Mamás en toda América

MISTERIOSOS DEFECTOS DE NACIMIENTO DE ALEMANIA

IMPACTO DE 5 G DESPLAZAMIENTO EN GELSENKIRCHEN?

En 2017, la ciudad de Gelsenkirchen se asoció con la compañía china Huawei para crear un Laboratorio de Innovación Abierta en el Arena Park de la ciudad como "escaparate", "banco de pruebas" y "centro" de plataforma para desplegar 5 G tecnología para el resto de Europa.

Here are links showing that an experimental 5G rollout called "Open Innovation Lab" was fully operational in Arena Park in Gelsenkirchen between 8/8/18 and 2/28/19 as part of the partnership between Huawei and the city of Gelsenkirchen. We suggest you take screenshots!

Nueve meses después, los medios de comunicación europeos comienzan a informar que cuatro bebés nacieron en el área sin manos. Tres vinieron del mismo hospital entre junio 2019 y septiembre 2019 con el cuarto de un pueblo vecino. Lo que no es sorprendente es que esto se hizo público únicamente debido a la valentía de una soltera llamada Sonja Ligget-Igelmund:

Valiente midwife

Medios de comunicación europeos sobre bebés nacidos con defectos de nacimiento en Gelsenkirchen entre junio y septiembre 2019:

Although this story was mostly ignored in the US, Cnn salud talked to Liggett-Igelmund who said she has been contacted by many families across Germany whose children have been born with similar deformities. "All the babies have the same deformities. Even colleagues have told me about such cases," she told the Süddeutsche Zeitung newspaper. "Roughly speaking, all the children have been born in the past three years, and many of them this summer."

Without further information, we cannot correlate all of these cases with 5G testbed rollouts. Many speculate that it could infections, pesticides or other environmental toxins. But consider that if a "testbed" can happen in Germany without broader public knowledge or consent, it could happen anywhere. We hope we are wrong about the link between the reported defects and untested 5G technology. We have less hope that governments and corporations will slow their 5 implementaciones de G before they obtain conclusive and independent proof that 5G is safe.

Siendo realistas, es aconsejable prepararse ahora y proteger a su familia. ¿Pero cómo?

The good people at Aires Tech have designed a low-cost solution, called Aires shield pro, that reduces the harmful effects of EMFs. Their patented products are third-party validated and peer-reviewed. They've spent over $20 million and 20 combined years on R&D with PhDs in both the medical and physics fields.

The US wireless industry, in contrast, is collectively worth 1/4 of $1 trillion and plans to shroud the entire country in 5G without heeding the ciencia revisada por pares indicating that their products pose a grave riesgo para la salud to life on this planet.

Incluso si te niegas a usar 5 G, estarás expuesto.

The Aires shield pro can help.

Copy and paste this code at revisa for 5% off: momsacross5

EL ELEFANTE INALÁMBRICO EN LA HABITACIÓN

Una descripción general del problema de salud pública que está surgiendo rápidamente en los teléfonos celulares, dispositivos inalámbricos e infraestructura inalámbrica, y cómo el crecimiento en estas tecnologías es un motor poco entendido de los malos resultados y costos de salud.

“The Wireless Elephant in the Room” was written by Camilla Rees, MBA, Senior Policy Advisor, National Institute for Science, Law and Public Policy and Founder, ElectromagneticHealth.org and ManhattanNeighbors.org.
Hard copies in booklet form are available through Amazon.

EL ELEFANTE INALÁMBRICO

Ciertamente, todos estaríamos de acuerdo en que la salud y la conciencia ambiental han aumentado en las últimas dos décadas. Han proliferado los alimentos orgánicos, los centros de yoga, los programas de mente y cuerpo, los clubes de salud y las artes curativas. Incluso han llegado restaurantes saludables de 'comida rápida', y las grandes marcas de alimentos están comenzando a liberarse de los OGM. Como consumidores, estamos tomando cada vez más decisiones 'verdes' que apoyan a la madre tierra y que respetan nuestra relación intrínseca con ella.

PREVENCIÓN

Why then, despite all this interest in health and in living ‘green’, do we have over 133 million people with a chronic illness in the U.S.— approximately 45% of the population¹, and growing? Promotion of ‘prevention,’ and, more recently, ‘rationing’ care, has been the response to high costs driven by chronic illnesses. But in looking for solutions to costs, we may be ‘missing the forest for the trees’, and also not understanding the true meaning of prevention.

