Although we have always been exposed to certain natural forms of radiation, such as Ultra-Violet radiation from the sun, public exposure to unnatural man made radiation has increased dramatically in the last 50 years. Invisible, harmful electromagnetic radiation pollution, otherwise known as “electrosmog pollution” is one of the biggest 21st century risks to public and environmental health.
An Invisible Pollutant
Unless you live off grid, never use a mobile phone and stay far away from a Wi-Fi router you are constantly being exposed to man made EMFs, at levels significantly higher that what one would be exposed to naturally.
It is estimated that by 2020…
-The number of individuals using a tablet will increase by 121%
-The number of individuals using a cell phone will increase by 82%
Daniel Debaun author of book ‘Radiation Nation’ states “In, 2016, the total audience report released by Nelson showed that the average American spent 9 or more hours a day using electronic media. Given that the average human spends 7 to 9 hours sleeping each night, that means we spend around two-thirds of our waking hours ‘wired‘”
An increasing use of wireless technology means more cell phone towers, more antennas and more Wi-Fi routers. We are exposed to so much EMF radiation, some say levels approximately 10 billion times higher than back in the 1960s (Olga Sheean).
Common Sources of Electrosmog Pollution
The Risk Factors
The World Health Organisation’s International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) radio frequency electromagnetic fields as possibly carcinogenic to humans (Group 2B), based on an increased risk for glioma, a malignant type of brain cancer1, associated with wireless phone use
Extremely low-frequency magnetic fields are also classified as possibly carcinogenic to humans (Group 2B) based on studies that have linked 300-400nT with doubling the chance of childhood leukemia IARC Summary of Data Reported and Evaluation
Well known researchers, Dr. Lennart Hardell and Michael Carlberg published a thorough examination of the NTP study results in the October 2018 issue of The International Journal of Oncology. They stated , “We conclude that there is clear evidence that RF radiation is a human carcinogen, causing glioma and vestibular schwannoma (acoustic neuroma). There is some evidence of an increased risk of developing thyroid cancer, and clear evidence that RF radiation is a multi‑site carcinogen. Based on the Preamble to the IARC Monographs, RF radiation should be classified as carcinogenic to humans, Group 1.” Their 2018 article “Comments on the US National Toxicology Program technical reports...” is here https://www.spandidos-publications.com/10.3892/ijo.2018.4606
A study published in Electromagnetic Biology and Medicine, “Impact of radiofrequency radiation on DNA damage and antioxidants in peripheral blood lymphocytes of humans residing in the vicinity of mobile phone base station,” compared people living close and far from a cell antennas and found that people living closer to cellular antennas had higher radiation levels in the homes and several significant changes in their blood predictive of cancer development.”
Examples of other effects linked to cell towers in research studies include neuropsychiatric problems , elevated diabetes , headaches , sleep problems and genetic damage . Such research continues to accumulate after the 2010 landmark review study on 56 studies that reported biological effects found at very low intensities, including impacts on reproduction, permeability of the blood-brain barrier, behaviour, cellular and metabolic changes, and increases in cancer risk (Lai and Levitt 2010).
A Child's Vulnerability
Full body low level RF radiation exposures, for significant periods of time can have a cumulative effect on the developing body of a child.
From 2015-2017 the 3rd leading cause of death in Australian children between the ages of 1-14 was brain cancer. Clearly, we, as a community, need to take greater precaution when exposing children to W.H.O-admitted carcinogens, such as wireless RF emissions.
Full body low level RF radiation exposures, for significant periods of time can also have a serious cumulative effect on the developing body of a child.
Children today have an unprecedented exposure that is higher than that experienced any generation before them and they have been shown to absorb more radiation than adults. It is imperative that our leaders protect the quality of life experienced by the next generation and those that follow.
- Studies show that children are more vulnerable to harmful effects from wireless radiation than adults.
- The World Health Organization’s International Agency for Research on Cancer’s 2013 Monograph on Radio frequency fields details the research showing how “the average RF energy deposition is twice as high in certain regions of children’s brains and up to 10 times higher in the bone marrow of children’s skulls, compared to energy deposition in adult brains and skulls.”
- A five year old can absorb sixty percent more microwave radiation than an adult.
- Children have thinner skulls (deeper penetration), more water in brain (conductor), and are of smaller size which allows greater absorption into bone and deeper tissues.
- Children have more vulnerable immune and neurological systems as they are not fully developed until early twenties.
- Cancers can have long latency periods (time from first exposure until diagnosis) and it will take decades before we know the full extent of health impacts from this radiation.
There is evidence that genetic damage caused by exposure within current guidelines may not only damage the exposed child, but also their offspring.
The Natural Environment
Adverse effects on health and environment are backed up by a huge range of respected peer-review research that show EMR emissions. EMR disrupts reproduction cycles, growth and development of flora and fauna, orientation and migration of birds and pollinators (bees), affects DNA in animals, and causes apoptosis (early cell death) in plants and crops and orchards
Experimental literature has found that rhizomes, nitrification and other critical processes to plant growth and health are affected by cell phone like radiation under controlled conditions. There have been over one hundred studies that have shown this and most recently a field study that showed under controlled conditions, trees that are close to cell towers die more readily.
A field monitoring study spanning 9 years involving over 100 trees (Waldmann-Selsam 2016) found trees sustained significantly more damage on the side of the tree facing the antenna, leaving the entire tree system prone to degradation over time. Documentation of tree damage from base stations is made visible in the Report “Tree Damage Caused by Mobile phone base stations” (Breunig, 2017).
An analysis of 45 peer-reviewed scientific publications (1996-2016) on changes in plants due to the non-thermal RF-EMF effects from mobile phone radiation entitled “Weak radiofrequency radiation exposure from mobile phone radiation on plants concludes, “Our analysis demonstrates that the data from a substantial amount of the studies on RF-EMFs from mobile phones show physiological and/or morphological effects (89.9%, p < 0.001).”
The Birds, Bees and Wildlife
“A review of the ecological effects of RF-EMF” 2013 review of 113 published studies found in 65% of the studies (50% of the animal studies and about 75% of the plant studies) RF-EMF had a significant effect on birds, insects, other vertebrates, other organisms and plants (Cucurachi 2013).The review paper cites development and reproduction in birds and insects as the most strongly affected endpoints.
Studies on bees have found behavioural effects (Goldsworthy 2009,; Sainudeen 2011; Kumar 2010), decreasing egg-laying rate (Favre 20117), disrupted navigation(Sharma and, Kimmel et al. 2007, Kumar, 2010) and reduced colony strength after RF exposures (Sharma and Kumar, 2010, Harst et al. 20061).
“Exposure of Insects to Radio-Frequency Electromagnetic Fields from 2 to 120 GHz” published in Scientific Reports is the first study to investigate how insects (including the Western honeybee) absorb the higher frequencies (2 GHz to 120 GHz) to be used in the 4G/5G rollout. The scientific simulations showed increases in absorbed power between 3% to 370% when the insects were exposed to the frequencies. Researchers concluded, “This could lead to changes in insect behavior, physiology, and morphology over time.
A study focusing on RF from cellular antennas found increased sperm abnormalities in mice exposed to RF from GSM antennas (Otitoloju 2010).
Researchers published a study on frogs in Electromagnetic Biology and Medicine exposing eggs and tadpoles to electromagnetic radiation from cell phone antennas for two months, from the egg phase until an advanced phase of tadpole and found low coordination of movements, an asynchronous growth, resulting in both big and small tadpoles, and a high mortality rate. The authors conclude, “these results indicate that radiation emitted by phone masts in a real situation may affect the development and may cause an increase in mortality of exposed tadpoles.”
Exposure Safety Standards
The government has established maximum exposure limits, which they say, must not be exceeded. These limits, however, are unrealistically high and, we suspect, sacrifice our safety in order to cater to corporate, industrial and political interests.
Measured In: microwatts / cm² (uW/cm²)
Safe Public Exposure Limit
Government: 1000 uW/cm2
Building Biologists (sleeping areas) :
< 0.000,01 uW/cm²
Bioinitiative Report: 0.1 uW/cm²
Levels in Nature: <0,000001
Measured In: Volts (V)
Safe Public Exposure Limit
Government (ICNIRP): 5000 V/m
Building Biologists: 1,5 V/m
Levels in Nature: <0,0001
Measured In: MilliGauss (mG) or NanoTesla (nT).
Safe Public Exposure Limit
Government (ICNIRP): 1000 mG
Building Biologists: 1 mG
The Bioinitiative Report: 1-2 mG
Levels in Nature: <0,000002 mG
Safe Public Exposure Limit
How Do Australian Safety Standards Compare to The Rest of The World?
Amongst other precautionary measures recommended as a result of the Australian Senate Inquiry (2001) into electromagnetic radiation, it was recommended that the exposure level of 200 microwatts per square centimeter be adopted. This was not approved and subsequently, since that time Australians have continued to endure higher exposure levels (currently this is 1000 microwatts per square centimeter) when compared to other countries that have significantly lower exposure limits.