such as AT&T, Google and Time Warner Cable to build Wi-Fi hotspots in U.S. cities connected to massive gigabit fiber-optic or fast networks of cable providers.
In the coming years, Google -- and likely its competitors-- will pump free or low-cost Internet service to city centers and shopping areas, granting shoppers and other users access to a wide array of the services and advertising that are central to Google's revenue model.
Both AT&T and Google recently announced proposals to provide gigabit fiber services to dozens of U.S. cities, and Wi-Fi connected to the fast fiber is expected to be a part of that offering.
Over the past several years, Time Warner has been busy provisioning its modern cable network to add 11,000 Wi-Fi hotspots for its Internet customers to use for mobile devices in various Kansas City area locales, including stores, parks, walking paths and nightlife spots like the popular downtown eight-block Power & Light District. During the last two years, the Google Fiber network has steadily mushroomed to 6,000 fiber-optic miles throughout the KC metro area, but it hasn't been connected so far to Wi-Fi.
Read more

Wednesday, April 23, 2014

Canadian Conflict-of-Interest Follies: Anything Goes Except Non-Disclosure

Canadian Conflict-of-Interest Follies:Anything Goes Except Non-Disclosure

Featuring Dan Krewski, the Royal Society and Health Canada

April 23, 2014
Last updated 
April 24, 2014

In 2011, Health Canada found itself in a tough spot. The public was becoming more and more uneasy over exposure to RF radiation from the proliferating number of cell phones, cell towers and Wi-Fi routers. After holding hearings in the spring and fall of 2010, Parliament asked the health agency to investigate whether its exposure limits —the national RF standard known asSafety Code 6 (SC6)— were too lenient and needed strengthening. Soon afterwards, the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) added urgency to the assignment by classifying RF radiation as a possible human cancer agent, or, in the vernacular, a 2B carcinogen.
Health Canada’s dilemma was that it had no interest in tightening SC6. Yet IARC’s 2B designation could not be easily ignored, especially after France and Belgium, among other European countries, had responded by adopting precautionary policies. Last year, for instance, Belgium banned the sale of cell phones to children. How would Health Canada find a way to stick with the status quo?
The answer was to commission a review of SC6 by the Royal Society of Canada (RSC) —many call it the equivalent of the U.S. National Academy of Sciences— and to have a trusted colleague, Daniel Krewski of the University of Ottawa chair the panel. This was an encore performance for the RSC and for Krewski. Fifteen years earlier, Health Canada had asked the Society to evaluate a previous revision of SC6. Krewski had chaired that first RF panel which issued its report in 1999.1 The RSC was now asking Krewski to do it again.
Read more

Washington’s revolving door: Cellular lobby and FCC have traded leaders

Washington’s revolving door: Cellular lobby and FCC have traded leaders

FCC is led by a former lobbyist; the lobbyists are led by former FCC leaders.

Aurich Lawson

Washington, DC, has long had a revolving door through which government officials exit to become lobbyists, and lobbyists enter to become government officials.
Regulators being led by former executives from the industries they're supposed to regulate and industry groups being led by their former regulators sounds like it should be the stuff of fiction. But the Federal Communications Commission has once again proven that this phenomenon is quite real.
The CTIA Wireless Association today announced that Meredith Attwell Baker—a former FCC Commissioner and former Comcast employee—will become its president and CEO on June 2, replacing Steve Largent, a former member of Congress (and former NFL player).
Largent himself became the cellular lobby's leader when he replaced Tom Wheeler—who is now the chairman of the FCC. Wheeler is also the former president and CEO of the NCTA (National Cable & Telecommunications Association), which… wait for it… is now led by former FCC Chairman Michael Powell.
To sum up, the top cable and wireless lobby groups in the US are led by a former FCC chairman and former FCC commissioner, while the FCC itself is led by a man who formerly led both the cable and wireless lobby groups.
There's more. Baker, the new CTIA CEO, was also an employee of the CTIA before her stint as an FCC commissioner. She was a director of congressional affairs at CTIA from 1998 to 2000, and she started working for the government in 2004 when she joined the Department of Commerce. She was appointed to the FCC in 2009, voted in favor of Comcast's purchase of NBCUniversal in January 2011, and then left the government to become senior vice president of government affairs for Comcast-NBCUniversal in May 2011.
"Meredith is a perfect fit to lead CTIA going forward given her vast experience with the telecommunications industry," Dan Mead, chairman of CTIA and CEO of Verizon Wireless, said in today's announcement. "We're excited to welcome her back to the association."
Baker faces restrictions on lobbying FCC commissioners during the remainder of the Obama administration but can still lobby members of Congress.
Wheeler, who became chairman last year, was president and CEO of the CTIA from 1992 to 2004 and president and CEO of the NCTA from 1979 to 1984. Along the way, he also worked as a venture capitalist; started companies that offer cable, wireless, and video communications services; and wrote a book on President Lincoln's use of the telegraph during the Civil War.
The revolving door is open to both Democrats and Republicans. While Baker and Powell are Republicans, Wheeler is a Democrat.

A lone wolf

Although it seems like the FCC's revolving door leads only to industry lobbyist groups, there are other paths. Michael Copps, an FCC commissioner from the Democratic Party between 2001 to 2011, was the only member to vote against the Comcast/NBC Universal merger, and he is now a self-described public interest advocate who leads the Media and Democracy Reform Initiative at Common Cause.
While there can be good people who go through the revolving door, it's bound to lead to worse policy decisions, Copps told Ars today.
"When people come and go in the industry, they have all these contacts and better access than other people have and more opportunity for their voices to be heard and their influence to be deployed," he said. "I think that only enhances the power of the special interest at the expense of the public interest."
The revolving door "isn't peculiar to the Federal Communications Commission. It's kind of everywhere you look. Probably it's one reason why a lot of people have diminished trust or diminished faith in government."
Comcast has spent millions of dollars lobbying, and its political action committee gave money to every member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, which recently examined its proposed purchase of Time Warner Cable. Copps is worried about the impact acquisitions are having on news reporting.
Media consolidation is "wreaking havoc on our news and information infrastructure, on our communications ecosystem, and I don't think there is a greater issue facing the country right now," Copps said. "I don't think there's any possibility of reform and change until you have a media that actually tells what's going on in the country, a decentralized local media, a media that has real investigative reporting resources, and I think you don't have democracy without media democracy."
Among current FCC commissioners, Republican Ajit Pai previously served as associate general counsel for Verizon and held numerous government positions before becoming a commissioner in 2012. Commissioner Michael O'Reilly, in office since 2013, was previously a policy advisor in the Office of the Senate Republican Whip.
Democrat Mignon Clyburn, in office since 2009, was previously a newspaper publisher and then chairwoman of South Carolina's Public Service Commission. Democrat Jessica Rosenworcel, appointed in 2012, previously practiced communications law and held positions with the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation. Rosenworcel was also a legal advisor to Copps when he was on the commission.

Tuesday, April 22, 2014

Wireless Revolution: Research/Policy Implications

Wireless Revolution: Research/Policy Implications

Joel M. Moskowitz PhD, Director and Principal Investigator at the Center for Family and Community Health at UC Berkeley's School of Public Health 

Resources: Electromagnetic Radiation Safety; Resources on wireless technologies, resources on health politics, and resources on environmental health - 

See more at:

Doctor, in Talk Sponsored by Telecommunications Industry, Makes Ridiculous Claim of No Link Between Mobile Phone Radiation and Cancer

No link between mobile phone radiation and cancer, says Padma awardee doctor

Express News Service | New Delhi | April 22, 2014 1:11 am
award-mainPulitzer award winning India-born oncologist Dr Siddhartha Mukherjee addresses a press conference in the capital on Monday. (Tashi Tobgyal )


