* EHS Solidarity with Human Rights and Mental Health fast protest in Pasadena,CA - MOBILE PHONES AND HEALTH EFFECTS - Emergency Campaign on Global Warming (3/8/03)

EHS Solidarity with mid-August Human Rights and Mental Health fast
protest in Pasadena,CA

Hi Klaus:

It seems so apt for me that this upcoming 16th August "Fast for Human
Rights and Choice in Mental Health" protest is taking place in Pasadena,
CA, a few minutes walking distance from the location where my life was
turned upside down and in the process transformed me into a committed
human rights activist against energy weapons, for medical recognition of
EHS and most importantly for clarifying distinctions between EHS plus
energy weapons bioeffects and "traditional" psychotic illnesses.

That pivotal event for me was as follows: I was shot awake in my former
condo on Madison Av., Pasadena, at 11.30 P.M. on November 20th, 1996,
and pinned to my bed while being assaulted with acoustic frequencies of
such strength that my brain felt on fire. (Indeed, I have frequently
compared the grotesque sensation of having my brain fried that November
night in Pasadena to a New Scientist description of how cancerous
tumours are treated: "A very high-frequency current in the wires causes
nearby atoms to vibrate heating the tissue from within just as a
microwave cooker heats food." New Scientist, 10 Oct., '98, p. 24).

My bed was beside and parallel to a non-structural wall which separated
my room from my Cal tech, (newly graduated in aeronautic engineering)
renter's bedroom which he had moved into a few weeks previously. Once
the energy charge was turned off (this could have been just a few
minutes duration), I was able to move but the tinnitus was so
excruciating I had to sleep beside running water and high and low
frequencies bombarded me frequently night and day.

In the weeks leading up to the assault, I had been outspoken about the
abuse of energy weapons and a mere ten days or so earlier I had faxed a
letter on this subject to the George Soros New York based Human Rights
Foundation. I had never previously, nor have I ever since, experienced
that oven-roasting of my brain that I endured during the assault of 20th
November 1996. My rentor was forcibly moved to the status of being my
former rentor within forty eight hours. No one else was living in my
condo at that time and he kept considerable engineering equipment in his

Below is the text of the letter I wrote to Huntington Memorial Hospital,
Pasadena, c. two weeks following the assault. (I have the original in my
possession.) In it I described my experience as "brainblasting." I
used that word because it felt like the brainblasting Alex. Constantine
describes in his "Pscyhic Dictatorship in the U.S.A." - a book I had
been reading in the weeks preceding Nov. 20, 1996.


266 S. Pasadena Ave., No. 201
Pasadena, CA 91101
December 6, 1996


Huntington Memorial Hospital
Emergency Department
100 West California Boulevard
Pasadena, CA 91105

Dear Medical Staff:

I am writing to thank you for your medical assistance following the
severe brain blasting assault I sustained on the night of November 20,
1996. (I sustained minor attacks of a similar nature for circa two weeks
subsequent to the November 20 onslaught, but the one that night was
close to fatal.)

I am enclosing some documentation for you to alert you to the
possibility of other victims arriving for assistance at your emergency
facility with symptoms similar to mine.

The public and medical personnel may not be, as yet, well-informed to
the dangers of these forms of assault and the symptoms can easily be
misdiagnosed. Using non-lethal weapons against innocent victims is the
dark, brutal side of contemporary technology. And brain blasting is but
one of these.

I feel the medical community must be alerted to these types of assault
so that victims can be diagnosed and treated effectively. Being
uninformed in high technology and medicine I cannot be of any
assistance. My contribution as a person with a strong social conscience
is to alert you to this public hazard and submit to you some
documentation on my assault. I do not know what long term brain damage I
may have sustained from this.


Imelda O'Connor, Ph.D.

c.c.'d as necessary


Well, I now know that brain seizures and other EHS disabilities that
make it impossible to work within a normal e-environment or to enjoy
normal leisure activities such as T.V. viewing, films, etc., have
followed in the wake of that November 20, 1996 assault!

In mid-December 1996, as my symptoms were still very severe, I decided
to return to Ireland for EHS treatment. The medical doctor I attended in
Cork thought I was hallucinating about the November 20th assault and I
was tricked into a psychiatric unit, misdiagnosed there by the medical
attendants and forced to take psychotropic drugs to which I had a
terrible reaction. (I think a number of your readers Klaus already know
about my EHS condition, being misdiagnosed as psychotic, my subsequent
futile search for legal help here in Ireland to bring a medical
negligence case against them and the progress of my own self-litigation,
so won't repeat.)

>From Spring 1998 I started again being outspoken about abuses by energy weapons and forwarded my own experience to various Human Rights organisations and politicians, etc. And then . . . the energy based assaults on me began again! One night in particular stands out. And interestingly, its date in mid-summer 1999 happened to closely coincide with the arrival of my personal data on energy assaults and related information, in Brussels, submitted to the EU officials there on my behalf by my local MEP (Member of European Parliament).

