ElectroSensitivity-UK

Discovery Magnets is a online retailer of the Biophone and Bioguard from ecoflow for protection against the all-pervasive electronic pollution which is often the cause of symptoms of electro-sensitivity. Try it for 90 days or your money back. Read the articles below, then visit my Bioguard page or call for a discussion.

Discovery Magnets provides this document taken from the UK electrosensitiviy website - www.es-uk.info for the convenience of visitors. The original site has been inaccessible for some time but is now online again - please click on the link above.

Are you electro-sensitive? What are the symptoms?

• Bewildered individuals with reddened skin, eye irritation, tingling, stinging or pricking sensations, swollen mucus membranes, headaches, fatigue and cardiac palpitations were pestering university scientists and commercial electromagnetic shielding experts for advice and help with their symptoms and their causes. Most GPs were considering it ‘psychosocial’ and due to stress and even delusions etc. “computers and mobile phones or wiring cannot make you ill” they proclaimed as they had received no training, lacked definite knowledge, were unfamiliar with the condition so reluctant to accept their patient's reports of EMF effects at face value.

• We call it electrosensitivity, the military have for decades called it ‘radiowave or microwave sickness’. They are well familiar with it. There are companies who even advertise microwave weapons designed to incapacitate, confuse, burn and kill. Health effects exist or else the weaponry could not. Of course there are exposure differences, but instead of massive effects from micro-seconds at high power, a continuous low level 24/7 barrage of radiation interferes with the body and brains’ normal functioning. It causes niggling nagging discomfort which cumulatively, without avoidance or precautions, becomes very debilitating and life de-stabilising.

• In September 2003 about forty concerned professionals; academics and experts on migraines, sick buildings, VDU sickness, allergies and hypersensitivity met and discussed this as a serious but neglected health issue: ‘Electrosensitivity; Real Or Imagined?’in The Electromagnetic Biocompatibility Association (EMBA) at the Royal Society of Medicine, Wimpole Street. It was decided unanimously that electrosensitivity is real.

• On December 17th a board of trustees was set up with Professor of Human Radiation Effects Dr Denis Henshaw of the University of Bristol Physics Department, Dr David Dowson M.B., Ch.B a GP and now a specialist in idiopathic conditions, and Ms Jean Philips BA. technical consultant and author from ‘Powerwatch’. An administrator, Mr Rod Read M.Phil., Dip.Psych., Cert Ed., all from the EMBA meeting, was recruited to establish a national organisation, christened ‘ElectroSensitivity-UK’.

• This group was Registered on April 2nd 2004 as a charity number 1103018. with twin aims: 1) Supporting floundering and isolated individuals by analysis of their symptoms and suggesting treatments utilising others’ experiences. 2) To educate the public and health professionals by campaigning for ES acknowledgement and recognition.
Serious EHS sufferers are isolated, with difficulties telephoning, no mobiles, no TV or internet/computer, little travel etc. and without an organisation to bring them together.

• Our trustee Dr David Dowson believes we have an ‘uphill struggle’ educating health professionals and others, swimming, as we are, against a tide of powerful commercial interests. We also have an ‘unscientific/sensationalist’ populist media bias to contend with that prefers simple human interest ‘victim’ tales to any elucidation of the science. This is unsurprising, wealthy companies with well-funded PR departments ‘spin and spoonfeed’ selected journalists to mock and muffle our message, simultaneously offering lavish slick advertising spending.

But you have found us, something is causing you to look more deeply.

• As part of our work this website www.electrosensitivity.org.uk is designed and put online with address and telephone contacts. As the word spreads more affected individuals, like you perhaps, have come forward. We are now in the low hundreds in our data-base.

Every single one has had a hard fight to self-diagnose what on earth is going on for them, why they have their symptoms, why they get no effective help and so on.

They have battled against contempt, mockery, disdain and disbelief from work-colleagues, family and friends, it is quite horrible for many before arriving at the ‘steep learning curve’ we warn them they must climb. Resistance to acknowledging this environmentally caused illness made by human reactions to this formerly ‘clean’ and beneficial energy and communication technology is institutionally deep. The research to tease out the how, the where and the why of it is barely commenced. Deny and delay is still the favoured eyes shut stance.

