Heart attacks amongst teens is becoming normalized
Kirkland pushes to have backyard cellphone antenna removed
Instead, the company will install three smaller lamppost cellphone antennas in the park, but outside of the wooded area, along the tree line.
Wonder how long the trees will last?
DELHI: The new and stringent radiation
emission rules for mobile
and towers, which will for the first time stipulate emission
for handsets sold in India and make it compulsory for these
be displayed on phones and retail outlets, will come into
September 1, 2012, telecom
All handset makers, mobile phone companies and tower cos will be informed of the deadline before April-end, the telecom department (DoT) officials quoted above added. ET had first reported in November 2011 that the government had finalised radiation emission norms for cellphones and towers.
Radiation emitted by cellphones varies from instrument to instrument and is measured in terms of specific absorption rate (SAR) - the amount of radio waves absorbed by the body tissue when a phone is in use. The new rules state that cellphones can be imported and sold in India only if the SAR level is below 1.6 watts per kg (W/kg).
So far, India had unofficially followed European norms, which state that the maximum SAR level must not exceed 2 W/kg. According to the industry body representing handset makers, nearly 650 models of low-end Chinese handsets don't comply with the new emission standards and will have to be redesigned. Radiation limits for towers have also been tightened to a tenth of the existing exposure level. The government has rejected the demands from the industry that the new norms for tower companies be deferred.
Tower companies are mandated to provide self-certifications on compliance, and the telecom department has decided that all such certifications from this month onwards will be covered by the new norms.
According to the new rules, the SAR value, or the radiation emitted by the handset, must be specified on the device, its manual, the box as well as the websites of both the company and the telecom department.
The radiation figure of each handset model must also be displayed prominently at all retail outlets that sell mobile phones. For consumers, the cost of acquiring a cellphone is set to go up by a minimum of Rs 400. The new rules make it mandatory for all handsets to be sold with a hands free device, as the government believes this step will help reduce the exposure to radiation significantly.
Teacher credited with saving student who had heart attack
Heart attacks amongst teens is becoming normalized and rarely questioned.
Perhaps the question the reporter should be asking: was there a Wi Fi system in the school which may have caused this?
Avoid Maple Ridge
He added that more radio frequency waves are given off from fluorescent lights than cellphone towers.
The above statement should be investigated as a possible criminal offence!
It is obviously false.
It appears to besaid for gain by one person, and for harm and a loss to others.
Is this a fraud? False pretences? Criminal deception?
Letter to the Medical Officer of Health
Cc: Hon. Christy Clark ; Rich Coleman, Minister of Energy ; John Horgan -- office ; adrian....@leg.bc.ca ; Jane Sterk ; alex.atam...@parl.gc.ca ; Elizabet...@parl.gc.ca ; Libby Davies Health Critic ; Mike Farnworth, NDP Health Critic
Sent: Wednesday, April 18, 2012 12:00 PM
Subject: New paper by American Academy of Environmental Mediciin -- smart meters are NOT safe.
Dear Dr. Kendall,
Here is the press release for yet another paper by qualified professionals about the biological effects of microwave radiation, and a call for a halt to installations of more wireless devices, such as WiFi in schools and smart meters. “The American Academy of Environmental Medicine (AAEM) issued a position paper on "Electromagnetic and Radiofrequency Field Effect on Human Health," including wireless technologies and smart meters.
This international group has an amazing record of recognizing problems and calling for solutions before mainstream people are aware of them, such as Gulf War Syndrome, chemical sensitivities, and the role of mold in the development of systemic illnesses. These physicians and professionals have dedicated themselves to expanding the knowledge of human health and its relationship to the environment for close to 50 years. They have the credibility and the track record which means they should be taken seriously and their recommendations heeded.
Your curt response to an earlier paper by this group, sent in January, was that you found nothing new in it and there was nothing to change your stance. The public deserves to know what independent scientific evidence you have upon which to base your statement that smart meters and WiFi are safe. Would you kindly provide this information? Please do not give me the BC Centre for Disease Control or the Planetworks reports. Neither of these studies is well done, peer-reviewed, or capable of standing up to scrutiny. If you feel so certain that there is absolutely no threat to the public from wireless technology, despite the findings to the contrary by many eminent experts in the field, you must have some credible scientific basis for your opinion.
I look forward to receiving evidence at your earliest convenience.
Informant: Martin Weatherall
More about the theme: