Environment-linked conditions | Hypersensitivity To Scents, Perfumes, Chemicals, Cell phones, Cell Towers, chronic fatigue syndrome, fibromyalgia and multiple chemical sensitivities

Why Do Smells Make Some People Sick?  Jan. 22, 2012 — Science Daily

Do you get a headache from the perfume of the lady next to you at the table? Do cleaning solutions at work make your nose itch? If you have symptoms prompted by everyday smells, it does not necessarily mean you are allergic but rather that you suffer from chemical intolerance. According to Linus Andersson at Umeå University, this hypersensitivity can be the result of an inability to get used to smells.


Normally your smell perceptions diminish rapidly, as when you enter a friend’s apartment. Even though you clearly notice smells just inside the door, you don’t think about them for long. For people with chemical intolerance, on the other hand, smells seem always to be present. Psychology researcher Linus Andersson has exposed both intolerant and non-intolerant individuals to smells and compared their reactions.

“The hypersensitive individuals felt that the smell was getting stronger even though its concentration had not changed. Their brain activity images also differed from those in the other group,” he says.

The results were observed using methods based on both electroencephalography (EEG) and functional brain imaging technology (fMRI). The EEG method involved placing electrodes on the heads of trial subjects and registering the minute changes in tension in the brain that arise following exposure to smells. Unlike the people in the normal group, Linus Andersson explains, the intolerant people did not evince a lessening of brain activity during the period of more than an hour they were exposed to a smell. The inability to grow accustomed to smells is thus matched by unchanging brain activity over time.

“These individuals also have a different pattern in the blood flow in their brains, compared with those who perceive that a smell diminishes. A similar change can be found in patients with pain disorders, for example.”

Sensitivity to smell impacts the entire body A further finding in the dissertation is that chemical intolerant people also react strongly to substances that irritate the mucous linings of their nose and mouth. People who cough more when they inhale capsaicin, the hot compound in chili peppers, also have heightened reactions in the brain to other smells. Besides the fact that intolerant individuals perceive that smells grow stronger, effects are also seen in mucous linings and in the brain.

“In other words we can see indications that this intolerance affects both the body and the mind, and that it’s important not to blindly focus on just one of these aspects,” says Linus Andersson.

Chemical intolerance is surprisingly common — up to ten percent of the Swedish population report they are bothered by everyday smells, whereas roughly two percent experience severe symptoms. Yet, in contrast to the situation regarding allergies and asthma, there is very little research about what causes this condition. Linus Andersson maintains that if it were possible to identify what characterizes this hypersensitivity then it would be possible to develop methods for diagnosis and treatment. But research can also provide new knowledge about how we should think about our work and everyday environments.

“Some co-workers are bothered more than others by the smell of the printer — what should we do to make our working conditions acceptable to as many people as possible?”

___________

Strong colognes and perfumes make me have instant migraines,  loss of 75% of vision and vomiting.  I have to move 10 times if I’m on public transit as people sit near you that seem to have been just bathing in the stuff.  If this is you or someone you know please be aware you are potentially making people violently ill.  Please stop waring so much.  Please stop waring any at all.

___________

Hypersensitivity to scents it covered under the Canadian Human Rights Act as a disability.  Accommodation by employers to request a scent free environment is required under this act.

___________

Chemical Free Area

Seriously Sensitve to Pollution

Canadian Recognition of MCS/ES (Multiple Chemical Sensitivities/Environmental Sensitivities)

The Canadian Human Rights Commission

Policy on Environmental Sensitivities

Individuals with environmental sensitivities experience a variety of adverse reactions to environmental agents at concentrations well below those that might affect the “average person”. This medical condition is a disability and those living with environmental sensitivities  are entitled to the protection of the Canadian Human Rights Act, which prohibits discrimination on the basis of disability. …

UPDATE 2013: see Canadian Human Rights Documents Archived

Ontario’s Human Rights Code

What is disability?

