Electromagnetic Sense Ireland

30th November 2015.  University of Melbourne, Australia. Dean’s Lecture – Professor Devra Davis

“Dr. Devra Davis gave an extraordinary talk at Monash University in Melbourne Australia. It is simply an amazing exposé about the effects of cell phone radiation. If you think there are no concerns about cell phone and the myriad other wireless transmitting devices (WTDs), after watching this I promise you, you will have a very different view afterwards.” Lloyd Morgan

“This is well worth watching – lots of well-presented up-to-date information. On 30th November 2015, the Dean’s Lecture at the University of Melbourne was given by Professor Devra Davis based around the question “What are the health effects of mobile phones and wireless radiation?”. Epidemiologist and electromagnetic radiation health-effects expert, Dr Davis, outlines the evolution of the mobile phone and smartphone and provides a background to the current 19 year old radiation safety standards (SAR), policy developments and international legislation.

New global studies on the health consequences of mobile/wireless radiation are presented, including those regarding children’s exposure and risks.” Powerwatch

December 2015

In the UK, 15 year old Jennifer Fry sadly took her life. Jennifer’s parents had lobbied her school and their MP David Cameron for two years calling them to remove wifi in her school, where she had to alienate herself from classes and school friends where wireless radiation was causing her pain and aggravating her symptoms.

She is not the first person suffering with ES to commit suicide.

We extend our heartfelt condolences to Jenny’s family.

http://www.naturalhealth365.com/wifi-electromagnetic-schoolgirl-1669.html

Please  watch the enclosed presentation via the video link containing a presentation from Dr Erica Mallery-Blythe which is featured within the following news article.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/12025988/Mother-claims-wifi-allergy-killed-her-daughter-and-accuses-school-of-failing-to-safeguard-children.html?fb_ref=Default

http://www.cotswoldjournal.co.uk/news/14102769.

For presentations in May to NZ Parliament and June 2000 in Italy, Austria, Ireland and at the European Parliament in Brussels.

Evidence that Electromagnetic Radiation is Genotoxic: The implications for the epidemiology of cancer and cardiac, neurological and reproductive effects

Dr Neil Cherry

Lincoln University, New Zealand

June 2000

“Our frame of reference determines what we look at and how we look. And as a consequence, this determines what we find.” Burke J, The Day the Universe Changed, 1985.

Introduction:

The way we perceive things determines how we make decisions. To move from picturing ourselves as physical beings to biological beings significantly changes our view of health and fitness. Too much exercise and oxygen free radicals really damage our cells. To move from biological to bioelectrical incorporates intelligence and emotion and leads to a radically fundamental change in our way of seeing things that it forms the basis of a new paradigm.

Principles of Approach:

This paper attempts to follow basic classical scientific principles to counter the dismissive and biased approach of industry and many government and international authorities, including the WHO and ICNIRP.

The principles found to be important are that biology reveals that brains, hearts and cells use electromagnetic signals, charged ions, voltage-gated ion channels, ion regulated gap junctions, all of which can be interfered with by external electromagnetic fields in subtle but vital ways in relation to health.

A primary physical principle of resonant absorption explains why external and internal signals that share the same part of the spectrum, resonantly exchange energy at levels well below the thermal threshold. This is also true for radio and TV receivers. It involves tuned circuits and resonant absorption.

Laboratory experiments provide evidence of effects. Replicated and/or extended studies provided confirmation and establish an effect. Multiple studies confirm and strengthen the cause and effect relationship.

In assessing genotoxicity, any evidence of genetic damage, cell death or neoplastic transformation is evidence of genotoxicity. The genetic material is fundamentally the double helix of the DNA molecule. During the cell cycle the helix unwinds and clones itself. They then fold themselves into the set of chromosomes that are so large that they can be seen in powerful microscopes. In the second half of the cell cycle the chromosomes clone themselves so that at mitosis, cell division, each cell has a full set of chromosomes. They then unfold themselves to form the DNA strands.

Any substance that damages DNA or chromosomes, or changes genetic activity, is genotoxic because it is acting on the same material, i.e. the DNA molecule. A genotoxic substance is mutagenic, carcinogenic and teratogenic.