We have accumulated a little knowledge, maybe the most in the UK on this issue, which we share as we advise and support. We search world-wide for information where many others are as concerned as we are, visit our links page and check it out. ES-UK provides a focal point for ES sufferers here, and often mainland Irish and other Europeans contact us too.
Fact and advice sheets are assembled and circulated with a newsletter. We are virtually unresourced, have no funds and no political or commercial agenda other than doing what is right for a vulnerable minority struck down by this idiopathic intolerance, and warning others. It was foreseen by Sir William Stewart in his official guidance to the government MTHR safety report back in 2000.

• The Chairman of The Independent Expert Group on Mobile Phones, Sir William Stewart, now head of two Government ‘watchdogs’, the UK Health Protection Agency,(HPA) and also the subsumed safety guideline setter, the National Radiological Protection Board now the HPA Radiation Protection Division (HPA/RPD) . Representing the expert group he gave evidence to the Trade and Industry Select Committee Inquiry of Parliament that:

• “Overall the balance of evidence to date suggests that exposure to RF emissions below the national guidelines do not cause adverse health effects to the general population.”

• However, we (his expert group) went on to say that:
“there was now scientific evidence that there may be biological effects occurring at exposures below those guidelines. Biological effects do not necessarily translate into health effects, but neither do they necessarily not translate.”

Stewart 1 recommended, at paragraph 6.40, that "a precautionary approach to the use of mobile phone technologies be adopted until much more detailed and scientifically robust information on any health effects becomes available".

At paragraph 6.41 it was said that "On its own, adoption of the ICNIRP guidelines will not allow fully for current gaps in scientific knowledge, and particularly the possibility of, as yet, unrecognised thermal or non-thermal effects at lower levels of exposure."

At paragraph 6.44 Stewart 1 referred to the current "uncertainties in scientific knowledge".

The NRPB in Mobile Phones and Health 2004 Vol 15 No. 5 2004 concluded: "The Board believes that the main conclusions reached in [Stewart 1] still apply today and that a precautionary approach to the use of mobile phone technologies should continue to be adopted" and "The possibility therefore remains open that there could be health effects from exposure to RF fields below guideline levels; hence continued research is needed".

• Further, and this is absolutely central for us, he continued in Stewart 1:

“It is simply not possible to say that there are no potential effects on the human population. It is difficult to talk about the population because populations vary. Antibiotics do a wonderful job for the general population, but there is a sub-group in the population that is allergic to antibiotics; they cannot take them. There is a sub-group in the general population who cannot eat nuts because they are allergic to them. That is why we refer to the general population.”

This report only deals with mobile phone microwave frequencies. Our concerns go wider and deeper because we believe it is the total exposure of the individual to EMF radiation that has health bioeffects. From wherever electricity is running and creating electromagnetic fields there is danger it will interfere with our own internal delicate signalling and electrical transmissions from the cellular level upwards, through the nervous system, the cardiac and hormonal and on to brainwaves.

To answer your queries as to whether you are slipping into this vulnerable group, because your total exposure is overwhelming your resistance, is why we are here. So how can you tell?

In a recent ES survey, the five most common symptoms experienced when exposed to electromagnetic fields (EMFs) which are present wherever electric current is running, and which should be considered warning signs, were:
skin itch/rash/flushing/burning and/or tingling,
confusion/poor concentration and/or memory loss,
fatigue/weakness,
headache, brain fog, 'insects crawling'
and chest pain/heart problems.

Skin problems and memory difficulties tied for first place among the overall symptoms.
Research by Professor Olle Johansson at the Karolinska Health Institute in Sweden has objectively confirmed the skin bioeffects using typical mobile phone frequencies. Less commonly reported symptoms included nausea, panic attacks, insomnia, seizures, ear pain/ringing in the ears, feeling a vibration, paralysis, and dizziness. Some ES patients experience only one symptom when EMF exposed, or afterwards, but more often more than one symptom is apparent.

We believe ES results in a special kind of tinnitus, zinging/crackling/clicking rather than whistling/singing. With cardiac effects it is the rhythm that is disturbed, resulting in racing, but also brachycardia, or slowing down.

There are many more details all over this website, including personal accounts of what it is like, it frequently is associated with multiple chemical sensitivity (MCS), there is an unfortunate synergy between the two reactions both contributing to worsening the other.

In Sweden ES, or EHS (Electrically Hyper-Sensitive), is an officially recognised condition with 285,000 registered sufferers, unlike the situation here.