“Disability” covers a broad range and degree of conditions, some visible and some not visible. A disability may have been present from birth, caused by an accident, or developed over time. There are physical, mental and learning disabilities, mental disorders, hearing or vision disabilities, epilepsy, drug and alcohol dependencies, environmental sensitivities, and other conditions.

The Code protects people from discrimination because of past, present and perceived disabilities. For example, the Code protects a person who faces discrimination because she is a recovered alcoholic. So is a person whose condition does not limit their workplace abilities, but who is believed to be at greater risk of being able to do less in the future.

http://www.ohrc.on.ca/en/disability-and-human-rights

CERA the Centre for Equality Rights in Accommodation

…While environmental sensitivities are not well understood by the general public, they are recognized by Health Canada, the Canadian Health Network, the Canadian Centre for Occupational Health and Safety, the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation, the Canadian and Ontario Human Rights Commissions, the Ontario Medical Association and the Environmental Health Committee of the Ontario College of Family Physicians – among others….

http://www.equalityrights.org/cera/?page_id=674

Environmental Health Clinic

The Environmental Health Clinic is a unique multidisciplinary clinic, and the only one of its kind in Ontario. It was established in 1996 by the Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care to be a provincial resource in promoting environmental health, and to improve health care for people with environment-linked conditions such as chronic fatigue syndrome, fibromyalgia and multiple chemical sensitivities.

The Environmental Health Clinic is the clinical part of a joint clinical and research program of Women’s College Hospital and the University of Toronto.

http://www.womenscollegehospital.ca/programs-and-services/environmental-health-clinic469/

 

___________

EHS Electro-hypersensitivy

Whole Life Expo 2007 Toronto, November 25, 2007 ____________________________________________________________________________________

Electromagnetic fields:
Questions and answers about wireless technologies

Andrew Michrowski, Ph.D.
The Planetary Association for Clean Energy, Inc

100 Bronson Avenue, Suite 1001 OTTAWA, Ontario K1R 6G8 (613) 236-6265; fax: 235-5876

pacenet@canada.com http://pacenet.homestead.com

____________________________________________________________________________________

What are the issues, the second-hand effects, and the standards for the wireless technologies? ____________________________________________________________________________________

Life on earth has evolved amidst a broad band of electromagnetic frequencies, which originate from throughout the universe. By 1980, environmental exposure to artificial, repetitive or random signals in the radiofrequency / microwave band has risen dramatically – by more than a trillion times, mostly for military technology.

Since 1980, mostly for newly-introduced commercial applications, the average “second-hand” exposure in Southern Canada has risen from about 0.005 microWatt/cm2 to the current background environmental range of 0.4 to 100.0 μWatt/cm2. We note an 8 to 20,000-fold increase with peaks in downtown Toronto and some centres, including Brantford and Mississauga. About 100 square kilometres in Southern Ontario have environmental broadband radiofrequency and microwave power emission exposures during timeframes that can exceed the Health Canada Safety Code 6 exposure limit of approximately 0.6 to 1 milliWatt/cm2 (600 – 1,000microWatt/cm2). Such illegal irradiation coverage can be expected to rise exponentially to several hundred square kilometres in both Ontario and Quebec by the end of this decade, on a more persistent basis, as more and more wireless technologies are approved by governments and marketed. Note that individuals within such exposed zones may experience a continual body temperature rise, with time, (but actually “feel” colder, and may seek greater warmth).

By “second-hand” exposure, we are referring to cases whereby an individual does not own nor use any radiofrequency/microwave device (wireless communication device, microwave oven, wireless computer tool, surgically implanted or portable RFID “spy chip”, etc) and is exposed simply by being in an irradiated zone, often outdoors. Additionally, there are places (public buildings, institutions, restaurants, etc.) where multi-frequency power absorption is unsolicited – actually, legally-speaking, in trespass of body functions. This level of average “second-hand” exposure is doubling annually in sparsely populated regions and tripling within more affluent urban zones. We can expect at 3 to 5 fold increase in second-hand exposure by 2010.