I was asleep when shot awake by a forceful gush of energy (similar to an
air-pump levelled at one's ears) through my aural tract that sent a
violent shock throughout my brain. This was followed by a strong
sensation of being thumped in the head. Then some hours later, c. 300
A.M. when I had just about fallen asleep again, another inward surge of
air raced through my ears and this time a shock was sent down my entire
right side. The following day, a Cork based radiologist whom I consulted
urgently for advise on how I could protect myself during such assaults
suggested I wear a thick aluminium helmet while asleep.

In fact, I was gravely endangered every night for a couple of hours, for
c. six months during 1999 (c. May to November) by some acoustic based
frequency weapon that would rev in through my ears, take hold of my
entire body, get my heart to sway in a wave-like motion and almost
knocked me unconscious with the sheer power of that sound. Within
seconds of it starting up, I would have bowel evacuation and could feel
my entire body tingling with electricity.

Even when I stayed some nights with relatives in two different areas
some hours by car from Cork, that acoustic "assault" would still take
place. I reported it many times to the local police where I live in
Cork, (especially during the attacks I'd telephone, because these
acoustic assaults were so ferocious in strength, I felt it was
touch-and-go whether I would actually survive each one).

Below I will quote an excerpt from a letter I wrote to another EHS
person describing these assaults:


"...starting at 11.00 P.M. last night, I experienced such a severe
assault that my heart-beat started going arrythmic, and I got a severe
sick stomach. I got up and ran water vigorously at sink: a technique
I've found somewhat soothing and counteractive since that first assault
on November 20th, 1996. The entire lasted c. an hour and a half, and, as
usual, I woke up this morning, as if nothing had happened! (Or, rather,
close to nothing--after all, I had to extract myself from all that
aluminium garb, remove ear plugs, etc., and tolerate yet another day
with a chronically heightened response to our electromagnetic
environment). But the severe attacks I experience are solely at night,
and they start either on the hour or half-hour. The usual time they last
is an hour, an hour and a half, or two; on the odd occasion, three.

There is a major difference between these "assaults" and the discomfort
from proximity to other ionised and non-ionised radiative sources that I
have developed since November 20th, 1996.

First, I experience them only at night. Second, on a scale of 1 to 10,
with 10 an aquatic belly-up, the discomfort I experience, during the
day, from electromagnetic sensitivity is rarely above a 5--maybe a 6.
During these nocturnal assaults the bio-effects I feel accelerate past 8
and to a 9, when very severe.

Last night was a 9. Now, the earplugs, with water tape gurgling water
through my head, still helped an awful lot, last night, but the
radiation had its other (although for it, less satisfactory, I hope)
route through that major external organ: my skin. Of course, I downed a
tranquilliser immediately when it started; my purpose is less the
severity of an electric-pole-blasting-through-my-head (= tinnitus), than
the all important factor of keeping my heart steadily tick-tocking,
while the "assault" lasts. I can feel, during such severe attacks
(whether in actuality of not, it feels so) the radiation trying to
attack me from within, and I can cope with the discomfort of a sick
stomach (I don't feel this is essentially dangerous), but I must protect
my heart from being knocked out of action, at all costs.

(The declasssified DIA documents, "Biological Effects of Electromagnetic
Radiation--Radiowaves and Microwaves--in Eurasian Communist Countries",
that refer to research in this field, way back two decades ago,
documenting detailed lab observed bio-effects of radiowaves and
microwaves, includes a subsection on their activation of cardiac
arrythmias and another on their capacity to cause heart seizure. See
reproduced DIA documents, in appendices of Tim Rifat's REMOTE VIEWING,
1999, pp. 415, 431.

Reading other sections of these documents also helped me understand why
my circulation was being malignantly affected--and resulting, on
occasion, in numbed/lifeless hands or/and feet and crown of head--during
severe attacks.)

By the way, I'll state again that I am basically a very healthy, strong,
fit person, who walks c. 4-6 miles daily. Neither am I of a particularly
nervous disposition; in fact, I have faced many a dangerous situation,
in the past, that most would have run a mile from. I'm saying this, not
to boast in any way, but to point out to you that I am not imagining any
of this stuff..."

I feel this upcoming "Fast for Human Rights and Choice in Mental Health"
in Pasadena by these very brave protestors is a perfect time for us to
show solidarity with them.

Recently you posted an email from a Canadian EHS supporter who pointed
out that the favoured medical treatment for schizophrenia, where he
lives, is the application of specific frequencies--energy medicine.