In the UK there is the usual inter-departmental runaround, buck-passing of this hot potato because of its implications for policy. So the HPA/RPD say it is not for them to define an illness and causation, the Department of Health says they act on the advice of the HPA/RPD who say yes there are electrosensitives but we do not know what causes it and though the World Health Organisation (whose former head was an ES sufferer) holds conferences on Electrical Hypersensitivity it has issued no disease classification for it. This is all down to the keeping ongoing of scientific conflict about it even more ongoing. With huge financial resources it is easy to buy pliant ‘science’ and ‘scientists’ and 'spin' it into the media in order to avoid limits on commercial exploitation of this untested technology.
This flies completely in the face of the governments own watchdog, Sir William Stewarts MTHR proposing application of the ‘precautionary principle’ while the science clears. You may notice we constantly 'take a pop' at the HPA/RPD and their spokespersons attitudes and public pronouncements on this issue, principally because they fail to insist on their own clearly stated policy advice being adhered to. People are suffering as a result, this is cruel and unforgivable, presumably due to capitulation to forceful lobbies from commercial and political interests.

Across the Atlantic a leading pioneer in diagnosing and treating electrosensitivity is Dr William J Rea, founder and currently director of the Environmental Health Center (EHC-Dallas, Texas).
In 1988, Dr. Rea was named to the world's first professorial chair of environmental medicine at the Robens Institute of Toxicology at the University of Surrey in Guildford, England. He has published more than 150 papers and abstracts over the past 37 years, has lectured and had teaching appointments worldwide, and has received numerous medical awards. He has also written four volumes, Chemical Sensitivity 1, 2, 3, and 4, which are classics in the field. His books are based on the treatment at the EHC of 28,000 patients since 1974, and over 100,000 patients from around the world. His website is www.ehcd.com. The HPA/RPD seem to be unaware of this work. They have obviously managed to look the other way and seem in complete ignorance of him and of the clinical evidence he has accumulated or their Dr Michael Clark would no longer absurdly claim there is ‘no evidence’ of health effects from EMFs.

We have extracted this piece from ‘Cardiovascular Disease in Response to Chemicals and Foods’ one of his numerous publications, as relevant to our sufferers with MCS & ES as we explore why the two seem to come together, as they so often do.
Quoted from

Dr William J. Rea and Ollie Dawkins Brown.

“Indoor air pollution

Historically, contaminated indoor air began with the soot on the ceilings of prehistoric caves resulting from open fires. Home air was very bad for health during the times of the great plagues and tuberculosis outbreaks. Changes in cleanliness in the home resulted in the virtual elimination of many diseases such as tuberculosis. More recently, the use of rapidly disintegrating synthetic materials, fossil fuels and pesticides, coupled with the sealing of buildings in an attempt to conserve fuel by prevention of heat loss, led to a new type of indoor pollution.

Electrical phenomena can also contribute to indoor air pollution.
Sources of indoor electric fields include most electrical appliances ranging from electric blankets (250 V/m) to light bulbs (2 V/m) [5].
Time spent indoors.
Typically, people spend more than 90% of their time indoors. Some contaminants have been found to be in higher concentrations indoors than outdoors. Indoor contaminants which have been found to be associated with health include aeroallergens, microorganisms, asbestos fibers, formaldehyde, pesticides, nitrogen dioxide, carbon monoxide, radon decay products, and tobacco smoke.

Electrical phenomena.
Although not strictly within the remit of this chapter, there seems little doubt that electromagnetic fields (EMF) can have clinical effects, and that EMF may contribute to the overall environmental load. This, in turn, may make patients more susceptible to chemicals in foods.

Electrical fields
Some natural areas of the earth have higher levels of EMF than others. These are found over water veins and geological faults. There are increased areas found radiating from the poles and widening over the equator [5].
High frequency emitters in the United States consist of the whole of the EMF spectrum including AM radio band (0.535–1.604 MHz) and FM and TV band (54–806 MHz). Low-frequency electromagnetic exposures emanate from the electrical power systems (60 Hz in the US, 50 Hz in Europe and the USSR). The main sources of indoor electromagnetic fields include hair dryers (10-25 gauss), electric shavers (5-10 gauss) and televisions (1-5 gauss) [5]. However, environmental exposures are very small compared with the 10-1V/m across a live cell membrane [5].

Clinical effects of electromagnetic fields.
Cardiovascular effects.
Animals exposed to EMF may exhibit significant changes in electrocardiograms [7], sinus arrhythmia [7] and brachycardia [22,67]. Alterations in heart function such as falling arterial pressure [67] and increased heart rate [30] have been noted in humans. Both short- and long-term hypotensive effects have been reported [51] along with decreases in efficient cardiac output [23]. Autonomic nervous system dysfunction was reported in individuals who were continuously exposed to higher levels of EMF, whereas very low frequency exposures were found to cause neurovascular instability in some individuals [80].

Hematological effects.
Changes in the cellular composition of blood of a variety of laboratory animals exposed to EMF have been shown. Changes in number of red and white blood cells have been noted and the changes were found to be dependent on time and the magnitude of the EMF. A variety of other changes in hematological parameters in response to EMF have been reported and are discussed elsewhere [34,43,45,50,80]. These include changes in iron metabolism, fibrinolytic activity and coagulation [45].

Charged electrical conditions
Negative ions have been shown to affect the carbon dioxide combining power of plasma and to increase blood pH [95,96]. Stimulation of heart rate and cortical alpha-rhythm [20,79] with decreases in alpha-frequency have been seen in humans exposed to air ions of either polarity. Increases in blood pressure and 17-ketosteroids under positive ionization have been noted accompanied by cholesterol decreases. Tchijevsky [87] and Vasiliev [91] proposed as a mechanism the penetration of charged particles through the alveolar wall into the blood vessels where the charges are transferred to blood cells and colloids." END

We have left the references to footnotes and other learned papers in place to show this is a scientific work, published peer-reviewed evidence, the kind Dr Mike Clark of the HPA/RPD repeatedly says does not exist. Anyone who wants to check up must go to www.ahef.com. Rea or ask us to send it.

Just google in Dr William J Rea and there is a wealth of material.

If you now find computers make you feel ill, that sitting in front of a VDU is affecting you then get a friend or family member to do it, it will help educate them.

It should be apparent from the very existence of this website that we are not technophobes or anti-technology luddites objecting to progress and change. That is far from the truth though occasionally thrown at us by those, especially commercial interests or rentaquote pseudo-scientists, who feel threatened by our science and message. We are not an anti-mast group per se, but share common cause with them over health effects and the lack of consideration given to them in planning policy.

Neither are we alone. Almost every western industrialised nation where independent groups are permitted has objectors like us advocating caution because of health threats. In Germany 'The Freiburger Appeal' requesting changes to policy has been signed by over 2000 medical doctors. In Sweden 'Feb' their Association for the Electrically Injured has over 2,800 members and started in 1987. Finland, Norway, France, Australia the USA and others all are in touch with us and the dangers. We receive reports from the Irish Doctors Environmental Association.

Far from us rejecting new technology indeed, many of us were keen and upfront geeky types adopting every new application and version of electronic gadgetry even before it appeared on retailers shelves. That is how we learned the hard way and try to warn you about this reckless marketing of untested and unnecessary uses, to save you from the problems of overexposure leading to overload, and consequent breakdown.

From www.Good Health Info.net under the Health Effects of Microwave Radiation, we find from Brussels:

“The public is now understandably wary of safety assurances from “official” government scientific sources w.r.t. [with regard to] electromagnetic pollution. This skepticism is enhanced when views contrary to official perceived wisdom are, at worst silenced or, at best, studiously ignored.”
March 2001 report by the European Parliament STOA

Concerns now receiving scientific attention are:
1) the breakdown of the blood/brain barrier from microwaves allowing in toxins leading to brain tumours. Especially relevant to heavy mobile users, children and young persons.
2) Leukaemia and other cancers.
3) Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (CFS)
4) Myalgic Encephalopathy (ME)
5) Immune system destabilisation via melatonin
6) Thyroid and Endocrine system problems due to destabilisation and loss of homeostasis.
7 Provocation studies claiming to look at links between mobile phone type emissions and claims to electrosensitivity. These latter being part-financed by the mobile phone industry and conducted by psychologists (!) are seen by many to be artfully designed to obfuscate and confuse the issue. Blame and causation will be put down to delusional individuals "they are all mental" we confidently predict in advance. This is known to gamblers as " having the fix in" See tetrawatch.net for details and scientific criticism.

Avoiding Ridicule, A True Tale of a Sufferer Making Contact

By email & recent

“Just found your web site
Oh my goodness.

For the past few months that I can remember, I have been troubled with the following symptoms. Flu like scratchy sore throat, not bad but feels like it wants to develop, but never does. Pain in my ears, and the gland under my left ear going up and down like a yo-yo for the past few months.

As I write this I also have a horrid metallic taste in my mouth coming through one of my back teeth. I sometimes have some mild pain in my jaw. I do suffer from tingling skin on my face, my upper lip is currently burning. I also sometimes have a rash either side of my nose
Today it was brought about as usual by using my work desk phone, (I have been on it for about 15 minutes total today max), which turned out to be digital. This phone causes me large discomfort. I will no longer be using it, and for some time have been limiting mobile use to text messages and speaking on the loudspeaker where I can.

I have been aware for sometime that my mobile use is probably what caused this. I have probably been an above average user, but would not class myself as a heavy user for around 6 years now with digital mobile phones in the UK, and before that about 4 years in New Zealand using the old analogue mobile network. I work in IT FYI. I am 31. It seems that only the use of certain phones causes me problems, and I knew this was the case. Now that I have written confirmation of what is happening to me, I will immerse myself in reading all I can about it. I sincerely hope that I can prevent my condition from becoming worse, where I am affected by all kinds of appliances.

Do you know if there is any relationship between sufferers and an increased development of various cancers in sufferers? I sincerely hope not, and I guess it also comes down to the individual, and how good your DNA is.....

Anyway, I now classify myself as a sufferer, and keep up the good work on the site

Kind Regards”

Nick -----Original Message-----

From: Electrosensitivity [mailto:electros@electrosensitivity.org.uk]
Sent: 02 June 2005 11:58
To: Nick
Subject: Re: Just found your web site

Hi Nick,
the word from us is 'don't panic', straight out of 'Hitchikers Guide',
but do take it seriously. And remember I am not a medic or doctor and have never met you, I have to put in these caveats.

So far none of the electrically sensitive people I know have developed cancer, cancer statistics are low but there are serious suspicions they may in certain cases be doubled or more from a very low base over a time period, or are promoted by EMFs. Get checked if you are still worried but be ready to be regarded as a neurotic if you blame EMFs, or hypochondriac or deluded or worse.

The other symptoms do sound as if you may well be in the club, today we shall be updating our 'What you can do' page so look there for advice.

However you cut it you are getting warning signals from your body same as putting your fingers near a flame. The message is avoidance, avoid whatever equipment, frequencies, gadgets specifically affect you.
DECT phones are generally the highest field in a domestic environment, (if the wiring is sound) a no-no to me, certainly in a bedroom.

You sound like a bright chap (if a bit rattled, not surprisingly!) and in the absence of doctors having much knowledge you must do some studying yourself, our website, powerwatch, tetrawatch.net, emfacts are all mostly agreed and even the old NRPB now Health Protection Agency,HPA seems to be regarding the evidence afresh, so a report is due this month or next by an epidemiologist, Dr Neil Irvine, to watch out for.( This report turned out to be a survey of pre-existing reports and a literature examination. The HPA/RPD are clear it is not their role to define new illnesses and medical diagnoses but describe how individuals in growing numbers are reporting similar symptoms they put down to electromagnetic field effects. Some symptoms are serious and life-disrupting. Sweden is most advanced in recognition with some 250,000 receving help from official authorities.)

www.powerwatch.org.uk on 01353-778814 hire out monitors to check for fields and supply excellent written material we rely on heavily, and shielding stuff, get their 'Electrical Hypersensitivity-A Modern Illness', easily the best intro for a tenner or so.

Unless there are other reasons for suspicion I think cancer is most unlikely, all of it sounds from a distance with my familiarity with them like symptoms of EHS or electromagnetic hypersensitivity.

Learn a bit and get back,
Cheers as much as poss under the circs,

Rod, ES-UK

Email

Thanks for the reply, at least I know what the likely issue is now.
Yes I will come in for ridicule; I stupidly tried to explain it to a workmate yesterday, and promptly got laughed at. I am not bothered.

Do you know of any doctors in London who are aware of this type of allergy, and do you know if there is anything I can take or do to help out with the symptoms?

Also are you aware at this stage if it is degenerative, am I likely to get worse and are there steps I can take to help recover so to speak?