The word ‘prevention’ rings hollow unless one is seeking to eliminate the factors that can lead to disease in the first place. These include unhealthy lifestyle choices, how we respond to stress, heavy metal and chemical toxicity, exposures to electromagnetic fields (EMFs), petroleum-based fertilizers, the weed killer glyphosate, GMO foods, poor nutrition, difficult relationships, etc. Today, ‘prevention’ instead typically means early detection of disease with tests like mammography, pap smear and PSA; manipulation of one’s physiology with pharmaceuticals and vaccines (which can have their own negative side effects); and, perhaps, depending on the doctor, advice to eat more vegetables and exercise. But prevention in the full sense of the word means something else entirely, and we ignore this at our peril.

True prevention means first removing from our lives those things that create biological dis-regulation and dis-ease, while identifying and proactively increasing the things that create balance and wellness.

EL ELEFANTE INVISIBLE

A health care system that does not advocate for dramatic reduction in cell phone and wireless radiation exposures ignores over six decades of scientific research showing biological and health effects from electromagnetic fields, including recent research from the NIH.^{2 3} It ignores repeated resolutions from scientists and physicians worldwide calling for caution, and the classification of cell phone and wireless radiation (radiofrequency radiation or RFR) by the WHO’s International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) as a ‘Possible Carcinogen’ (Group 2B).⁴ It ignores the experience of people in every corner of the globe with life-altering, sometimes debilitating, symptoms from acute and chronic exposures to wireless technologies. And, it turns a blind eye to the DNA-damage consequences of these wireless conveniences for ourselves today, as well as for future generations.

In parallel with the growth of chronic illnesses since the 1990s, it is hard not to notice that the amount of wireless communication infrastructure in our midst has been exploding. Four and a half billion people use a cell phone today, whereas in the early 1990s most people didn’t own a cell phone. There are now millions of cell towers radiating the planet, many hundreds of millions WiFi networks⁵ and billions of wireless devices connected to them.⁶

Fuente: Wigle.net

Certainly, there has also been growth in other environmental pollutants during this period, and many people are over-drugged and suffer from drug interactions, with costly side effects, that also drive total costs. For example, on average, individuals 65 to 69 years old take nearly 14 prescriptions per year.⁷ But, as a society, we are not fully ‘seeing’ the important EMF issue in the background, which has direct effects on biology and leads to a wide range of acute and chronic health issues.

In addition to the many known biological effects, EMFs also have interactive effects with man-made chemicals, heavy metals and microorganisms in our bodies, and with metal implants and amalgams, exacerbating the biological effects. And, importantly, unknown to most people, radiofrequency radiation can impact drug actions. The radiation can both enhance and decrease the efficacy of a drug, impacting the drug actions of amphetamines, anxiolytics, opiates and alcohol to name just a few.⁸ Few prescribing physicians are focused on this, or asking patients who take pharmaceutical drugs about their exposures to wireless devices and infrastructure. Overprescribing pharmaceuticals to address electrosensitivity symptoms is one of the resulting travesties, and drugs will never solve the problem.

DESTACANDO NUESTRA BIOLOGÍA

Our bodies are attempting to cope in an entirely different milieu than the one in which most adults today were raised. Biology is being continually stressed from the acute and cumulative effects of these pulsing energy fields and responds by creating stress proteins, as with any other kind of stressor. Is it any wonder, then, that the incidence of chronic illness has accelerated since the early 1990s alongside the rapid proliferation of these technologies?

Here is a graph showing six hours of radiofrequency radiation exposures to an individual in New York City wearing a portable dosimeter on marzo 1, 2016. The graph shows the extraordinary density of electromagnetic field exposures of different kinds, the variable nature of the pulsing and peaks, and that exposures today are way above safety guidelines based on biological scientific evidence⁹ (peaking, in this particular case, in fact, way above the top of the graph).

It should be noted that since the 1990s we have seen tremendous growth in neurological and psychological disorders, such as depression and bipolar disease, autoimmune diseases, inflammatory conditions, autism, ADHD, sleep disorders, chronic fatigue, diabetes and metabolic conditions. In children, we are seeing increases in psychiatric disorders, psychotropic medication use, chronic medical conditions, delinquency, addictions, aggression, sensory integration issues, and disability filings.¹⁰And we are seeing a growing number of reproductive issues and decreased fertility.¹¹

