New iPhone Has No Headphone Jack
Apple just announced that its
newest brainchild, iPhone 7, which touts a thinner profile, exceptional
water resistance and superior sound quality, will not feature a
standard headphone jack.1 However, the World Health Organization (WHO) classified
radiofrequency (RF) electromagnetic fields (EMF) linked with wireless
phone use as possibly carcinogenic to humans (aka cancer-causing), with
potential for "increased risk for glioma, a malignant type of brain cancer."2 The report was issued in 2011. Apple's Legal page suggests that, "To reduce exposure to RF energy,
use a hands-free option, such as the built in speakerphone, the
supplied headphones or other similar accessories. Carry (your
phone) at least 5 [millimeters] (about half an inch) away from your
body to ensure exposure levels remain at, or below, the as-tested
levels."3 However, new wireless AirPods (a premium accessory you can buy) will
basically put radio transceivers in your ears. One problem with this
recommendation is that wireless headphones increase the distance
between your phone and your head, but you're simply exchanging one RF
device and picking up another, CNN asserted. "The RF of any wireless device — a cell phone, Bluetooth
headphones or a wireless router — emits non-ionizing radiation. These
devices aren't as dangerous as those that emit ionizing radiation, such
as X-ray machines, but some experts remain wary of them nonetheless."4 The National Toxicology Program (NTP) recently concluded its "largest, most complex" two-year study,5 on potential health hazards of cell phone use. They found that RF and EMF exposure increases brain tumors in rats and mice; more significantly, in humans, a Scientific American article reported.6 Jerry Phillips, a biochemist and director of the Excel Science
Center at the University of Colorado, said in a follow-up article that
RF signals may interact with living tissues. Children and pregnant women using them are particularly vulnerable. "It was always assumed that because the power being created by
the handsets was low enough, there would be insufficient energy for
heat production — and without heat production there would be no biological effects on users whatsoever."7 Chairman of the neurosurgery department at Cedars-Sinai Medical
Center in Los Angeles, Dr. Keith Black, noted that one of the most
troubling aspects of cell phone use is that it will take, at minimum,
generations to determine the full environmental and physical impact from exposure to these devices. As of 2014, there were officially more mobile devices in the world
than people. The recorded number at that time was 7.2 billion.8 Experts projected there will be $77 billion worth of cell phone revenue generated by 2017.9 Nearly two-thirds of adults in the U.S. own one. Some "experts" think there's no reason for concern because they're
viewing only the thermal effects of cell phones and how the body
absorbs RF energy. The industry assures energy levels are too low to
heat tissues, measured by Specific Absorption Rate (SAR), so there must
not be biological consequences from cell phone use. The recommendation for cell phone buyers is to compare ratings and
pick one with a lower SAR. But SAR ratings can be considered worthless
because only the radiation heat penetrating into your head is
considered. Cell phone wave energy, signal modulation or magnetic
fields created by the batteries aren't taken into account. What about cell phones in shirt and jeans pockets,
or tucked in hats and belts? CNN's report on the new Apple 7, as well
as potential impacts on users, quoted Black's assessment: "What microwave radiation does, in most simplistic terms, is
similar to what happens to food in microwaves, essentially cooking the
brain. So in addition to leading to a development of cancer and tumors,
there could be a whole host of other effects like cognitive memory
function, since the memory temporal lobes are where we hold our cell
phones."10 The wireless industry calls radiation from FM radios and microwave
ovens "non-ionizing." But when you use a cell phone to make a call,
text or access data, your phone first sends RF waves from its antenna
to nearby cell towers, then receives RF waves in return back to its
antenna. Most people hold their cell phones to their ears, which projects
about 70 percent of the antenna's energy straight into your head. You should hold your phones as far from your bodies as possible,
especially during the initial hook-up, when the most power is being
exchanged, and whenever possible, use the speaker function or a safe
headset. You might ask, why don't cell phone manufacturers
tell us these things? The sad and infuriating fact is, nearly 75
percent of the studies alleging there are no toxic effects from cell
phone use were funded by either the military or the wireless industry. Of the independent studies conducted on the topic, 67 percent
weren't linked to the industry which, it should be noted, was at last
count worth around $171 billion. In May, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) released a "partial report"11
on potential cell phone radiofrequency radiation hazards, based on the
rats and mice experiments. Results will be open for peer review and
comment by the end of 2017. CNN's response: "CNN typically does not report on animal studies, because the results often don't translate to humans. However, these rare, aggressive [and] malignant
tumors that occurred in male rats are the very same tumors found in
epidemiologic studies in humans using cell phones for the longest
period of time." CNN quoted Dr. Dedra Davis, founder and president of the
Environmental Health Trust, and visiting professor at the Hebrew
University of Jerusalem, asserts: "The reason they released a partial report was because the
senior scientist leading the study realized how extraordinarily