Background power emissions (0.5 MHz – 3GHz band) selected Canadian cities, 2007 microWatt/cm2

page1image20416 page1image20576

page1image21384

City

μWatt/cm2

City

μWatt/cm2

page1image24192

Windsor

0.2 – 15

Cornwall

0.3 – 5

London

0.2 – 5

Ottawa

0.1 – 25

Brantford

0.8 – 50

Montreal

0.1 – 10

Hamilton

2 – 10

St-Hyacinthe

0.1 – 4

Burlington

1 – 10

Mississauga

4.0 – 25

Oakville

1 – 15

Drummondville

0.1 – 4

Toronto

2.5 – 120

Laval

0.1 – 5

Ajax

1 – 10

St-Sauveur / Ste-Adèle

0.1 – 3

Oshawa

1 – 10

Mirabel

0.3 – 8

Trenton

0.2 – 20

Gatineau

0.1 – 5

Belleville

0.2 – 5

Renfrew

0.1 – 3

Kingston

0.3 – 5

Peterborough

0.3 – 3

page1image64080

1

What is behind the increases in second-hand and direct-use microwave exposure?

We can expect a further 3 to 5-fold Canadian general population increase in “environmental” exposure of microwave frequencies within a few years, with more wireless technologies, such as: smart water and electric power meters, intercarrier text messaging, mobile satellite radio, music downloaders, wireless e-mail, wireless video calling, social and corporate networking, mobile television, instant text, multimedia messaging, smartphones, 3G (as well as 4G available in Europe) products and services, GPS mapping. Still more leaps in exposure emerge as the plans of investors, the military and governments materialize: to have every dwelling, school, office and store in the world become a microwave transmitter/receiver for wireless computers and related linkages, and to have transceivers implanted and/or injected in our bodies, including for banking transactions. A significant factor driving cell phone sales worldwide is for telephone banking delivering monetary services to the “unbanked”. Vodaphone started in Kenya Safaricom “mobile money” banking in Swahili, attracting 175,000 subscribers signing up at a rate of 2,500 a day, even if they may need “fingertip” RFID chip authentication for their micro-lending. Although the intention was to enable loan payments, individuals have been using the phones for person-to-person transfers – in a “dial ‘M’ for money” type of culture.

There are 19 million wireless customers in Canada (pop. 32,000,000). More than 5% of households now have only a cell phone. There is a convergence in usage rates with traditional phone services. At the end of 2006, Canada had 55.1 mobile subscribers and 55.3 traditional wire line access lines per 100 inhabitants (vs: 18.7 wireless subscribers and 64.4 traditional wire line accesses in 1999). 74% of those between the ages of 18 and 34 use a cellphone for an average of 400 minutes per month. 40% of Canadians between ages 12 and 24 consider cellphones to be their main means of communication. In the United Kingdom, 90% of the youth use cellphones, many sleeping with them “on”, under their pillows. 10% of the wireless transmissions are data, a segment that is rising 50% every 3 months.

page2image17496

Households with only a cell phone, December 2005

page2image19872 page2image20032 page2image20776 page2image21200 page2image21824 page2image21984 page2image22144

%

page2image23824 page2image23984 page2image24576 page2image24736

Canada

4.8

page2image27272 page2image27696

N.L.

page2image28728 page2image29152

page2image29776 page2image29936 page2image30528 page2image30688

2.3

page2image32208 page2image32368 page2image32960 page2image33120

P.E.I.

3.8

page2image35640 page2image36064

N.S.

page2image37264 page2image37424 page2image38016 page2image38176

4.1

page2image39848 page2image40272

N.B.

page2image41304 page2image41728

page2image42352 page2image42512 page2image43104 page2image43264

2.4

page2image44784 page2image44944 page2image45536 page2image45696

Que .