The BioInitiative Report (much of which was later published in Pathophysiology) synthesizes the key findings of thousands of scientific studies showing biological effects from electromagnetic fields.¹² The U.K. publication, Electromagnetic Sensitivity and Electromagnetic Hypersensitivity, available through E.S.-U.K.¹³ contains references to 1,800 studies showing effects of low-intensity exposures. There exists decades of military Radiofrequency (RF) research showing risk, much foreign research, and even an industry-funded review, “Mobile Telecommunications and Health,” prepared by the Ecolog Institute, which was issued in 2000 and lays out the known risks in great detail, including DNA risks, cancer risks and risks to children.¹⁴

The International Commission for Electromagnetic Safety (ICEMS) and the National Institute for the Study and Control of Cancer and Environmental Diseases ‘Bernardino Ramazzini’, published a report, “Non-thermal Effects and Mechanisms of Interaction Between Electromagnetic Fields and Living Matter” in 2010. This was an international effort by scientists to compile what was known at that time about the biological effects and mechanisms of action, and included studies showing EMFs create oxidative stress, blood-brain barrier permeability, genotoxic and fertility effects, heat shock (or stress) proteins, changes in the autonomic nervous system (ANS) and in neurotransmitters, and much more.¹⁵

The millions of magnetic crystals per gram of brain tissue that orient us to the Earth’s magnetic field (as high as 100 million crystals per gram in brain membranes) are also affected by artificial electromagnetic fields and are believed to be playing a role, as well, in the biological dis-regulation occurring.¹⁶

More recently, Dr. Martin Pall, Professor Emeritus of Biochemistry and Basic Medical Sciences at Washington State University, has built a case that Voltage-Gated Calcium Channel (VGCC) activation in cells from low-intensity EMFs, such as those emitted by cell phones, wireless devices and wireless infrastructure, is a primary mechanism of biological dysfunction. He believes the VGCC activation in cells can explain long-reported association between electromagnetic fields and a wide range of biological changes and health effects, including:¹⁷

1) Varios efectos neuropsiquiátricos, incluidos cambios en la estructura y función del cerebro, cambios en varios tipos de respuestas psicológicas y cambios en el comportamiento.

2) Al menos ocho efectos endocrinos (hormonales) diferentes.

3) Los efectos cardíacos que influyen en el control eléctrico del corazón, incluidos los cambios en los ECG que producen arritmias, cambios que pueden poner en peligro la vida.

4) Rompe cromosomas y otros cambios en la estructura cromosómica.

5) Cambios histológicos en los testículos.

6) Muerte celular (lo que ahora se llama apoptosis, un proceso importante en las enfermedades neurodegenerativas).

7) Disminución de la fertilidad masculina, incluida la calidad y función de los espermatozoides, y también la fertilidad femenina (menos estudiada).

8) Estrés oxidativo.

9) Cambios en los flujos de calcio y señalización de calcio.

10) Daño del ADN celular que incluye roturas de cadena sencilla y roturas de cadena doble en el ADN celular y también 8 -OHdG en el ADN celular.

11) Cáncer que probablemente implique estos cambios en el ADN pero también aumente las tasas de eventos similares a la promoción de tumores.

12) Efectos terapéuticos que incluyen la estimulación del crecimiento óseo.

13) Formación de cataratas (anteriormente se pensaba que era térmica, ahora se sabe que no lo es).

14) Descomposición de la barrera hematoencefálica.

15) Depleción de melatonina e interrupción del sueño.

Dr. Pall says, “We’re clearly at a point where we can confidently debunk the industry’s argument of more than 20 years that there cannot be a biological mechanism of action from these low-intensity EMFs. According to industry, the forces electromagnetic fields place on electrically-charged groups in the cell are too weak to produce biological effects. However, the unique structural properties of the VGCC protein can, it turns out, explain why the force on a cell’s voltage sensor from low-intensity EMFs is millions of times stronger than are the forces on singly-charged groups elsewhere in the cell.¹⁸ They may be low intensity but with regard to the VGCCs, can have a tremendously powerful impact on the cell. Furthermore, published studies showing that calcium channel blocker drugs block or greatly lower biological effects from electromagnetic fields confirm there is a voltage-gated calcium channel mechanism that is occurring.”¹⁹

Si bien puede haber otros mecanismos que pueden conducir a efectos biológicos de los EMF, ahora sabemos que la activación del VGCC es al menos un factor muy importante que puede conducir a una variedad de efectos.

¿No es hora de que comencemos a prestar atención y pensar más sobre el 'Elefante inalámbrico' en la habitación si queremos mejorar a las personas y reducir los costos de atención médica?

Después de todo, tenemos más de medio siglo de ciencia que muestra efectos biológicos, mientras que las exposiciones a la radiación continúan siendo cada vez más penetrantes y poderosas.