We must highlight/expose the schizophrenic like effects victims of
EMR/frequency weapons experience and how the medical community -
particularly mental health specialists-- must be made aware of the
proliferation of energy weapons in use now and what bio-effects they
can produce in victims who come to them for the right type of help.

So far, as we too well know, the medical community being blind to the
dark brutal side of technology is blundering hopelessly, and EMR
targeted victims - plus, of course, EHS sufferers who may not be
specifically targeted-- are just locked up or/and prescribed
psychotropic drugs that greatly deteriorates their condition. And makes
them feel more hopeless than ever.

So, let's get going on strategies to help make this fast a global one
that will highlight the current medical tragedy of EHS sufferers being
considered delusional about their symptoms and that the bio-effects they
claim from EMR sources are pronounced by all governments to be merely
psychological/psychiatric--which means, in other words, that EHS is just
another manifestation of mental illness.

We can also propel the evils of EMR targeting and bio-effects right
onto everyone's radar.

My posting on the frequency of misdiagnosing EHS as Schizophrenia is all
over the net! Just google: EHS and schizophrenia. You have it posted
Klaus on C.I.O. dated 19/9/02.

Best, Imelda, Cork, Ireland


Dr Peter French (Submission to Senate Inquiry, 2001)

(Submission to Senate Inquiry, 2001)

By Dr Peter French

In considering this issue, there are four key papers that I wish to
highlight for their unique insights into the critical facets of the

A. Theory of the mechanism of action.

The attached paper (which is in press in the Journal of Theoretical
Biology) by Laurence et al proposes a mechanism by which pulsed
radiofrequency fields such as those used by mobile phones could exert a
biological effect. In brief, the paper postulates that the pulsed
exposure can cause a shape change in key regulatory protein molecules in
cells which can lead to a change in function of the protein, and
therefore an alteration in key cellular processes, such as signal
transduction, gene expression and cell growth. The exposure does this
through the delivery of a pulse of energy which is absorbed by the
target tissue. This pulse of energy would therefore act as a 'stress'
imposed on the cell, in the same way as heat, some chemicals, cold shock
and osmotic shock do. If this mechanism is correct, several important
implications result.

Firstly, cells and tissues respond to such an imposed stress by making
stress or 'heat shock' proteins to protect the proteins from undergoing
change of shape.

Secondly, the degree of protein shape change determines the threshold of
heat shock response. Therefore, if an imposed RF field was powerful
enough to change the shape of a key protein in a way which altered its
function BUT did NOT change it sufficiently to invoke the heat shock
protein response, the biological effect would occur without defence. As
the power is turned up, the degree of alteration of protein shape would
become sufficient to both alter its function AND its shape sufficiently
to activate the heat shock response, which would effectively negate or
control the RF shock. This can therefore explain the 'window' effect
reported in many RF experiments (eg French et al).

B. Biological Evidence for this theory.

A recent publication by de Pomerai et al ('Non-thermal heat-shock
response to microwaves'. Nature 405: 417-418, 2000) provides evidence to
support the above hypothesis. They report that nematode worms subjected
to continuous wave RF energy at 750MHz respond by turning on the heat
shock response Importantly, they report this effect occurring at an SAR
(specific absorption rate) of 0.001 W/kg, which is 100 - 1000 fold LESS
than current digital phones emit. This paper therefore pushes back the
limits of exposure considerably. If biological effects occur at this
level, does this imply effects at the whole animal/person level? The
answer is it does, and there is evidence that it occurs.

C. Experiments in Animals

An Australian study published in 1997 (Repacholi, M. et al., 1997.
"Lymphomas in Em-Pim1 Transgenic Mice Exposed to Pulsed 900MHz
Electromagnetic Fields." Radiation Research 147: 631-640) reported that
the incidence of lymphoma was significantly increased in transgenic mice
exposed to pulsed 900 MHz electromagnetic fields. The aim of this study
was to determine whether long term exposure to pulse-modulated RF
fields (selected specifically to correspond to those from mobile phone
handsets) would increase the incidence of lymphoma in transgenic mice.
The Em-Pim1 system was chosen because although the mice are moderately
predisposed to develop lymphoma spontaneously, for them to acquire
malignancy the cells must undergo further mutagenic events in existing
genes. Pim1 mice "...would be expected to respond to carcinogenic agents
with an increase in lymphomas because (they) express an activated
oncogene selectively in the lymphoid cells." The advantage of this
system is that it is highly sensitive to mutagenic or carcinogenic