Calls for revision of World Health Organization’s list of carcinogens, says not enough data to establish the link.
India-born oncologist Dr Siddhartha Mukherjee on Monday urged World Health Organization to remove cellphone radiation from the list of carcinogens on the ground that the “preponderance of evidence suggests there is no link” between radiation from mobile phones and cancer. In an event sponsored by COAI (formerly known as Cellphone Operators Association of India), India International Centre and Open Health Systems Laboratory,  he delivered a lecture making a strong case for the revision.
Dr Mukherjee, author of the Pulitzer winning book The Emperor of All Maladies: A Biography of Cancer that was published in 2010, is currently in India to accept the Padmashree award. He is an assistant professor of medicine at Columbia University and a staff physician at Columbia University Medical Center in New York City.
In a recent article in The New York Times he had argued that the drastic increase in cellphone usage does not mirror incidence of brain cancer, neither is the radiation emitted by cellphones of the nature that can directly damage DNA. He also termed as “loose” WHO’s definition of “possible carcinogens”, some of which “defies logic” in their proclivity to be more conservative.
However, he says, “The last word has not been said on the matter of cellphone radiation and cancer. The interphone trials (that sought to examine the link) have a serious recall bias — people did not always correctly recall the extent of their cellphone usage. There is a need to examine how radiation of that wavelength can be carcinogenic. I would ask WHO to downgrade cellphone radiation in the list of carcinogens, which includes coffee. But I am willing to revise this assessment if there is additional data available.”
But he says there is not enough data to make a similar claim about radiation emitted by cellphone towers.
Talking about the classification of formaldehyde as a carcinogen by the National Toxicology Programme of the United States, he stressed that the important thing in medicine and therefore in deciding carcinogenicity is dosage. He said while formaldehyde may not be carcinogenic for people with less exposure, it would definitely be for workers in industries where they are routinely exposed to it.
He also spoke about his dissatisfaction with the tendency to attribute to “stress” any unexplained carcinogenic effects. “There is a need to qualify stress like say immunological stress does cause cancer but anger does not. For years patients of dyspepsia were told they are susceptible to cancer because of stress but now it is known that H Pylori is the organism responsible,” he said.
Asked whether taxes are a good way to reduce tobacco usage — one of the most certainly known carcinogens — he said taxes are only marginally effective, it is behavioral interventions that make the most difference.

Monday, April 21, 2014

Ukrainian Scientists Find Cell Phone Radiation Leads to Oxidation of Cells

Ukrainian Scientists Find Cell Phone Radiation Leads to Oxidation of Cells

NASA: EMF Interactions with the human body

NASA: EMF Interactions with the human body

by Paris08, Tuesday, December 06, 2011, 11:58 (886 days ago)
Source of Information:
Jeremy K. Raines, PhD,
April 1981

Report Prepared for:
National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA)
Goddard Space Flight Center
Greenbelt, Maryland 20771

EMF Interactions with the human body: observed effects and theories
Table 11: Subjective Effects on Persons Working in RF Electromagnetic Fields:
Headaches, Eyestrain; Fatigue; Dizziness; Disturbed sleep at night; Sleepiness in daytime; Moodiness; Irritability; Unsociability; Hypochondriac reactions; Feelings of fear; Nervous tension; Mental depression; Memory impairment; Pulling sensation in the scalp and brow; Loss of hair; Pain in muscles and heart region; Breathing difficulties; Increased perspiration of extremities; Difficulty with sex life. …
Table 12: Clinical Manifestations of Chronic Occupational Exposure of 525 Workers to Electromagnetic Radiation at Microwave Frequencies:

Symptomatology: Bradycardia; Disruption of the endocrine-humoral process; Hypertension; Intensification of the activity of thyroid gland; Exhausting influences on the central nervous system; Decrease in sensitivity to smell; Increase in histamine content of the blood.

Subjective Complaints: Increased fatigability; Periodic or constant headaches; Extreme irritability; Sleepiness during work.

Table 18: contains some especially unusual entries. First, there is a report by Eckert of the most extreme adverse effect, death (by sudden infant death syndrome). Second, there is a report from the United States by Bise concerningneurasthenic effects previously reported exclusively from Eastern Europe. Also, an Italian report by Albert concerns neurasthenic effects. Third, an extreme adverse effect, promotion of cancer, is reported from Australia by Holt. …

Figures 11 and 12, due to Konig, are unusual because they result from controlled experiments. They show that 3 Hz electric fields increase reaction time and galvanic skin response. Similarly, Figure 13, due to Wever, results from controlled experiments. They show that removal of the earth’s natural electric field and/or the application of a manmade field can disrupt circadian rhythm. …

… Table 22 concerns an especially curious effect, microwave hearing. Evidently, pulsed microwaves produce click like audio sensations. …

From all of the tables and figures in this section, it is seen that EMF may cause death in at least two ways, ventricular fibrillation and sudden infant death syndrome. Both of these occur at power line frequencies; however, one technical newsletter (Bioelectromagnetic Society Newsletter, December, 1980) reported one fatality associated with much higher frequencies. Death followed accelerated aging, and a New York State court was convinced that protracted exposure to microwaves was the cause.