¿Temo, me pregunto, reconocer a este elefante?

LOS EXPERTOS SON ADVERTENCIA

De hecho, se necesitaron décadas para que surgiera la verdad sobre los riesgos del tabaco, el asbesto y la pintura con plomo, pero en el caso de los campos electromagnéticos, los expertos advierten que, debido a las exposiciones ubicuas, debemos actuar con urgencia para evitar consecuencias de consecuencias potencialmente catastróficas. dimensiones.

Ominously, in 2013, Harvard autism expert, Martha Herbert, MD, published an article indicating that the very same biological changes happening in autism happen with electromagnetic field exposures.²⁰

Ella dice que la evidencia es suficiente ahora para garantizar nuevos estándares de exposición pública, y prácticas preventivas fuertes e interinas. "Con aumentos dramáticos en las ASC (condiciones del espectro autista) que coinciden en el tiempo con el despliegue de tecnologías inalámbricas, necesitamos una investigación agresiva de los posibles enlaces ASC-EMF / RFR", dice el Dr. Herbert.

Autism now affects approximately 1 in 50 school age children,²¹ up from 1 in 1,500 in the 1990s, when the widespread proliferation of antenna infrastructure began.²² MIT Senior Research Scientist Stephanie Seneff of MIT’s Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory projects 1 in 2 children will be on the autism spectrum by 2032. If there is even a small chance EMFs could be playing a role in the growth of autism, along with other factors, like vaccines, mercury and glyphosate, the topic certainly deserves our immediate attention, given the condition’s continued non-stop growth and the seriously alarming projections.

El Dr. Herbert dice: “EMF / RFR de WiFi y torres celulares pueden ejercer un efecto desorganizador en la capacidad de aprender y recordar, y también pueden ser desestabilizadoras para las funciones inmunes y metabólicas. Esto hará que sea más difícil para algunos niños aprender, particularmente aquellos que ya están teniendo problemas en primer lugar ”.

Beyond RF impacts on attention, memory, and behavior, in extreme cases, children are exhibiting signs of “digital dementia”, where overuse of technology leads to symptoms comparable to dementia in the elderly.²³ We should be aghast that this is occurring to children, and that companies are allowed to push wireless technology on them without regard to the short- or long-term consequences.

In commercial or industrial grade WiFi, found in schools, where the RF radiation is designed to be strong enough to easily go through cement walls, and to handle dozens to hundreds of users, the rate of cardiac arrest in children can be 40x the expected rate. Instead of addressing the increasing incidence of heart irregularities in children by turning off the WiFi, some schools are sheepishly addressing the problem by installing defibrillators.²⁴ This is clearly no solution.

There is a statistically significant increased risk for brain cancer from cell phone use, enough to now upgrade the IARC classification to Group 1 ‘Carcinogen’ from ‘Possible Carcinogen’ according to recently published studies.²⁵ Young people who begin using cell phones heavily before age 20 have four to five times more risk of brain cancer by their late 20s.²⁶ Risk has been shown to increase with years and total hours of use, as would be expected.

David Carpenter, MD, Director del Instituto de Salud y Medio Ambiente de la Universidad de Albany, un ex funcionario del Departamento de Salud del Estado de Nueva York que dirigió el laboratorio de salud pública más grande del estado y que anteriormente fue Decano de la Escuela de Salud Pública de la Universidad de Albany / SUNY dice: "Hay pruebas claras y contundentes de que el uso intensivo de teléfonos celulares aumenta el riesgo de cáncer cerebral, tumores del nervio auditivo y cáncer de la glándula parótida, la glándula salival en la mejilla por el oído . "

In a letter to a school Board of Trustees, Martin Blank, PhD, of the Department of Physiology and Cellular Biophysics at Columbia University, and author of “Overpowered: The Dangers of Electromagnetic Radiation (EMF) and What You Can Do About It,” says, “I can say with conviction, in light of the science, and in particular in light of the cellular and DNA science, which has been my focus at Columbia University for several decades, putting radiating antennas in schools (and in close proximity to developing children) is an uninformed choice.” He adds, “Assurances that the antennas are within ‘FCC guidelines’ is meaningless today, given that it is now widely understood that the methodology used to assess exposure levels only accounts for one type of risk from antennas, the thermal effect from the power, not the other known risks, such as non-thermal frequencies, pulsing, signal characteristics, etc. They fail also to consider multiple simultaneous exposures from a variety of sources in the environment, and cumulative exposures over a lifetime. Compliance with FCC guidelines, thus, unfortunately, is not in any way an assurance of safety today, as the guidelines are fundamentally flawed.”²⁷

