Zap! You can run from electrical fields but you can not hide. You can minimize.
Whether or not you're electro-sensitive, health consequences in our electric age with its wires, switches, and mega-batteries, electromagnetic fields are everywhere -- and increasingly documented.
I am not a fan of electricity. Or cell phones. For countless reasons. I use 'em, though, sparingly. Like a hypocrite. Dreaming I'm some sort of Pocahontas living off the grid. Meanwhile, I stay informed about unseen man-made pollution with the ability to cause negative health impacts. I'm reading a book called Electronic Silent Spring by Katie Singer. Very informative. I recommend. And check out the newsletter, Electrical Pollution. As for myself, I plan to never again buy an iPhone for reasons one day I'll likely write about but for now know iPhones have a high SAR rating, which is not good.
FYI - Scientists from around the world are united on more than climate change impacts, enter the wireless world and the studies you should know about.
New York, NY, May 11, 2015 (Business Wire) -- Today 190 scientists from 39 nations submitted an appeal to the United Nations, UN member states and the World Health Organization (WHO) requesting they adopt more protective exposure guidelines for electromagnetic fields (EMF) and wireless technology in the face of increasing evidence of risk. These exposures are a rapidly growing form of environmental pollution worldwide.
The "International EMF Scientist Appeal" asks the Secretary General and UN affiliated bodies to encourage precautionary measures, to limit EMF exposures, and to educate the public about health risks, particularly to children and pregnant women.
The Appeal highlights WHO's conflicting positions about EMF risk. WHO’s International Agency for Research on Cancer classified Radiofrequency radiation as a Group 2B "Possible Carcinogen" in 2011, and Extremely Low Frequency fields in 2001. Nonetheless, WHO continues to ignore its own agency's recommendations and favors guidelines recommended by the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP). These guidelines, developed by a self-selected group of industry insiders, have long been criticized as non-protective.
The Appeal calls on the UN to strengthen its advisories on EMF risk for humans and to assess the potential impact on wildlife and other living organisms under the auspices of the UN Environmental Programme, in line with the science demonstrating risk, thereby resolving this inconsistency.
Martin Blank, PhD, of Columbia University, says, "International exposure guidelines for electromagnetic fields must be strengthened to reflect the reality of their impact on our bodies, especially on our DNA. The time to deal with the harmful biological and health effects is long overdue. We must reduce exposure by establishing more protective guidelines."
Joel Moskowitz, PhD, of University of California, Berkeley, says, "ICNIRP guidelines set exposure standards for high-intensity, short-term, tissue-heating thresholds. These do not protect us from the low-intensity, chronic exposures common today. Scientists signing the Appeal request that the UN and member nations protect the global human population and wildlife from EMF exposures."
International EMF Scientist Appeal: EMFscientist.org
I wrote about EMFs last year with helpful links here.
Are you electro-sensitive?
Photo from my Coast Starlight Amtrak Van Nuys to Oregon trip, passing near Santa Barbara.
Until next time, breathe easy and make life an adventure!
To stay connected with my search for clean air & solutions to air pollution...
FACEBOOK LIKE Chasing Clean Air
Verify your email. Subscribing is safe. No 3rd party sharing.