Strength of evidence for public health has a classical hierarchy that has dose-response relationship at the top and biological mechanism at the bottom, Hill (1965). This is seen by considering Sir Austin Bradford Hill’s descriptions of his ‘view points’ from which the question of cause and effect is being considered. Of dose-response he says:

“The simple dose-response curve admits of a simple explanation and obviously puts the case in a clearer light”, i.e. cause and effect.

Sir Austin considers many other forms of evidence from which cause and effect can be decided in the absence of a dose-response. These include strength of association and consistency, although he points out that the lack of strength and apparent inconsistency, is not necessarily arguments against cause and effect. Of biological mechanism, or plausibility, he states:

“It will be helpful if the causation we suspect is biologically plausible. But this is a feature I am convinced we cannot demand. What is biologically plausible depends upon the biological knowledge of the day.”

Thus biological plausibility has a low status and dose-response has a very high status.

When epidemiological evidence is available it should be used to set public health standards, where possible, using the dose-response relationships. In the absence of these, the level of lowest observed effect, with a safety margin to allow for uncertainly, the vulnerable, the size of the population at risk, are appropriate.

Dose response relationships for epidemiological studies of cancer are likely to be linear because of the cumulative cell damage/repair/mistake mechanism. At very high levels approaching lethal levels the curve become asymptotic. At very low levels, around the optimum homeostatic levels, curves can become “U” shaped. Thus, with the great sensitivity of the brain the neurological effects at extremely low exposure levels might be curved.

EMR Spectrum Principle:

It is observed that both biological effects and epidemiological effects appear to be the same or very similar from ELF exposure and from RF/MW exposures, including calcium ion efflux, melatonin reduction, DNA strand breakage, chromosome aberrations, leukaemia, brain cancer, breast cancer, miscarriage and neurological effects.

A frequently used method for falsely dismissing evidence of effects is to consider effects in small frequency and intensity bands. In fact, biophysics shows that the dielectric constant decreases monotonically with carrier frequency across the EMR spectrum, Schwan (1985). Vignati and Giuliani (1997) show that for a unit field exposure, the induced current increases significantly as a function of frequency, Figure 1.

The EMR Spectrum Principle predicts that effects that are associated with ELF exposure are very probably found with low intensity RF/MW exposure.

Figure 1: Capacitive current density in a toroid of human muscle tissue of unitary radius, to a unitary magnetic induction, Vignati and Giuliani (1997).Bawin and Adey (1976) show that a 56 V/m ELF field induces a tissue gradient of 10^-7 V/cm, whereas a 56 V/m 147 MHz signal induces a tissue gradient of 10^-1 V/cm, a million times higher. This is a large factor but smaller than that given by Figure 1.

These biophysical observations show that the impacts of RF/MW fields are higher than those of ELF fields of the same external intensity. It also indicates that the impact rises with carrier frequency. All of the EMR genetic damage effects are shown to occur with ELF and RF/MW frequencies, including cell phone frequencies. As the high frequencies couple more strongly with tissue, the depth of penetration decreases.

While this paper is primarily about RF/MW exposures, confirmation of effects is given by studies involving mixed and ELF exposure.

READ FULL PAPER http://www.feb.se/EMFguru/EMF/genotoxic/Genotoxic-EMR-paper.htm

Reliable disease biomarkers characterizing and identifying electrohypersensitivity and multiple chemical sensitivity as two etiopathogenic aspects of a unique pathological disorder

Abstract

Much of the controversy over the causes of electro-hypersensitivity (EHS) and multiple chemical sensitivity (MCS) lies in the absence of both recognized clinical criteria and objective biomarkers for widely accepted diagnosis. Since 2009, we have prospectively investigated, clinically and biologically, 1216 consecutive EHS and/or MCS-self reporting cases, in an attempt to answer both questions.

We report here our preliminary data, based on 727 evaluable of 839 enrolled cases: 521 (71.6%) were diagnosed with EHS, 52 (7.2%) with MCS, and 154 (21.2%) with both EHS and MCS. Two out of three patients with EHS and/or MCS were female; mean age (years) was 47. As inflammation appears to be a key process resulting from electromagnetic field (EMF) and/or chemical effects on tissues, and histamine release is potentially a major mediator of inflammation, we systematically measured histamine in the blood of patients.

