This short clip will forever the way you
look at your cell phone, ever again.
A scientific paper bravely published by a
leading radiation biologist, Prof. Dariusz
Leszczynski now allows top neurologists, like
Keith Black, MD of Los Angeles' Cedars-Sinai
Hospital to issue warnings to their patients
about the dangers of cellphone use, which
he describes as "Cooking the brain". The cell
phone industry retaliated against Leszczynski
by lobbying to have his funding stopped and
in the meantime, insurance companies have
also stopped coverage for health damages
related to cell phone use.
In 2011, San Francisco, CA passed a law,
which originally required retailers of cell
phones to display the amount of radiation
that was emitted by each unit. Lobbyists
successfully had the law revised to simply
inform people on ways to diminish their
exposure to cell phone radiation.
Ellie Marks' husband had a golfball-sized
tumor in his brain, next to where he regularly
used his cellphone. It was removed and he
subsequently suffered severe memory loss.
She says that over 20 cities and states tried
to pass similar legislation to that of San Francisco
- and all were threatened with lawsuits from
the cell phone industry.
Brent Bocook, a former US Olympic Champion
Crew Team Member had a portion of his brain
removed, right next to where he used to always
place his cellphone. That particular portion of
the brain is responsible for motor control and his
surgery has left him almost completely disabled,
physically.
He says he is spearheading a class action lawsuit
against the industry because he believes that this
is the only way that big business can be made to
take responsibility for itself, as was the case with
the tobacco industry.
He notes that cell phone use is much more
dangerous for children because their skulls are
a lot thinner. Brain tumors associated with cell
phone use has replaced leukemia as the
number one child-killer.
Truthseeker host, Daniel Bushell uses a radiation
detector to measure the amount of radiation
emanating from commonly-used household items:
*Microwave oven: 800 microvolts *WiFi Router: 800 microvolts *Tablet PC: 2,000 microvolts (watching a movie). *Smartphone: 40,000 microvolts (Samsung S3).
This is over a thousand times the normal
background radiation levels of 30 microvolts.
The use of cellphones and other wireless
technologies is being called the next 'casualty
catastrophe,' after tobacco and asbestos. iPhones
now all contain a legal disclaimer page with fine
print, which cannot be enlarged and which is
relatively difficult to locate within the phone's
navigation. It discloses the dangers of radiation
exposure from cellphones and advises users to
keep the device at least 10mm from the body.
At the same time, a wireless lobbying group
called the CTIA assures us that "Radio waves
from cellphones are safe" and studies paid for
by the cellphone industry claim that, "Cellphone
use causes no biological damage." However,
independent studies consistently report serious
health effects, ranging from DNA damage, a
300% reduction in sperm counts, 290% more
brain tumors, autism and birth defects.
Former Senior White House Advisor,
Epidemiologist, Dr. Devra Davis testified to
the Senate and gives a hair-raising report here
about the back-stories behind these contradictory
scientific reports: The independent scientists who
reported on the ill effects of cell phones found
themselves under attack by the cellphone
industry, who would attempt to get them fired
and to get their funding taken away or else
accuse them of fraud.
When that didn't work, they hired
inexperienced scientists who didn't know
anything about the subject to *look* like they
were replicating the incriminating experiments
and when all of the above didn't work, they
wrote an internal memo, in which they stated,
"We war-gamed the science."
Journalist, Anthony Gucciardi proved how easy
it is for industry to plant fake science in respectable
science publications, in the very similar case
involving the drug Prozac, which was proven in the
1980s to increase the incidence of suicide among
users and to cause violent behavior - but this was
hidden from the public until 2005, until there was
a BBC expose. In response, the manufacturers
hired their own scientists to prove how "great"
Prozac was.
Producers of anti-depressantshave since been
mandated to disclose these drugs' side effects,
which one may read in their accompanying manuals
or overhear, in the blindingly-fast and unintelligible
disclosure statements that run during television
advertisements for these products. Remember,
virtually all the mass-murdering shooters in these
recent attacks were taking this drug or else one
of many similar fluoride-based, Selective Serotonin
Reuptake Inhibitors (SSRI), at the time that they
massacred people by the dozens. Gucciardi says
he believes that once the public becomes aware of
these dangerous side effects, the public outcry will
be worse than it was for cigarettes.
Dr. Louis Slesin, editor of Microwave News since
1981 says, "The system is broken, nobody has
been told the truth. It's crazy."
The science which would eventually prove that
cigarettes and secondhand smoke damaged human
health during the did not yet exist when tobacco
was initially marketed - but cellphones were launched
after preliminary science was already available as
to its inherent dangers and these products were
released into the public without any safety studies,
whatsoever.
Dr. Slesin says, "The point is to take action." Action
is already being taken outside the US: In Italy, a
landmark supreme court ruling found a "causal link"
between cell phone use and brain tumors. In France,
WiFi is being taken down in schools and replaced with
cabled Internet in and countries from Germany to
Israel and Finland are moving to stop cell phone
sales to kids. In the UK, children under the age of 18,
have long been barred from cell phone use.
But of course, in the Good Ol' USA, the former chief
lobbyist for the wireless industry, Thomas Wheeler
was recently appointed by President Barack Obama
to head up the Federal Communications Commission
(FCC), which regulates the safety of wireless devices,
in yet another astonishing conflict-of-interest in the
choice of appointed Federal Regulators, who better
resemble wolves guarding the sheep, rather than
advocates for the health of the public at-large.