4.8

page2image48272 page2image48696

Ont.

page2image49728 page2image50152

page2image50776 page2image50936 page2image51528 page2image51688

4.1

page2image53208 page2image53368 page2image53960 page2image54120

Man.

4.5

page2image56640 page2image57064

Sask.

page2image58264 page2image58424 page2image59016 page2image59176

2.5

page2image60832 page2image61256

Alta.

page2image62456 page2image62616 page2image63208 page2image63368

5.8

page2image65032 page2image65456

B.C.

page2image66488

page2image67096 page2image67256 page2image67848 page2image68008

7.1

page2image69528 page2image69688

Source: Statistics Canada, Catalogue no. 56M0001XCB.

Direct-use microwave exposure characteristics and lack of quality control

Microwave devices are notorious for lack of quality control during manufacturing, especially with their emission leakage characteristics. For example, at least 33% of microwave products manufactured, whether microwave ovens or wireless communications devices do not meet the Canada Safety 6 Code, which sets the basic limits that are not be exceeded and are given in terms of body currents either by induction, or contact with energized metallic objects, or in terms of the rate at which radiofrequency/microwave energy is absorbed in a body, averaged over a period of time across the body. Some jurisdictions worldwide have more stringent regulations than Canada, as indicated below. We can infer the rules are not being met worldwide, for lack of competence, compliance and failure to measure emissions at manufacture. Microwave devices tend to easily deteriorate with wear and tear, lack of maintenance and proper cleaning.

INTERNATIONAL Radiofrequency / Microwave EXPOSURE STANDARDS

Country

New South Wales, Australia
Salzburg, Austria (pulsed transmissions) Russia / Bulgaria / Hungary/ Switzerland Belgium
China
Italy / Toronto, Canada
Auckland, New Zealand
Australia
New Zealand / Japan / Germany/ US /Canada United Kingdom

Exposure level (microW/cm2) 0.001
0.1
2 –10

3
7 –10
10
50
200
200 –1,000 1,000 –10,000

2

Toward second-hand exposure statistics

On the basis of environmental irradiation surveys, it can be deduced that, in Toronto – population of over 2,500,000, at least 25,000 individuals are being exposed by unwanted trespass of “second-hand” environmental microwave emissions – for several hours daily – that are more elevated than those permitted by Canada Safety Code 6, simply by working or living in high-density urban “hot-spots” and that this number can increase during periods of wet ground as a result of precipitation. This means that these individuals risk irreversible damage to their body functions merely because of the popularity and the commercialisation of the wireless technologies. While government agencies assume that such environmental emissions are merely “a fog”, actual mapping point out to a dense and active network of multiple frequencies permeating the built-up environment, often without any centralized organisation. The densest groupings of hotspots tend to be in the traditional commercial cores, the transportation nodes (interchanges, bridges, over and underpasses) to and from the city, near high-voltage power transmission lines and near buildings that house significant mainframe computers and automated functions (such as postal sorting facilities, fabricators, etc.).

“Second-hand” microwave geography in Salt Lake City, Utah

Paul M. Torrens, Geography, Arizona State University

Autism connection

It is estimated that at least 300,000 Canadian children are being exposed to, and, are absorbing, illegal levels of microwave power associated with cellphone usage alone. This number is expected to double by 2010, even though the actual total base population of children is expected to decrease. These children face severe (or life-threatening) wireless-related physical conditions. Add to this group about 300,000 in Ontario alone who suffer from some form of autism, considering that 30 years ago, there were only a few hundred cases. More than 1 child in 100 is autistic, compared with 1 in 10,000 only 30 years ago, before the pervasive environmental exposure of wireless technologies.

A study by Tamara Mariea and George Carlo indicates how microwave wireless frequency emissions render cells incapable of releasing heavy metals (including mercury and aluminum), such as those used as stabilizers in the massive vaccination programmes. Heavy metals in the body interfere with the distribution of dopamine, a hormone and a neurotransmitter which controls motor skills. In autistic children, such functions are inhibited. When autistic children are detoxified from heavy metals, and when they are no longer exposed to wireless emissions, they can recover. This situation has the potential for trans-generation toxic accumulation.

page3image20448

3

Microwave device (dry weather conditions)

page4image1616

μWatt/cm2

page4image2520

Common exposure

Cellphone @ user

9 – 3,500

Cellphone, second hand exposure

1 – 200

Microwave oven @ user

10 – 2,000

Cordless phone base station @ 2 to 6m

7 – 17

Analog in urban environment (1-2 blocks away)

5 – 25

Digital in urban environment (within 100m)

0.2 – 5

Analog in rural environment 500m

0.25 – 30

Local amplification by metal window, door frames, studs, metal plumbing, grounding wire, unfiltered telephone and Cable TV wires

1 to 4.5 fold power increase

page4image20976

page4image23320 page4image23480 page4image23640

(microW/cm2) 0.0000000000001

0.0000000001 0.000000001 0.0000000027 0.00000001 0.00000002 0.000005 0.00001 0.000027 0.001

0.002

0.0027 0.0027 to 0.007 0.01 0.016 0.06

0.06

0.05

0.1
0.1 to 1.8

0.13 0.168 0.2 to 8.0 0.3

0.6 0.6 0–4 1.0

1.0 2.5 5.0 2.0

5.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0

1,000.0

Reported Biological Effects

Altered genetic structure in E. Coli Threshold of human sensitivity Altered EEG in human subjects Growth stimulation in Vicius fabus Effects on immune system in mice Stimulation of ovulation in chickens Effect on cell growth in yeast Conditioned “avoidance” reflex in rats Premature aging of pine needles

100 Yards / metres from Cell Phone

Sleep disorders, abnormal blood pressure, nervousness, weakness, fatigue, limb and joint pain, digestive problems, fewer schoolchildren promoted Growth inhibition in Vicius fabus
Smaller tree growth ri ngs

50 Feet from a Cordless Phone

Human sensation

1 Mile (1.6Km) from a Cellular Tower

Altered EEG, disturbed carbohydrate metabolism, enlarged adrenals, altered adrenal hormone levels, structural changes in liver, spleen, testes, and brain in white rats and rabbits
Slowing of the heart, change in EEG in rabbits

10 Feet /3 meters from a Wireless Computer

References

0.065

Belyaev Kositsky Bise Brauer B und y uk Kondra Grundler Kositsky Selga

Altpeter Brauer Balodis

Kolbun

1996
2001
1978
1950
1994
1970
1992

2001 1996

1995, 1997 1950
1996

1987

BIOLOGICAL EFFECTS OF MICROWAVES BELOW U.S. & CANADA’S REGULATORY LIMIT

page4image46880 page4image47040 page4image47200 page4image47360 page4image47520

Increase in melatonin in cows
Decreased life span, impaired reproduction, structural and developmental abnormalities in duckweed plants
Decreased cell growth (human epithelial amnion cells)
Irreversible sterility in mice
Childhood leukemia near transmitters
Impaired motor function, reaction time, memory and attention of school children, and altered sex ratio of children (fewer boys)
Change in calcium ion efflux from brain tissue
Cardiac arrhythmias and sometimes cardiac arrest (frogs)
Altered white blood cell activity in schoolchildren
Headache, dizziness, irritability, fatigue, weakness, insomnia, chest pain, difficulty breathing, indigestion (humans—occupational exposure) Stimulation of white cells in guinea pigs
Breakdown of blood-brain barrier (used a digital cell phone to radiate) Leukemia, skin melanoma and bladder cancer near TV and FM transmitter (lower “Microwave hearing” – clicking, buzzing, chirping, hissing, or high-pitched threshold notetones known)

Biochemical and histological changes in liver, heart, kidney, and brain tissue Damaged mitochondria, nucleus of cells in hippocampus of brain
Impaired memory and visual reaction time in people living near transmitters Decreased size of litter, increased number of stillborns in mice Redistribution of metals in the lungs, brain, heart, liver, kidney, muscles, spleen, bones, skin, blood

Dumanskij 1974
Serkyuk, reported in McRee 1980

Stark 1997

Magone 1996 Kwee 1997 Magras 1997 Hocking 1996

Kolodynski 1996 Dutta 1986 Frey 1968 Chiang 1989

Shutenko 1981
Meg Sears, Medical Perspective on Environmental Sensitivities, Canadian Human Rights Commission, 2007.

United States FCC Exposure Limit, Safety Code 6 Canada limit

4

Salford

1978 1997

Simonenko 1998 Shanda la
1997
Dolk

Frey 1963, 1969, 1971, 1973, 1988, Justeson 1979, Olsen 1980, Wieske 1963, Lin 1978
Belokrinitskiy l982
Belokrinitskiy 1982a
Chiang 1989
Il’Chevich (reported in McRee 1980)

Significant Secondary infrastructure effects

There has been a significant increase in corrosion problems in the last few decades, parallel to the spread and implementation of wireless technologies. Whereas in the 1970s, only a small number of engineers consulted on corrosion problems, now a full quarter of all engineers in North America are experts in corrosion trying to resolve problems associated with building structures, water and oil and gas pipelines, fluid containers. How radiofrequencies affect corrosion can be verified by anyone who replaces a fluorescent compact bulb into a metallic fixture that once had an incandescent bulb. It takes only a few weeks to have the onset of paint coating corroding in lamp holders, followed by the steady eating away of metallic sheeting. Likewise, one can see which urban areas are exposed to elevated levels of microwave emissions: where sewer and telephone service covers rust – actually powder away rather than just coat themselves with oxidation, where fire hydrants crumble – even if installed within the previous 6 months – that is likely to be a zone subject to denser environmental microwave emissions. Normally, such fittings last problem–free for decades. This is an effect of enormous burden to tax and rate-payers.

The Federation of Canadian Municipalities has made an emergency plea to the federal government for $123 Billion within 5 years to avoid building collapses in Canadian cities due to corrosion, which only emphasizes how outrageously expensive for our civilization is this problem of accelerated corrosion from radiofrequencies and microwaves is. What is little known is that most corrosion is induced by weak voltages and amperages from net currents in our electric power delivery systems, which are imbalanced. What is even less known is that as the electric power system becomes more affected by the use of computers and wireless systems, radiofrequencies and microwaves penetrate the electric power system’s ground, via neutral wires. The ground in many populated areas now carries charges that are highly electronic with radiofrequency and microwave characteristics. This new phenomenon accelerates corrosion of materials – whether pipelines, rebars in buildings and transportation infrastructure or even nuclear power plant reactor rods – by quantum leaps. Galvanic coupling between alloys and hydrogen and e particles is accelerated, leading to hydrogen- induced cracking in steels. Electromagnetically-induced Hydrogen diffusion has become so commonplace under such environmental conditions that a Russian scientist, P. S. Orlov proposed this year a method of locating underground corroded (hydrogen saturated/embrittled) steel gas-supply pipes simply by measuring hydrogen leakages. This conduction of charges has been observed with electrochemical impedance spectroscopy (EIS) and reported this year by scientists from Atomic Energy of Canada and the National Research Council of Canada. There is also greater spattering of deposits, crevice enhancements and oxidation reactions.

What we can expect as health effects due to these new exposures?
Experimental observations with low-level microwave exposure

Observation

page5image24128

Effects of microwave emissions

Exposure level

page5image25912

Effects on DNA

Single and double-strand breaks, electron flows within staked base pairs of double helix of DNA molecules, direct gene transcription, 40-90% increase in Fos mRNA from cellphone signals,

2h, 0.6W/kg, 0.001W/kg

Blood-brain barrier

Toxins may reach brain tissues: serotonin, glucose, selective permeability, allows glucose to pass

After 2 minutes, as low as 0.0004W/kg

Psychoactive Drugs

Neurotransmitter functions modified: Pentobarbital (alters narcosis), entylenetetrazol (more convulsions), Curare (less anaesthesia), Valium, Librium (potentiated). Endogenous opiods activated: increase in alcohol use, less of withdrawal symptoms in morphine-dependents

Eye damage

Worsen effects.