Near 40% had a increase in histaminemia (especially when both conditions were present), indicating a chronic inflammatory response can be detected in these patients. Oxidative stress is part of inflammation and is a key contributor to damage and response. Nitrotyrosin, a marker of both peroxynitrite (ONOO°-) production and opening of the blood-brain barrier (BBB), was increased in 28% the cases. Protein S100B, another marker of BBB opening was increased in 15%. Circulating autoantibodies against O-myelin were detected in 23%, indicating EHS and MCS may be associated with autoimmune response. Confirming animal experiments showing the increase of Hsp27 and/or Hsp70 chaperone proteins under the influence of EMF, we found increased Hsp27 and/or Hsp70 in 33% of the patients.

As most patients reported chronic insomnia and fatigue, we determined the 24 h urine 6-hydroxymelatonin sulfate (6-OHMS)/creatinin ratio and found it was decreased (<0.8) in all investigated cases.

Finally, considering the self-reported symptoms of EHS and MCS, we serially measured the brain blood flow (BBF) in the temporal lobes of each case with pulsed cerebral ultrasound computed tomosphygmography. Both disorders were associated with hypoperfusion in the capsulothalamic area, suggesting that the inflammatory process involve the limbic system and the thalamus.

Our data strongly suggest that EHS and MCS can be objectively characterized and routinely diagnosed by commercially available simple tests. Both disorders appear to involve inflammation-related hyper-histaminemia, oxidative stress, autoimmune response, capsulothalamic hypoperfusion and BBB opening, and a deficit in melatonin metabolic availability; suggesting a risk of chronic neurodegenerative disease. Finally the common co-occurrence of EHS and MCS strongly suggests a common pathological mechanism.

Read Original Source HERE

20 October 2015 RESET.ME by Deane Alban

Via EMFScientist.Org

Currently there are 7.3 billion people on the planet and 6. 9 billion mobile phone subscriptions — almost one phone for every person! Few of us can even imagine living without our electronic devices like smartphones and computers. But what is living in a sea of electronics doing to our brains? There’s evidence that our electronic devices may be hazardous to both our physical and mental health.

The most obvious concern is whether mobile phones might cause brain cancer. But this isn’t the only way our electronic gadgets might be affecting us. Let’s examine what the latest science says about the safety of our electronic devices and their effects on our brains.

When researching the hazards of cell phones or other electronics, you’ll come across the term electromagnetic fields (EMFs). Obvious sources of EMFs include power lines, mobile phones, and WiFi. But electromagnetic fields are created any time an electric current flows through a wire, meaning you are exposed to EMFs from seemingly innocuous appliances like your hairdryer, dimmer switches, and coffee makers.

One thing that sets our computers, iPads, mobile phones, and fitness trackers apart is that we use them so much of the time in close proximity to our brains and bodies. More than two-thirds of adults sleep with their mobile phone next to their head and alarmingly, this figure rises to 90 percent in the 18 to 29 year old age bracket.

Unsurprisingly, the number one fear of mobile phone usage  is brain cancer. The World Health Organization (WHO) classifies electromagnetic fields as a Group 2B carcinogen and recommends that consumers find ways to reduce their EMF exposure. By definition, a Group 2B carcinogen means it’s suspected of causing cancer. While that might not sound too serious, keep in mind that this carcinogenic group also includes lead, engine exhaust, DDT, and chloroform.

In a meta-analysis published in the International Journal of Oncology, Swedish researchers found significant associations between long-term cell phone use and brain tumor risk. Cell phone use is linked to both malignant and benign brain tumors after ten years of cell phone use.

But brain cancer isn’t the only concern. Other reported side effects of EMFs include headaches, dizziness, sleep disorders, benign tumors, dementia, and Alzheimer’s. Here are some of the known mechanisms by which EMFs affect the brain.

The blood-brain barrier is a group of specialized cells that acts as a filter to keep the brain safe from toxins, heavy metals, pathogens, drugs, and other foreign substances. Many neurological diseases are linked to a compromised blood-brain barrier, including meningitis, Alzheimer’s and multiple sclerosis. EMFs increase permeability of the brain-blood barrier, making it leaky and allowing things like mercury, aluminum, and viruses to more readily enter the brain.

Long-term EMF exposure leads to a chronically increased level of free radicals. Free radicals are unattached oxygen molecules that attack cells much in the same way that they cause metal to rust. The brain is highly susceptible to free radical damage because it’s a heavy oxygen user — using 20 percent of the body’s total. Free radicals cause brain cell damage and aging down to the level of your DNA.