In 2015, 190 EMF scientists from 39 countries sent an International EMF Scientist Appeal to the United Nations, saying the World Health Organization has an internal conflicting stance on risks from electromagnetic fields, that needs strengthening, calling for protection of humans and wildlife.²⁸Columbia’s Dr. Martin Blank was the Appeal’s spokesperson. Watch the video here:

To date, there is evidence of a connection between electromagnetic fields and nine cancers: Glioma (brain cancer), Acoustic Neuroma (tumor on acoustic nerve), Meningioma (tumor of the meninges), Salivary Gland cancer (parotid gland in cheek), Eye Cancer, Testicular Cancer, Leukemia, Thyroid Cancer and Breast Cancer. In five of these cancers, the RF-cancer connection has now been identified in multiple studies and in multiple countries.²⁹

Approximately 3-5% of people are also estimated to be electrically sensitive in developed countries,³⁰ with up to 35% mildly electrically sensitive.

Overall, the risks and warnings from scientists the world over do not paint a pretty picture, given that billions of people are now using cell phones and wireless devices, while mistakenly thinking they are safe. Wireless radiation is blanketing employees in offices, the sick in hospitals, travelers in hotels, schoolchildren in schools, people in their homes and bedrooms, and even newborns in the neonatal intensive care unit at one Los Angeles hospital.³¹

Young people of childbearing age have no idea that a fetus’ exposure to RF radiation in utero can lead to biological effects, such as effects on the brain and on organs,³² and to greater instances of emotional and social difficulties later in childhood.³³ Young men don’t know that they regularly incur risks to fertility by placing a cell phone in their pants pocket.³⁴ Elders sleeping near a WiFi router, or near a portable phone, have not been told these exposures can impact cognitive function, or lead to heart irregularities and accelerated aging.³⁵

In this video on risks from electromagnetic fields in pregnancy, The Baby Safe Project,³⁶ a collaboration between Grassroots Environmental Education and Environmental Health Trust, features Yale University’s Chair of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Sciences and Professor of Molecular, Cellular and Developmental Biology, Dr. Hugh Taylor; Dr. Devra Davis of Environmental Health Trust; and Dr. Leo Trasande from NYU Langone School of Medicine.

Las personas en edad fértil querrán escuchar atentamente lo que dicen estos expertos y escuchar sobre la investigación del Dr. Taylor en animales que muestra una asociación entre la exposición del teléfono celular en el útero y síntomas similares al TDAH en la descendencia.

Devra Davis, Ph.D. dice: "La creciente evidencia nos dice que los hombres que desean engendrar bebés sanos deben seguir los consejos de los fabricantes y mantener los teléfonos fuera de sus bolsillos. El embarazo también es un momento de vulnerabilidad evidente, razón por la cual crece un número de médicos aconseja a las mujeres jóvenes que eviten la exposición directa a su abdomen de la radiación de microondas de los teléfonos celulares y otros dispositivos de transmisión inalámbricos ". Ella agrega:" Las personas tienen el derecho fundamental de saber por qué y cómo proteger su capacidad de tener hijos cuando y si eligen hacerlo ".

¿Por qué los medios convencionales ignoran la ciencia EMF cuando tanta gente, de todas las edades, está en riesgo?

CAMINO DE LA OSCURIDAD

Los desarrolladores y fabricantes de tecnología también están desarrollando el próximo 'Internet de las cosas' (IoT), donde los electrodomésticos y equipos en nuestras vidas se comunicarán de forma inalámbrica constantemente en nuestros hogares, pero esto es un mal augurio para la salud, lo que se suma a las exposiciones actuales. ¿Por qué querríamos tener radiación inalámbrica de múltiples dispositivos electrónicos que nos cubren en el santuario de nuestra casa y sin la capacidad de apagarlos? No solo se trata de un problema de salud, sino que es un problema de privacidad, que brinda a terceros la oportunidad de estudiar nuestros comportamientos en detalle para sus fines comerciales.

The FCC has given the green light to move forward with 5th generation (5G) wireless technology, saying it is in the interest of U.S. ‘economic activity,’ and it recently reallocated parts of the spectrum for it. 5G will utilize ultra-high frequencies (24 to 100+ GHz compared to 2.4 and 5 GHz currently used). Ultra-high frequencies are being permitted, despite research on 2G (GSM) technology showing risks for brain and heart tumors in federal government animal studies; despite 3G (UMTS) technology, though 1000x lower power than 2G, demonstrating several times the cancer risk compared to 2G,³⁷ ostensibly due to factors other than power, such as modulation (which has been shown to impact DNA repair genes³⁸); and, despite no health research having yet been conducted on 4G. Nonetheless, outgoing FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler says the country will be covered in a massive deployment of new 5G small cells, on which there has also been no health research. While smaller cells may not be as visible to the public as large cell towers, their presence—and radiation—will be ubiquitous and potentially much more dangerous and biologically disruptive than the radiation we experience today.³⁹

Se estima que el mercado 5 G, que ya está en marcha por los desarrolladores, crecerá a cientos de millones de dólares en la próxima década.

Of equal concern, large media companies like SpaceX, Google, Facebook, OneWeb, and Outernet are planning to launch WiFi from the air and space, using satellites, balloons, and drones. The Google Loon project is an example.⁴⁰

This type of out-of-the-box R&D may give tech employees a sense of purpose, with the novelty of being a welcomed stimulant, perhaps, but the real value in connecting all material things in our lives, or in using space for communications, interfering with the atmosphere, when far safer and more energy-efficient hard-wired options exist, has yet to be explained. For our health, of course, we would want to be pushing entirely different ‘edges’, such as developing meaningful connections among people, and communities, not inanimate machines, and restoring our lost relationship with nature, while using the safer, faster and more secure wired technology options that are readily available.

It appears many in technology circles really don’t understand this, for they seem to regularly mistake what is only a facsimile of interconnection for our real potential in this regard. There is no intrinsic value in ‘integrating us with our information,’ or in tethering us to our devices, or in giving data companies the ability to analyze us for their commercial gain, all while using a tremendous amount of energy to sustain wireless equipment and to store data. Product development should instead aim, fundamentally, to meet a market need, while being mindful of health, and of environmental and social impacts.

We are in a new business era, and companies will increasingly be called to account for evidence of social responsibility. We are seeing this in the loud demands for non-GMO food, for transparency in product ingredients, in the fair trade movement, in calls for vaccine injury accountability, and, for example, recently in the market response to the first interactive, internet-connected Barbie doll, ‘Hello Barbie’. Hello Barbie was lambasted by irate parents over privacy and security concerns, designated “Worst Toy of the Year” by Campaign for Commercial Free Childhood⁴¹ and flopped in the marketplace, achieving only a small fraction of predicted sales.

There are many international groups now calling for wireless companies and their executives to be brought before the International Criminal Court at the Hague for crimes against humanity, as well more and more academics voicing concern about the effects of overuse of technology, and internet addiction, in our culture. And yet ironically, some technology executives who seduce us into thinking non-stop, biologically-disruptive communications technology is actually desirable probably believe that they are doing us a favor. The myopia��and focus on growth at any cost is profound. As a society, we need to be asking what is at the root of this myopia. How did it happen that so many in technology circles are overlooking one of the most important aspects of life—health—seemingly in denial that we are electromagnetic ourselves? Can it really be only about the greed?

DESPERTAR: ANTES DEL PUNTO DE VUELTA

Llegará el día en que se conozcan las lesiones profundas a nuestras vidas y a las generaciones futuras de las tecnologías inalámbricas, incluidos no solo los efectos biológicos y de salud, y los vínculos con las enfermedades, sino también los efectos psicológicos, como la autoestima poco desarrollada y otros efectos , como conductas compulsivas, adicción y aislamiento. Estamos siendo condicionados como ratas en una cinta de correr, cada vez más adictos a la tecnología e incapaces de dejar de tomar la droga. Muchos niños Nunca he conocido la calidad de vida posible sin ataduras al universo sin parar. No conocen la paz, o la sensación de seguridad y orientación interna posible en completa quietud, cuando uno está profundamente conectado con el mundo natural, o en la comunidad, y no está conectado a la electrónica hecha por el hombre.

Lo que cada vez más sacrificamos en el mundo inalámbrico moderno son las relaciones de significado y satisfacción entre las personas, y la conciencia de que los humanos y el ecosistema están destinados a vivir en una relación activa, viva, de apoyo y alegre. En cambio, muchas personas, incluidos los niños, están apegados al estimulante de la tecnología, 'comiendo la manzana', por así decirlo, ignorando el Jardín del Edén que tenemos ante nosotros. Estamos en un camino de decadencia y decadencia y seguiremos en este camino mientras sigamos siendo capturados y adictos a los estímulos.