Behavioural changes

Major errors in judgment, vision altered; disruptive attitude (hyperactivity); memory problems, [non-lethal weapons for combat advantage]; synthase inhibition caused by increase in body nitric oxide production by digital (pulsed) signals

Cognitive functions

Faster reaction time, auditory memory retrieval [mind control], difficulty in concentration, “fuzzy thinking”, dizziness (indication of serotonin activity increase)

0.16 μWatt/cm2

Sleep

May promote sleep, sleepiness, reduction of REM sleep (important to memory, learning)

Melatonin

Melatonin secretion decreases

Fundamental life processi

ELF-encodes in wireless transmissions may imitate heartbeat, cellular communications, brainwaves, cell growth, human metabolism; sperm count lowered, irreversible infertility in mice after 5 generations from “an antenna park”, chicken embryo mortality increases by half

As low as 0.005 W/kg

Dosedependency

Observed in Korean War, US embassy personnel in Moscow, cumulative effects

Microwave syndrome

Fatigue, irritability, nausea, anorexia, depression Cardiovascular disorders, hypo /hypertension Change in skin, skin allergies, eczema, psoriasis
Increase in lymphocytes, effects in EEGs, reduced insulin production, multiple allergies, Tinnitus, itches in the ear, ears feel heated

As low as 0.02 to 8.0 μWatt/cm2

page5image62776

5

Some, natural, highly-coherent oscillations in living beings have same or similar characteristics as those produced by wireless technologies. For example, the 2Hz-encoded signal from cellphones reporting to base stations resembles the heartbeat (and can entrain heartbeat). Other extremely-low-frequency-encoded signals resemble, and interact with, brain waves, cell growth, cell communication, calcium ion balance and other fundamental life processes, even at levels as low as 0.005W/kg.

What can be done?

In many built environments, microwave power levels are too elevated for even minimum health risk conditions.

Many health practitioners are unaware either of the general exposure conditions, not those of their patients, thus not taking under consideration their bearing of the diagnosis, nor therapy at hand. Similarly, employers may not realize that the microwave environment faced by their employees might adversely affect their job performance, occupational health and safety and productivity.

Fortunately, appropriate design and careful oversight in installation can provide citizens with acceptable, safe and generally no-risk levels of electromagnetic fields. But the implementation of these measures, even if they entail relatively no cost to the public or private purses, requires a public demand for common sense safety.

Municipal governments who participate in the siting process by issuing permits are in the frontline for complaints and legal filings because they are, legally, accomplices. The City of Toronto has an active guideline that provides for a Canadian platform for precedence from a health and safety legal perspective, that other communities can emulate, and eventually help industry and federal regulatory agencies, including the Canadian Radio-Television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC), review their current policies and practices.

An European Parliament expert analysis in 2000, which was comprised of World Health Organization, European Community and scientific peers recommended that the average annual exposure near microwave emitters should not exceed 0.10 μWatt/cm2 (following the lead of the Italian Government notion of quality target) and that anyone exposed to higher fields should receive regular medical attention, including blood analysis, EEG and ECG tests. All zones with higher exposure rates should be posted with markings on pavement and with road signs.

In Canada, you can view your wireless transmission environment on http://spectrum.ic.gc.ca/tafl/tafindxf.html. A socio-political question

Is it worthwhile to promote an industry that emerges while it hurts civilization and induces costs greater and more expensive than the “benefits” that it offers? Is the wireless industry prepared to pay for these costs?

Advertisements

About this entry