of human peripheral blood lymphocytes to electromagnetic fields associated
with cellular phones leads to chromosomal instability.
M, Folkman D, Kesar A, Barbul A, Korenstein R, Jerby E, Avivi L.
of Human Genetics and Molecular Medicine, Tel-Aviv University, Tel-Aviv,
exposure to radiation emitted from cellular phones poses a health hazard
is at the focus of current debate. We have examined whether in vitro exposure
of human peripheral blood lymphocytes (PBL) to continuous 830 MHz electromagnetic
fields causes losses and gains of chromosomes (aneuploidy), a major "somatic
mutation" leading to genomic instability and thereby to cancer. PBL
were irradiated at different average absorption rates (SAR) in the range
of 1.6-8.8 W/kg for 72 hr in an exposure system based on a parallel plate
resonator at temperatures ranging from 34.5-37.5 degrees C. The averaged
SAR and its distribution in the exposed tissue culture flask were determined
by combining measurements and numerical analysis based on a finite element
simulation code. A linear increase in chromosome 17 aneuploidy was observed
as a function of the SAR value, demonstrating that this radiation has
a genotoxic effect. The SAR dependent aneuploidy was accompanied by an
abnormal mode of replication of the chromosome 17 region engaged in segregation
(repetitive DNA arrays associated with the centromere), suggesting that
epigenetic alterations are involved in the SAR dependent genetic toxicity.
Control experiments (i.e., without any RF radiation) carried out in the
temperature range of 34.5-38.5 degrees C showed that elevated temperature
is not associated with either the genetic or epigenetic alterations observed
following RF radiation-the increased levels of aneuploidy and the modification
in replication of the centromeric DNA arrays. These findings indicate
that the genotoxic effect of the electromagnetic radiation is elicited
via a non-thermal pathway. Moreover, the fact that aneuploidy is a phenomenon
known to increase the risk for cancer, should be taken into consideration
in future evaluation of exposure guidelines. Bioelectromagnetics 24:82-90,
2003. Copyright 2003 Wiley-Liss, Inc.
[PubMed - in process]
way to fight a new cell tower is to point out to the approving authority
all of the missing items that are NOT on the cell tower applications.
Then ask the question WHAT ARE THE CELL CO's TRYING TO HIDE FROM EVERYBODY?
I have that answer also.. I have attached my missing items report for
your information. Regards Del..
INFORMATION ON CELL TOWER APPLICATIONS
is the system going to operate at? Analog, IDen, CDMA, TDMA, or GSM?
2. Where is the Radiated Propagation analysis pattern?
3. Where is the Radiated Spreadsheets, showing Power Output of one sector
4. What is the Polarization's of the antennas?
5. What is the Maximum Power Radiated per channel?
6. What is the DB Gain of the antennas?
7. What is the Amplifying Equipment make and model numbers?
8. What are the Operating Transmit and Receive Frequencies?
9. What are the ERP and EIRP of the main lobe radiating antenna pattern?
10. What are the Minimum Power Levels at ground level with Minimum channels?
11. What are the Maximum Power Levels at ground level with Maximum channels?
12. What is the Minimum number of operating channels?
13. What is the Maximum number of operating channels?
14. Will you have a 16 to 32 Channel Combiner per antenna in TDMA?
15. What are the Physical and Electrical Tilt Angles of the antennas?
16. What is the DB gain of the Tower Mounted Amplifier?
9327 Classic Dr. NE
Lacey, WA 98516-3191
Level EMF Bioeffects Research Results Show Many Cell Responses (excerpt)
summary below just came to me from two different sources in the past couple
A statement by Dr. Pawluk, M.D., M.Sc., medical consultant to Body Fields
USA, is as follows: "I just got this info. It's important to the
work we are doing since it seems to indicate that the Quantron Resonance
System's (QRS) square wave design, low field strength and rapid wave changes
probably affect nerve cell regrowth by stimulating "normal human
neural progenitor (NHNP) cells", i.e., cells that lead new nerve
cells to grow from their "infant" precursors. WOW! Very low
level fields, interacting with the earth's DC fields!!! Just as I suspected,
you don't need high powered DC fields to do this. This can be done at
a much lower cost -- QRS and the like.