Brain cells communicate with each other via chemicals known as neurotransmitters. Neurotransmitters regulate mood, sleep, motivation, ability to learn, addictions, and more. Long-term exposure to EMFs alters the expression of 143 proteins in the brain. EMFs cause significant disruption in levels of serotonin, dopamine, and norepinephrine causing adverse effects on mood, memory, learning, and stress.

Another way EMFs disrupt brain cell communication is by rupturing brain cell membranes. This causes them to leak calcium ions needed for communication between brain cells. Dr. Andrew Goldsworthy of the Imperial College of London believes that an increase in accidents among cell phone users has less to do with distraction than with delayed reactions caused by the flood of calcium ions into brain cells.

The Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) found that 50 minutes spent on a cell phone disrupts brain glucose metabolism. This is important since your brain uses glucose as its main source of energy. Some experts believe that Alzheimer’s disease may occur when areas of the brain can no longer utilize glucose to feed brain cells. These parts of the brain have become insulin resistant, leading some experts to consider Alzheimer’s type 3 diabetes. Living within 150 feet of high voltage power increases the risk of dementia by 24 percent.

Sleep is a critical pillar of good brain health. It’s during sleep that your brain consolidates memories, repairs itself, and clears itself of metabolic debris. Dozens of studies show that low-level EMF exposure disrupts your natural production of melatonin. Melatonin is most commonly known as a natural sleep hormone that regulates circadian rhythm, but it does more than that. It’s also a potent antioxidant, which has been found to aid in the prevention of Alzheimer’s, depression, cardiovascular diseases, insomnia, mood disorders, tinnitus, and various cancers.

EMF exposure affects the structure and function of the thyroid. EMFs elevate levels of thyroid stimulating hormone (TSH). High levels of TSH are directly linked to hypothyroidism. Common symptoms of hypothyroidism include memory loss, depression, brain fog, fatigue, sensitivity to cold, dry skin, constipation, weight gain, and muscle aches.

One of the most unexpected findings has been that seamstresses have a four-fold increased risk of developing Alzheimer’s. According to research done at the University of Southern California, “Seamstresses seem to be among the individuals with the highest occupational EMF exposure. They sit near motors of sewing machines for hours, and most industrial sewing machines are always on, and always produce magnetic fields.” This illustrates that it’s not only high-tech devices that emit substantial amounts of EMFs.

The Dangers Of Mobile Phones On Young Brains

In the United States, 46 percent of children between ages 8 and 12 use a mobile phone, and this is bad news for their developing brains. Dr. Ronald B. Herberman was the director of the University of Pittsburgh Cancer Institute. Before that he was a senior investigator at the National Cancer Institute. He testified in a Congressional hearing on Tumors and Cell Phone Use that EMF absorption rates are higher in a child’s brain than in an adult’s since their brain tissues are more absorbent, their skulls are thinner, and their relative size is smaller. A child’s brain may absorb twice as many EMFs as an adult brain. Electromagnetic radiation penetrates almost straight through the entire brain of a 5-year-old child.

Some common sense steps for reducing children’s exposure to EMFs include making their bedrooms electronic-free zones and not allowing kids to have their own mobile phone or wireless devices. If this sounds too difficult, keep in mind that Steve Jobs did not let his children have iPads! If he chose to limit his kids’ use of electronic devices, it’s something you may want to consider too.

Protect Yourself From EMFs

Mobile phone manufacturers will tell you their products are safe and, in fact, they must meet government guidelines set by the Federal Communications Commission in the United States. But not every one is convinced that enough is being done to protect consumers. In May 2015, a letter signed by 195 scientists from around the world called on the United Nations, the World Health Organization, and governments to develop stricter controls on devices that create EMFs. Collectively these scientists have published more than 2,000 peer-reviewed papers on the hazards of EMFs.

This letter, which can be found on EMFScientist.org, states that, “Numerous recent scientific publications have shown that EMF affects living organisms at levels well below most international and national guidelines. Effects include increased cancer risk, cellular stress, increase in harmful free radicals, genetic damages, structural and functional changes of the reproductive system, learning and memory deficits, neurological disorders, and negative impacts on general well-being in humans. Damage goes well beyond the human race, as there is growing evidence of harmful effects to both plant and animal life.” This letter goes on to accuse WHO of failing to impose sufficient guidelines to protect the general public, particularly children who are at greater risk.