It is also seen from the tables and figures that electromagnetic fields may promote cancerHolt (Table 18)reported the stimulation of human cancers at VHF (30-300 MHz) frequencies and exposure levels less than 10 mW/cm2 (milliwatts per square centimeter). Wertheimer and Leeper (Table 19) performed a formal epidemiological study relating childhood cancer to fields at 60 Hz. …

… With respect to curious effects, at least two have been included in this section, microwave hearing and visual effects. The former has already been discussed in connection with Table 22. Visual effects include the distortion of threshold for various colors (Table 15) and magnetophosphenes (Table 18). The latter effect is the perception of light flashes in response to a magnetic field. 

… EMF can interact with proteins, possibly disturbing them as described above, over a wide range of frequencies. …Proteins figure predominantly in at least one theory of cancer, advanced by Nobel laureate Albert Szent-Gyorgyi, which is currently being researched. According to this theory, proteins conduct electrons out of the cell interior. Oxygen molecules at the cell exterior accept the electrons and carry them away. These free electrons are products of some chemical process inside the cell that inhibits reproduction. If the electrons are not conducted away, then the process stops, and the cell divides at an uncontrolled rate. Eventually, there are enough cells to form a tumor, which characteristically has a poor circulatory system. So, little or no oxygen-carrying blood reaches the cells. The continued lack of oxygen exacerbates the situation, and reproduction continues unchecked. …

Full NASA CR 166661 Report:

‘Letter to the Editor’ of the Bioelectromagnetics journal: A travesty of science

‘Letter to the Editor’ of the Bioelectromagnetics journal: A travesty of science

Bioelectromagnetics, a peer-review journal of the Bioelectromagnetics Society and the European Bioelectromagnetics Association has just published a ‘Letter to the Editor‘:
Wiedemann PM, Boerner FU, Repacholi MH. Do people understand IARC’s 2B categorization of RF fields from cell phones? Bioelectromagnetics. 2014 Apr 15. doi: 10.1002/bem.21851
This publication is the clear attempt to discredit the work of IARC’s invited experts who, as members of the Working Group, classified in May 2011 cell phone radiation as a possible human carcinogen.
This is not any new situation. Classification of the cell phone radiation as a possible human carcinogen was criticized, right from the start, by ICNIRP and by the industry. Immediately after the classification was made public, ICNIRP’s epidemiologists published contra-opinion saying that the IARC classification is not supported by the epidemiological evidence. The industry had its share of dismissive opinions in attempt to neutralize impact of the classification on the future health policies:
Michael Milligan, Secretary General of the Mobile Manufacturers Forum (MMF) said:After reviewing the available scientific evidence, it is significant that IARC has concluded that RF electromagnetic fields are not a definite nor a probable human carcinogen. Rather, IARC has only concluded that it may still be possible that RF fields are carcinogenic and has identified areas for further research”.
Jack Rowley, GSMA Director for Research and Sustainability said: “The IARC classification suggests that a hazard is possible but not likely. Put simply, this comprehensive scientific review identified some suggestive evidence in the human studies but no consistent support from animal and cell studies.”
Industry, instead of recognizing that there are indications of possible harmful effects and that more research funding is needed to resolve the incomplete science, it engaged in a game to dismiss the IARC classification. One can wonder on what science is based statement from GSMA that the hazard is “not likely“? There is no such science to show that the hazard is unlikely…
The new publication of the ‘Letter to the Editor’ in Bioelectromagnetics is puzzling.
Firstly, what kind of publication it really is? Is it ‘Letter to the Editor’ or is it ‘research paper’? It looks like combination of both causing that, in reality, it is neither of them. It is not really ‘research paper’, although some “research data” seem to be included.  It is also too long to be sensu stricto ‘Letter to the Editor’ and, therefore, it is a curiosity, seemingly published only thanks to some exception approval by Editor-in-Chief of the journal.
As ‘research paper’ it is flawed from the very beginning.
The question asked from “study subjects” was:
The WHO/International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) has classified radiofrequency electromagnetic fields as possibly carcinogenic to humans (Group 2B), based on an increased risk for glioma, a malignant type of brain cancer associated with wireless phone use. The IARC [2011] did not quantitate the risk; however, one study of past cell phone use (up to the year 2004), showed a 40% increased risk for gliomas in the highest category of heavy users (using their phones for 30 min per day over a 10-year period).”
Why in this question was mentioned only Interphone result when the IARC classification was based on Interphone and Hardell data? What was the reason or purpose of omitting Hardell?
However, this is not the worst problem with this ‘Letter to the Editor’. The worst problem is how the study subjects were gathered. The study subjects were gathered as in any on-line edition of newspaper questionnaire. In on-line newspapers are often asked questions and readers provide answers. The newspaper has no any control over who is answering. Newspaper just counts votes for and against. While it might be entertaining way to engage readers of the daily newspapers, this has nothing to do with scientific experiment. But this is the basis of “data” of this ‘Letter to the Editor’:
Information about this on-going survey and the opportunity to participate was made available to all 27,000 students of the University of Innsbruck in Austria. A total of 2,013 students with a mean age of 24.5 years participated, with 66% of the respondents being female and 34% male.”