important those results were. There is no other substance I know of
where results like this have occurred in the National Toxicology
Program." The Federal Drug Administration (FDA) says that if there's an RF
exposure risk from cell phone use — "and at this point we do not know
that there is" — it's probably very small. But if people are still
concerned, they should spend less time on the phone and use the
speakerphone function or wired headset.12 But Davis astutely reveals: "My understanding is that the current generation of phones
contain more sophisticated accelerometers that indicate when the phone
is held next to the head and automatically put the phone on the lowest
power possible, in order to both save battery life and reduce [RF]
exposure to the brain or body, which would indicate a recognition of
the need to reduce exposures directly to people." According to CNN, the Cellular Telecommunications Industry
Association (CTIA) "strongly disputes" the notion that RF energy does
any kind of damage to cell phone users. In lock step, the industry sticks to the narrative that "scientific
consensus, based on peer-reviewed evidence in the U.S. and a number of
other countries, indicates that wireless devices do not pose a public
health risk for adults or children." It further advises that people with concerns should place more
distance between their body and the source of the RF, such as using a
hands-free device, and reduce their "talk time."13 The National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences submitted a
study showing that that in mice studies, whole body exposure to cell phone radiation may cause brain and heart cancer. And, in a pooled analysis of case-controlled studies, Oncology
Reports found an increased risk of brain tumors among heavy users of
mobile and cordless phones.14 Another study concluded that EMF exposure can alter reproductive
function, cellular homeostasis, endocrine function and fetal
development in animals, as well as early embryonic development and pregnancy success. In
animal experiments, the adverse effects on reproductive function
depended on the frequency, wave strength and duration of exposure.15 The title of another study explains it very well: "Disturbance of the immune system by electromagnetic fields — a potentially underlying cause for cellular damage and tissue repair reduction which could lead to disease and impairment."16 The conclusion was that "existing public safety limits are inadequate to protect public health." The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has published some
interesting anecdotes relating to microwave radio exposure, but adds
that: "Many statements from industry spokesmen state that 'not enough
is known' about these exposures to identify risk, or that there is
'insufficient' or 'incomplete' evidence regarding such risks, or that
there is 'no scientific consensus' on this risk. This implies that there
isn't much scientific information on this subject. But actually, there
is a great deal of research documenting adverse biological effects
from low level RF exposures." One of the most interesting accounts was covered in BioMed Central in 2012,17
regarding the U.S. embassy in Russia, which was inundated by radiation
from a microwave transmitter positioned on the roof of a nearby
building between 1953 and 1978. Russian medical researchers, according
to the FCC, listed such symptoms as headache, fatigue, dizziness, cardiovascular abnormalities, sleep disorders, depression, irritability and memory impairment. "Exposed embassy staff experienced a statistically significant
excess of several problems, including: depression, irritability,
difficulty in concentrating, memory loss, ear problems, skin problems,
vascular problems and other health problems. Symptom incidence
increased significantly with accrued years of exposure."18 The wide array of symptoms finally led to an investigation, led by
Dr. A.M. Lilienfield, an epidemiologist at Johns Hopkins University.
"The abnormalities found in this study were an embarrassment to the
U.S. government, since the levels of exposure experienced by embassy
staff inside the building were … dramatically below the described U.S.
safety standards for microwave exposure. It appears that the conclusions
of the study were altered to soft-pedal any abnormal findings."19 In 2001, La Ñora, Spain, a population of 1,900, had a GSM (Global
System for Mobile Communications) cell phone tower. A questionnaire,
which residents filled out, contained 25 health concerns they called "RF
syndrome" or "microwave sickness." The symptoms included poor concentration, irritability, nausea,
fatigue and dizziness. Similar problems were noted in Norway in 1998,
France in 2002 and the populated area around a cell phone tower in
Shebeen El-Kom, Egypt. People in Austria, Cypress and Bavaria have
experienced similar problems. At the very least, cell phone users should use caution: Never "wear"
your cell phone, store it in shirt pockets or hold it in your hand as
you walk or drive. Don't use wired baby monitors or let kids play with
radiating cell phones, as biological consequences have been documented.
Use a wired earpiece that keeps the phone the furthest from your head,
and use landlines whenever possible. Asked what the take-away is from
the studies to use caution, Phillips concluded, "If you look at all of the research being done on this, it's all
from outside this country. People want to believe their technology is
safe. I do. I would love to believe it, but I know better."20
Cell Phone Use Worldwide and Why It's a Problem
Cell Phone Radiation Concerns
Government Entities on Radiation and Electromagnetic Field Exposure
What the Wireless Industry Versus Studies Say About RF Energy
Wave Energy Problems, Including Microwave
Taking Responsibility: Use Caution With Wireless Devices
Read More..
Comments
There are 0 comments on this post