Llegará un día de ajuste de cuentas. Al igual que con los niños pequeños sin control de impulsos, las personas, los adultos y los niños por igual, tendrán que aprender sus propias lecciones de esta manera difícil, ya que las cosas más importantes se evaporan, comenzando con las relaciones y los sistemas de apoyo. Esto ya está sucediendo en todos los grupos de edad. A pesar de toda la "interconexión" prometida por la tecnología, las personas parecen estar menos conectadas en el verdadero sentido de la palabra y más solas que nunca.

Y no solo los humanos están sufriendo por la exposición a la radiación. En 2014, el Departamento del Interior de los Estados Unidos dijo que los estándares de la FCC para la radiación de radiofrecuencia no protegen adecuadamente la vida silvestre. Este fue un momento decisivo. Sigo preguntándome cuándo los líderes del sector público en este país no solo reconocerán el impacto de esta radiación en humanos, animales, plantas y el ecosistema (en masa), sino que actuarán con urgencia. ¿Qué tienen sus personas ¿Pensar en eso podría ser más importante que una premonición de la salud humana y la catástrofe ambiental de los campos electromagnéticos que finalmente afectarán nuestra sostenibilidad? De hecho, necesitamos un replanteamiento completo de la forma en que vivimos en esta Tierra, en muchos aspectos.

Es importante entender que la evidencia de los efectos biológicos de esta radiación no es nueva. La evidencia del daño se remonta a décadas de investigación militar, décadas antes incluso de que existiera una industria de telefonía celular o inalámbrica de consumo. Puede que no haya importado tanto en los primeros años de estas tecnologías cuando los usuarios se encontraban en entornos militares, y las exposiciones no estaban muy extendidas. Pero hoy, estamos viviendo en un denso mar de radiación, día y noche. Y las exposiciones se están acelerando a un ritmo rápido y continuarán empeorando a menos que las personas, incluidos los responsables políticos, se unan para cuestionar lo que está sucediendo en nuestro entorno de vida.

The list of known biological effects is now very long and presents a compelling rationale for rapidly scrapping the way the FCC assesses cell phone and wireless safety, and for developing exposure guidelines that consider not only any thermal effects of the radiation, but the non-thermal (non-heating), and other effects, as well. Martin Blank, Ph.D. and Reeba Goodman, Ph.D. of Columbia University have wisely suggested using changes in DNA biochemistry as a definitive measure of risk across all the different types of frequencies.⁴²

Dado que tenemos reguladores de la FCC con enlaces a la industria inalámbrica y conflictos de interés significativos, las posibilidades de cambio voluntario en la FCC son escasas. Es probable que sea el sistema legal el que finalmente impulse el cambio.

Un caso bajo la Ley de Estadounidenses con Discapacidades está en marcha en Massachusetts por padres de un niño de 12 años que experimenta síntomas de electrosensibilidad de 5 Ghz WiFi en una escuela privada, buscando alojamiento para el niño. Se espera que las audiencias de expertos se completen en breve, y se tomará una decisión judicial sobre si la ciencia es lo suficientemente sustancial como para respaldar la condición de 'electrosensibilidad'. La demanda procedería a una decisión judicial o un juicio con jurado.

En una demanda multipartita sobre los riesgos de los teléfonos celulares (Murray et al v. Motorola et al) en 2014, el juez Frederick H. Weisberg dijo:

“Si incluso existe una posibilidad razonable de que la radiación de los teléfonos celulares sea cancerígena, nos toca el momento de actuar en los sectores regulatorio y de salud pública. Aunque el costo financiero y social de restringir tales dispositivos sería significativo, esos costos palidecen en comparación con el costo en vidas humanas de no hacer nada, solo para descubrir dentro de treinta o cuarenta años que los primeros signos apuntaban en la dirección correcta. Si la probabilidad de carcinogenicidad es baja, pero la magnitud del daño potencial es alta, una buena política pública dicta que no se debe ignorar el riesgo ”.

But we cannot afford to wait for government, the legal system, or the health care system to effectively respond before acting to protect and preserve our biology. People can do a lot now preventatively to protect health if they understand the risks, while also encouraging an appropriate response from our government, especially Congress. See 50+ EMF Safety Tips and Insights and For Parents to Know.

CONEXIÓN A COSTOS

Volvamos a la prevención y a nuestro sistema de atención médica. Actualmente, estamos pagando por un sistema de atención médica hinchado, costoso, farmacéutico y orientado al tratamiento que no está educando a las personas sobre la necesidad de minimizar las exposiciones a la radiación inalámbrica (u otros factores ambientales) cuando muchos de los problemas de las personas se derivan de estas exposiciones . En cambio, esperamos hasta que aparezcan los síntomas y luego los tratamos con productos farmacéuticos, modulando la fisiología, pero nunca abordando las raíces del problema. Esta es una situación de no ganar.

People are given sleeping pills, for example, instead of being told to try turning off the wireless router, or heart medications, instead of being told wireless radiation can lead to heart irregularities (in one study increasing the heart rate in 40% of subjects—almost doubling the rate in one subject).⁴³ Children by the millions are being given ADHD medications, while increasingly tethered to biologically disturbing wireless devices that could be contributing to attention difficulties. Homeowners across the country do not know the new radiating utility meters are making them sick, or that they can, in many cases, opt-out.⁴⁴

La lista continua. Estas exposiciones están erosionando nuestra salud, pero muchas están bajo nuestro control diario.

In a Harvard Safra Center for Ethics report, “Captured Agency: How the Federal Communications Commission is Dominated by the Industries it Presumably Regulates,” the authors said ‘public ignorance’ is the best ally of industry. But this ignorance about wireless impacts won’t last. People are increasingly motivated to find solutions to their health challenges themselves, in part due to the new, very high deductible insurance plans. This is good. As health costs rise higher and higher, sooner or later more and more people will likely connect the dots between a wide range of health challenges and wireless devices and infrastructure—ranging from inflammation- related problems, like joint pain, to neurological diseases, heart irregularities, brain tumors, low fertility, and cancers—and decide to minimize their personal exposures.

Si bien el nuevo mandato de seguro de salud tiene como objetivo garantizar que el sistema de atención médica pueda estar a cargo de los costos de atención médica de las personas, como los costos de hospitalización costosos (y para la mayoría de las personas, prohibitivos), que limitan los costos de bolsillo anuales de los pacientes, el sistema ciertamente no es No atender los intereses de los pacientes en materia de prevención ahora, o intentar comprender las fuentes fundamentales de desequilibrio que impulsan el crecimiento de enfermedades crónicas en primer lugar, como los campos electromagnéticos. Vale la pena intentar hacer que la atención sea asequible para las personas, pero el enfoque actual está tratando de parchear el sistema de atención de la salud hacia abajo, mucho después de que muchas, si no la mayoría, enfermedades podrían haberse prevenido.

Only when we start focusing on root sources of imbalances, like EMFs, as well as food and water toxicity, chemicals in everyday products, GMOs, glyphosate, pharmaceuticals, vaccines, poor nutrition, etc., and decide to teach people how to live healthily, will we be offering the quality of care that has a chance of actually getting people better. Otherwise, without telling people the truth on these matters, we’ve essentially given up on peoples’ health potential from the get-go.

Cuando se trata de EMF, estamos permitiendo que la población esté continuamente expuesta a tecnologías inalámbricas biológicamente perturbadoras que pueden hacer que las personas se sientan cansadas, irritables, distraídas, deprimidas, ansiosas, adictas, improductivas, hostiles y sintiéndose como 'zombies', y eso puede conducen a muchas enfermedades, incluidas muchas graves y potencialmente mortales, como los tumores cerebrales.

Significant harm is being done to our society biologically, psychologically, spiritually and economically right before our eyes. A poll by Common Sense Media reported on by CNN recently indicated half of teenagers believe they are addicted to their smartphones.⁴⁵

Isn’t it time we courageously acknowledge the damaging impact of cell phones and wireless technologies and find a new path forward?

¿Por qué, en esencia, deberíamos estar de acuerdo en ser el daño colateral de los valores equivocados de la industria inalámbrica que están dañando a los humanos, los animales y la naturaleza, y especialmente a los niños, en una escala sin precedentes, para su beneficio comercial?

Animo a todos a defender la salud, comenzar a hacer preguntas y exigir que esta industria oscura, que propaga enfermedades y muertes, se regule adecuadamente para proteger nuestra salud y la de las generaciones futuras.

The Author: Camilla Rees, MBA is an internationally respected researcher and educator on the biological and health effects of electromagnetic fields, and co-author of “Public Health SOS: The Shadow Side of the Wireless Revolution”. She founded ElectromagneticHealth.org and Campaign for Radiation Free Schools (Facebook) and co-founded the International EMF Alliance. Camilla is a Senior Policy Advisor to the National Institute for Science, Law and Public Policy; Advisory Board member of the International Institute for Building-Biology™ & Ecology; a Voting Member of the U.S. Health Freedom Congress; and EMF Advisor to Citizens for Health, Radiation Research Trust (U.K.) and Mercola.com.