You can’t trust the manufacturers of electronic devices or the government to keep you safe from EMFs. And, unfortunately, a lot of information on how to avoid EMF exposure is dispensed by people trying to sell you something that creates electromagnetic fields — and some of it is hype.

The Environmental Working Group, a non-profit organization, shares these common sense tips for using your cell phone safely: talk less and text more, use a headset or speaker when you do talk, and don’t carry your phone close to your body. Of course, don’t sleep with your phone next to you. Better yet, make your bedroom an electronics-free zone. Use your phone when your signal is strong — EMF exposure increases dramatically when signals are weak.

To find more ways to reduce EMF exposure, I highly recommend Ann Louise Gittleman’s book Zapped: Why Your Cell Phone Shouldn’t Be Your Alarm Clock And 1,268 Ways To Outsmart The Hazards Of Electronic Pollution. You’ll find plenty of common sense actionable steps to minimize EMFs throughout your home, without giving up the electronic devices you’ve come to rely on.

This article was brought to you by Deane Alban, a health information researcher, writer and teacher for over 25 years. For more helpful articles about improving your cognitive and mental health, visit BeBrainFit.comtoday.

MCPS Wi-Fi : Get the Facts and Decide for Yourself  – SAFE TECH FOR SCHOOLS

MORE ON WIFI IN SCHOOLS HERE

SCIENCE DIRECT – JOURNAL OF MICROSCOPY AND ULTRASTRUCTURE

Why Children Absorb More Microwave Radiation than Adults – The Consequences 

• L. Lloyd Morgan^{a, ,} ,
• Santosh Kesari^b,
• Devra Lee Davis^a

Highlights

– Children absorb more microwave radiation (MWR) than adults.
– MWR is a Class 2B (possible) carcinogen.
– The fetus is in greater danger than children from exposure to MWR.
– The legal exposure limits have remained unchanged for decades.
– Cellphone manuals warnings and the 20 cm rule for tablets/laptops   violate the “normal operating position” regulation.

Abstract

Computer simulation using MRI scans of children is the only possible way to determine the microwave radiation (MWR) absorbed in specific tissues in children. Children absorb more MWR than adults because their brain tissues are more absorbent, their skulls are thinner and their relative size is smaller. MWR from wireless devices has been declared a possible human carcinogen. Children are at greater risk than adults when exposed to any carcinogen. Because the average latency time between first exposure and diagnosis of a tumor can be decades, tumors induced in children may not be diagnosed until well into adulthood. The fetus is particularly vulnerable to MWR. MWR exposure can result in degeneration of the protective myelin sheath that surrounds brain neurons. MWR-emitting toys are being sold for use by young infants and toddlers. Digital dementia has been reported in school age children. A case study has shown when cellphones are placed in teenage girls’ bras multiple primary breast cancer develop beneath where the phones are placed. MWR exposure limits have remained unchanged for 19 years. All manufacturers of smartphones have warnings which describe the minimum distance at which phone must be kept away from users in order to not exceed the present legal limits for exposure to MWR. The exposure limit for laptop computers and tablets is set when devices are tested 20 cm away from the body. Belgium, France, India and other technologically sophisticated governments are passing laws and/or issuing warnings about children’s use of wireless devices.

READ FULL REPORT HERE

11 November 2015

From John Weigel

“…. an egregious mast – a public eyesore and danger – has been ordered to be removed by the national planning body of Ireland, An Bord Pleanala. It sets a country-wide precedent.

It is the result of a process. The timeline is:

Magda Havas wrote a letter outlining the dangers of microwaves

The letter was published in the Liffey Champion local newspaper

Olle Johansson was invited to address the community with members of the Irish Environmental Radiation Victims Network (IERVN)

An Irish politician, Catherine Murphy, attended Johansson’s lecture. She, along with others, opposed renewal of the planning permission for this very large mast.

Desmond Guinness had a mast removed from his lands

The town council gave it’s support.

The community was leafleted several times.

Joshua Hart, from California, of Stop Smart Meters addressed a group at Leixlip Castle

All county councillors and elected officials at the central government receive weekly Updates

Paediatric Consultant Dr. Hilllary Hoey (whose historic home is beneath the mast) came forth in opposition to the mast

The national planning authority requires removal (albeit within a two year time frame)

It is important for residents and village passers-through because the mast must go before the introduction of 5G technology.”

An Australian mum has been successful in preventing installation of WiFi at her child’s school and has worked with the school in drafting EMR precautionary measures by requesting compliance with the Disability Discrimination Act 1992 and Article 9: Accessibility from the Conventions on the Rights of the Disabled to accommodate her child’s functional impairment.

She stated “My child has a sensitivity to EMR, specifically WiFi and Bluetooth elicit symptoms.” The school environment was very good already, to change that by installing WiFi would exclude the child’s access to the school. The first step she took was to register a compliment/complaint/ feedback form on the Dept of Education’s website she said. “I requested help to find a WiFi- free high school and stated my child’s health complaints and symptoms. Rather than sending an email which could get “lost” in the system, I chose to use the education department’s processes for registering my complaint regarding accessibility to schools.” Around the same time, the child’s school initiated the WiFi installation discussion again. This quickly led to further conversations with the school and district education officers covering both accessibility issues.

The mother stated “I read extensively regarding disability in education policy, on human rights and Electro Hypersensitivity where functional impairment and disability were the focus. I was particularly interested in the perspectives of Prof Olle Johansson and Dr Isaac Jamieson, in relation to disability, human rights and the built environment.”

Referring to General Comment No. 2 (2014) Article 9: Accessibility and cross referencing with the Disability Discrimination Act and Disability Standards for Education it became apparent that to override the hardwired system with WiFi could put the school and decision makers in a position of discriminating against the child’s right to education on an equal basis with other students as they would be preventing accessibility to the school.

The mother said raising discrimination and liability issues ended the possibility of going to a public vote for WiFi in the school. Such an action would leave those voting in breach of the Disability Discrimination Act 1992 and Article 9 – Accessibility from the Conventions on the Rights of the Disabled and numerous other conventions cited below.

“The significance of accessibility can be derived also from general comment No 14 (2000) of the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights on the right to the highest attainable standard of health (para 12). In its general comment No.9 on the rights of children with disabilities, the Committee on the Rights of the Child emphasizes that the physical inaccessibility of public transportation and other facilities, including governmental buildings, shopping areas and recreational facilities, is a major factor in the marginalization and exclusion of children with disabilities and markedly compromises their access to services, including health and education (para 39). The importance of accessibility was reiterated by the Committee on the Rights of the Child in its general comment No. 17 (2013) on the right of the child to res, leisure, play, recreational activities, cultural life and the arts.” (General Comment No. 2 (2014) Article 9: Accessibility)

In initial discussions the school felt that there would not be an impact to the quality of education by remaining hardwired. The school procured iPads and implemented safe practices such as use in airplane mode and downloads were done out of hours away from children. The mother said, “Parents, pupils and teachers still need to be vigilant as mistakes can be made and airplane mode not implemented as has happened with our child. There are other brands available that offer wired downloads that would improve functionality at school greatly and in the long run schools save on costly upgrades and IT support costs which I believe are not supported by funding.”

She hopes parents feel encouraged to raise the issue with their schools and believes it’s not our job to try to be experts, but it is our job to ask common-sense questions and raise safety concerns for our children, especially when there is confusion over safety and reported obvious risk.

Under the Local Schools, Local Decisions scheme, schools have greater decision making power at a local level. The Branch Manager from the Digital Infrastructure and Resources Branch (DETE) stated, “education authorities have primary responsibility for decisions about the educational hardware, software and networks best suited to the specific needs of their schools. As such, the choice to install wireless networks is one that is made by education authorities and is not mandated at the federal level.”

In recent conversations, the school and authorities were given examples of liability concerns where Comcare was ordered to pay compensation to an Australian Government employee harmed from WiFi at work and Canadian school’s recently notified of Lloyds of London’s EMR exclusion clause to their insurance policies, which excludes any liability coverage for injuries, “directly or indirectly arising out of, resulting from or contributed to by electromagnetic fields, electromagnetic radiation, electromagnetism, radio waves or noise.”

Any school given this information would have concerns and questions for the education authorities who maintain the technology is safe for our children. This makes even less sense as Comcare advise the Minister for Education on Health and Safety issues. Wireless technologies have been classified a 2B carcinogen.

The mother stated she was very pleased the school acted responsibly, despite confusing messages, by examining all aspects of implementation of the technology – looking closely at health risk and liability under Local Schools Local Decisions. Safe practice implementation in the school is still in progress. “This is one benefit of schools being given local decision making powers. The school were very keen to support my child, did not feel disadvantaged by using hardwired systems, or restricting mobile phone access on site and are successfully using devices safely for creative purposes with no unjustifiable hardship.”

With regards to accessibility to high school the issue has not yet been resolved. Schools are known for their strong WiFi systems capable of supporting multiple devices simultaneously which increases the output of radiation and therefore makes school inaccessible and harmful to a sensitive child’s health and wellbeing. The other issue is regarding student mobile phones which are allowed in most schools in Australia. Reports from parents confirm that it is common practice for children have smartphones sitting on their desks.

The fact is, that all children are biologically sensitive to WiFi and other radiation emitting sources and can benefit in a number of ways from restricted use of wireless technology in the education environment as documented in this report regarding a move to ban mobile phones and devices from schools in the UK to improve learning and behaviour outcomes.

“A recent study by the London School of Economics claimed schools where they were banned saw test scores rise by an average of 6 per cent.

Most schools have some form of mobile phone policy in place. One third of schools ban mobile phones outright, with a further fifth limiting their use in lessons, the Department for Education said. GCSE results at the Ebbsfleet Academy in Kent have almost doubled since the school banned smartphones in 2013.” Source: The Telegraph, “Mobile phones and iPads could be banned from classrooms”
In another report:

“Low-achieving and low-income students improved the most, researchers claim”.

Report authors Louis-Philippe Beland and Richard Murphy say despite the benefits of new mobile technology phones cause distractions, reduce productivity and are detrimental to learning.”

The inequality of the education gap and outcomes could be significantly reduced by prohibiting mobile and managing tablet/ laptop use in schools. Precautionary measures compliant with accessibility make sense for all of our children. They promote and support diversity, health and wellbeing and equality in learning outcomes for low achievers, those with learning difficulties or screen addiction issues. We create the best possible learning environment that supports the wellbeing of a diverse community. We include everyone.

“The NSW Government is strongly committed to providing safe, supportive, quality learning environments for all students and teachers. Studies have shown students who are better supported in their wellbeing have higher academic achievement and better life outcomes in relation to health, employment, social inclusion and economic independence.” Source: NSW Department of Education and Communities | Supported Students, Successful Students

“The results suggest that low achieving students are more likely to be distracted by the presence of mobile phones while high achievers can focus in the classroom regardless of the mobile phone policy,” the study says. Source: BBC Mobile phone bans ‘improve school exam results

Authorities have a choice. Review and adopt the best possible practices for ALL of our children in the education system or dig their heels in because they have invested a lot of money in education initiatives and learning resources and it is rapidly looking like they made a mistake. We all make them, it’s what you do to remedy it after the fact that matters.

Concerned parents should monitor and diarise unexplained symptoms like headaches, nausea, blurred vision, poor sleep, loss of memory and fatigue and notice if they ease off or disappear on weekends and holidays and try a reducing exposure at home.

The UNSW Faculty of Law is hosting a free public lecture on Wireless Devices and Biological Effects by Nobel prize laureate Dr Devra Davis 18 November and also recently hosted a seminar titled “Wireless Devices: Risk, Regulation, Compliance and Liability”, geared toward school principals and school council members, employers, Councils, legal professionals, human resources and businesses.

ORIGINAL SOURCE – WWW.EMFACTS.COM

Following the fifth Paris Appeal congress, which took place on the 18th May, 2015, the attending European, American and Canadian scientists unanimously decided to create a working group and to write a Common International Declaration to request an official recognition of these new diseases and of their sanitary consequences worldwide.

The declaration calls upon national and international bodies and institutions and particularly the WHO, for taking urgently their responsibility for recognizing electrohypersensitivity and multiple chemical sensitivity as real diseases, including them in the International Classification of Diseases.

This International Declaration also asks national and international institutions to adopt simple precautionary measures of prevention, to inform populations andrequires the appointment of real independent expert groups to evaluate these sanitary risks in total scientific objectivity, which is not the case today.

PLEASE SIGN THIS VERY IMPORTANT PETITION HERE