Sunday, April 20, 2014

Scientists Speak Out

Scientists Speak Out


Media Coverage

Royal Society Review Scientists Break Their Silence

On April 1st, 2014 the Royal Society of Canada submitted its Review of Safety Code 6: Health Canada's Safety Limits for Exposure to Radiofrequency Fields. Despite selecting highly conflicted academics to its review panel, and having to replace three of them after a conflict of interest was exposed in the Canadian Medical Association Journal, the panel went ahead with its report. Predictably it was a rubber stamp that Canada's radiation safety limits should not be changed.
Despite Geoffrey Flynn, Secretary of Expert Panels confirming in writing that the conflicts present would be disclosed with the review, they were not.
“With respect to the points of view and potential conflicts of interest of the panel members, these are largely known to us, were carefully reviewed at the first meeting of the panel, and will be published with the panel report.” (Click here to read full letter)
Now two of the Report's official peer reviewers have stepped forward to say something is amiss. It has been revealed that the Royal Society concluded that its "survey of the evidence" supports the notion that wireless radiation is safe, only because the panel did not consider the science that shows it is not.
The two reviewers give us a rare inside look at the true controversy behind the Royal Society's "expert" review panel. Definitive evidence that cell towers, cell phones, smart meters, Wi-Fi and cordless phones can cause harm to humans has been swept aside at the highest level of scientific oversight in Canada.
The two scientists breaking their silence are eminent scholars in the fields of human cellular biology, and the environmental causes of Cancer in our society.


Dr. Anthony B. Miller, MD
University of Toronto.

Official peer reviewer for Royal Society of Canada's Expert Panel to review Safety Code 6.
"..this is a conflicted panel, with insufficient expertise in Epidemiology – it is unfortunate that the Royal Society failed to amend the membership of the panel as requested by some of us. This is a report to the Royal Society of Canada, not a report of the Royal Society..."

(click for full analysis)


Dr. Martin Blank PhD.
Columbia University.

Official peer reviewer for Royal Society of Canada's Expert Panel to review Safety Code 6.
"..despite its length and seeming breadth of coverage, the report contains deficiencies which lead to questions about its conclusions."

(click for full analysis)

Canada Post Recognises the need to accommodate people with EHS

Canada Post Recognises the need to accommodate people with EHS

Can cell phone radiation affect my fertility?

Can Cell Phone Radiation Affect My Fertility?

Mehmet Oz, MDCardiologyanswered
If you drive around with your cell phone in your lap, could it have an effect on your fertility?

Watch the video to learn whether cell phone radiation can affect your fertility, from Dr. Oz.



Video published by Russia Today