The result of exposure of the mice under very carefully controlled and
characterised conditions was a 2.4 fold increase in the risk of
developing lymphoma associated with the exposure. This was highly
statistically significant (the statistical probability that the result
was due to chance was less than 1%). Furthermore, the lymphomas
developed much earlier in the exposed group than in the unexposed
(control) group.
The authors emphasise the contradictory results and uncertain
conclusions which exist in the scientific literature regarding the
non-thermal effects of electromagnetic fields. The authors clearly do
not regard RF as being able to directly induce mutations or activate
genes, so they presumably do not regard RF as a potential carcinogen,
even though by their definition in this system it could be regarded as
such. Rather they hypothesise that the effect of the exposure is to
induce a "transient low level warming of exposed tissues" which leads to
increased cell proliferation and therefore to a greater probability of
spontaneous lymphomas arising. Is this mechanism feasible? The authors
comment on the subject of heating as follows: "Under the conditions
used...the thermal load induced in an exposed mouse would have been
small relative to the heat generated by normal metabolic activity". It
therefore seems unlikely that such a small heat load could induce
increased cell proliferation. However, it is possible that the RF field
may act to induce an increase in cell proliferation by some other
mechanism, as has been reported for RF frequencies in lymphocyte
cultures. It is also possible that RF exposure may induce the increased
expression of an oncogene such as c-fos or c-jun, as has been shown by
other workers for extremely low frequency fields.

It is true that this study does not imply that there is an increased
risk to humans of lymphoma induced by mobile phone exposure. It may
indicate however that in individuals genetically predisposed to certain
forms of cancer, the long term intermittent exposure to RF such as that
used in mobile phone technology may be an important environmental
stimulus in the induction of malignancy, by an as yet unknown

Whilst it is true that there may be a difference between mice and humans
in the way they absorb the radiation, this study cannot be dismissed in
terms of "it utilised mice therefore it is not relevant to humans". In
some cases it is true that mice represent an entirely different
biological system to humans, whereas in other cases they are an
excellent surrogate for human experiments. In support of the latter
cases it should be noted that Australia's 1998 winner of the Nobel Prize
in Medicine, Prof. Peter Doherty, was awarded the Nobel prize for his
work in the immune system using mice. His findings are directly
applicable to human biology.

D. Experiments in humans

A recent study in humans looked at patterns of brain waves of people
using a mobile phone operating at 902MHz whilst performing a memory
task, and comparing the results to no mobile phone use. They concluded
that "the exposure of EMF does not alter the resting EEG per se but
modifies the brain responses significantly during a memory task" (Krause
CM et al, 2000.

'Effects of electromagnetic field emitted by cellular phones on the EEG
during a memory task.' Cognitive Neuroscience 11: 761-764). They
concluded that GSM phones have effects on brain electric oscillations in
the 4-12 Hz frequency band range particular during memory retrieval
processing. The authors propose that the mechanism my be via 'mild
temperature changes' in the cortex, and were unable to comment on
long-term effects of mobile phone use on cognition. This is not the only
study to have shown such effects, and as such it seems that there is a
strong likelihood of an effect on neurological processing. This has
implications throughout the community, and in particular calls into
question the use of mobile phones by children.


Each of these four papers provides an important insight into our
thinking on this issue. We can conclude:

1. That the mechanism of biological (and therefore physiological) effect
can be explained in terms of orthodox physical and biological data.

2. That the mechanism rules out a simple 'dose-response' curve as the
appropriate measure to validate research reports.

3. That the Australian and International Standards do not cope with the
reported effects at SARs of 0.001 W/kg, nor with the reported cognitive
effects reported for mobile phone users.

4. That the data provides evidence of effects at the cellular, organism,
animal and human level of exposures conducted at mobile phone relevant
frequency and power.

Informant: Robert Riedlinger


Emergency Campaign on Global Warming

** Over 125,000 petition signatures & counting **

This week, the Senate will vote on a landmark bill to slash global
warming pollution in the U.S. The Climate Stewardship Act, from Senators
John McCain (R-AZ) and Joe Lieberman (D-CT), is a clear litmus test for
how your senators stand on global warming. Environmental Defense has
launched a national advertising campaign on CNN and in the New York
Times to support this bill, and we also need your help. Sign our online
petition and join over 125,000 people who have become citizen
co-sponsors of the McCain-Lieberman bill.



Deceit, Danger Mark U.S. Pursuit of New WMD

Informant: edandbunkie

Citizens' Initiative Omega

If you want our (normally daily) Newsletter in German, sometimes partially in English, please go to

Note: Citizens' Initiative Omega works on non-profit base. Our messages are the result of many hours of daily research, roundup and editing. If you would like to support our activity for people around the world with a donation or an aid fund unique or on regular base, you can do it here https://www.paypal.com/xclick/business=Star.Mail%40t-

If you have informations which you would like to share with your friends and colleges around the world and which are from common interest, please send us this informations, we will send them out. Thank you.

Disclaimer:  The informations contained in our EMF-Omega-News are derived from sources, which we believe to be accurate but is not guaranteed.

Citizens' Initiative Omega is not responsible for any errors or omissions and disclaims any liability incurred as a consequence of any of the contents of this resources.