I'll go lay on my QRS right now. (The QRS is a German-developed home health
maintenance system, with pillow and mattress, containing pattern placed
coils for application of low level pulsed magnetic fields. (01/03/03)
of Sage EMF Design (a division of Sage Associates) an environmental consulting
firm <www.sageassociates.net>, remarked: "Seen this on the
NASA patent? Transients, fast rise-time issues.... major implications
for EMF policy, if true.
we get so involved with the hazardous health problems of artificial and
uncontrolled EMFs, we tend to overlook the possibilities for very beneficial
healing applications!. This would seem to be a good argument for the hazardous
uncontrolled long-term exposure EMF problems. After all, if we can heal
biosystems with controlled, researched medical applications of EMFs, then
it seems to follow, like with drugs, that uncontrolled applications can
be harmful to health!
once said "Never underestimate the power of the human mind to resist
the inroads of useful knowledge!!"
EMF Interface Consulting
Robert G. Dennis, Ph.D.
In a collaboration
with Tom Goodwin at NASA Johnson Space Center, we have developed 2-dimensional
and 3-dimensional bioreactor systems to subject tissues to controlled
electromagnetic fields. Experiments are currently in progress, and our
preliminary data is extremely promising. We have subjected normal human
neural progenitor (NHNP) cells to low level electromagnetic fields generated
near electrically conductive plate electrodes (2-D) or within a field
generated by a solenoid coil 3-D). The waveforms tested included sine
waves, narrow pulses (delta function), and square waves. Cells were subjected
to 17 days of electromagnetic field stimulation of all waveforms as well
as a DC field.
were not subjected to transverse electrical fields through the culture
medium, as is often done in cell culture experiments employing electromagnetic
fields, rather the cells were grown within the induced magnetic field
surrounding the electrical conductor. For both the 2-D and 3-D systems,
the magnetic field intensity was limited to ~ 70 mG. Magnetic field intensity
was measured using a linear Hall effect sensor. For comparison, the Earth's
magnetic field is approximately 500 mG at 450 latitude. Rate of change
of the magnetic fields was estimated on the basis of Maxwell's equations
and the measured current transient response in both the conductive plate
and the solenoid coil.The mB (micromagnetic) fields were applied in 5
separate interventions as:
(1) 10 Hz
bipolar square waves,
(2) differentiated square waves (delta functional); narrow pulses (200
ms) corresponding to each square wave edge,
(3) sine waves of the same amplitude and frequency as the square waves,
(4) DC (steady) mB fields, also of the same amplitude as the square wave,
(5) control (no mB field).
(relative to control)
Proliferation rate increased up to 4x
Morphology changes were macroscopically evident for large colonies of
nerve cells in 2-D
Glucose metabolism +~60% in 3-D system
Gene array profiling indicated very significant increases in expression
of classes of genes related to extra-cellular matrix production, growth,
were greatest for square and delta functions, no difference between DC
fields and control (no field).
Cells respond to the rate of change in the mB field (dB/dt), not to the
peak field magnitude (Bmax) or total flux exposure. The high dB/dt of
the square waves and the delta were both effective at influencing cellular
response, whereas slowly varying (sine) or non varying (DC) fields had
significantly reduced or no effect. Equivalently high peak fields or long
exposure times (sine and DC, as well as square wave) were clearly not
as important as the rate of change of the mB field. In this study, peak
magnetic field amplitudes were ~ 70 mG, whereas the Earth's magnetic field
on average is ~ 500 mG, but is not time varying (i.e., it is DC). The
electromagnetic interventions carried out in this study were of course
superimposed upon the Earth's DC magnetic field. It is the time varying
nature of the fields that apparently has the most significant influence
on every aspect of the cellular response. We collectively term these time
varying electromagnetic fields as TVEMFs.
and protocols for this series of experiments have been filed with the
United States Patent and Trademark Office, and two manuscripts are currently
this question in the daily news to someone who know, or maybe you know
someone who can answer:
concerns the value of measurments, and the radiation per antenna. I read
that every channel emits 100 watts. Every antenne has many channels. Every
base station has many antennes. = hundreds of watts er base station.
does it settle with the low standard (if we take the most eccentic cases
of Russia or Salzburg) how can a base station emit low radiation when
we are talking about hundreds of watts?
it was published that the cellular companies doubled the radiation per
antenna, from 8 to 16 watts. How can it be 16 while every channel has
100 and every antenne has many channels?
understand here something, can someone clarify this?