Thanks again

Nick

Email

No Nick,
I do not agree that you were stupid, these effects need talking about just as we share other ailments. A bit of practice is perhaps necessary I grant, and a preparedness for ignorance and unfortunately a lack of sympathetic hearing. Old EHS hands soon blind the casual scoffer with a torrent of science, it’s there, and on the website.

If you start with "it used to be called 'radiation sickness' and mostly affected people exposed working in the electricity or radar industries but now EMFs are so widespread...blah blah.."
then you create enough dots for people to join up. And they do, often coming out with tales of their own, about a workmate's sister etc. Don’t hit ‘em over the head with it cold, they reject it we find.

Symptoms too... start with warming on the mobile's side of the head ...or warm face from VDU...then headaches..tingling...whatever and however it affects you. Tell it gently how you experience it, it is the truth and real and you are a bit mystified and that will come through and be genuine.

I like you causing me to run through these steps, I shall copy them for an advice sheet called I reckon, 'Avoiding Ridicule'.

People need educating, I remember from teacher-training years ago how we were taught to prepare an audience/class, soften and open them up, not just jump a new fresh unexpected idea on them. After all it does turn the familiar into a bogey-man, and no-one welcomes that. Also many people now are hooked on their mobiles, its adrenaline apparently, a buzz. They are worse than cars as status-symbols and signs of busyness and importance, frantic they might miss out or worse not be missed! They resent criticism and fear risks, so neurotically jump to resist the suggestion and pooh pooh dangers. As EHS you are a threat to them, be careful.

Dr Dowson has an occasional surgery in London try 01225 874075

Degenerative? no, not if you avoid EM fields which are getting to you, the reaction is a warning sign, like burning your fingers on a flame. Actually it is the healthy working of a sensitive body we now believe, it is giving you an important message, THIS STUFF IS TOXIC, at least stressing, so take notice.

Many, with adjustments, learn to cope, but it may not be easy, a bit of a roller-coaster but not necessarily a one-way downhill slide. I will attach our advice, study and read up on it, with us, with powerwatch and tetranet etc. See our links page.

Cheers and all the best

Rod, manager ES-UK

All we know is to be found somewhere on this website, we don't try to keep anything from anyone! So poke around and explore, use the menu and get a grip on the science, then the next time someone tries to blank you about this serious reaction to electromagnetic fields of all kinds, you will be well briefed with plenty of ammunition. Shoot 'em down!!! This is a real physical illness affecting a vulnerable minority, but big interests out there are petrified about their profits as this becomes widely known.

If you are ES and still feel well enough to be a test subject please contact Professor Elaine Fox at Dept of Psychology, University of Essex, Wivenhoe Park, Colchester CO4 3SQ or phone 01206 873783 if you can bear to use a phone. If you don't react too badly to a computer try e-mail efox@essex.ac.uk.

We have grave reservations about the methodology and lack of sophistication of this study and even more over Kings College. It takes no account of total exposure, only of brief handset usage. Well one vegetarian or pesticide free meal would not reveal much health improvement, nor would a very slightly adulterated one show much sickness. We regard electrical sensitivity as a consequence of accumulated exposure to electromagnetic radiation over years and years. The body becomes saturated or entrained to certain interfering frequencies and then there can be responses by some to even a brief exposure but how measurable these are by blood sample or other techniques is highly debatable. Also some extra-sensitives will not volunteer to be hurt, others have been made so ill by exposures they leave the programme and so will not count in the results!

We suspect a whitewash PR job will be performed anouncing grandly 'No links between EMFs and illness' when it should really pronounce 'Provocation study inadequate for task of detecting known links. Must redesign and try harder' Preferably without a psychologist in charge but a biophysicist or expert in bioelectromagnetics with much deeper understanding.

Its just a bit like that, too simple, too crude, too clunky, and by the wrong people in the wrong place. For the really suspicious it is a 'set-up' designed to be a PR success for the industry half-financing it, and a scientific failure, as is common today.

For a proper scientific criticism of this kind of experimental set-up and why we have reservations about its utility see "THE PROBLEM WITH LABORATORY EMF EXPERIMENTS" on tetrawatch. net's admirable website by clicking here While you are there see their wealth of material on TETRA, the emergency services inept and dangerous system, it is well worth a visit. Many links to other science too, a cornucopia indeed.

If the experiments themselves make you ill, as we know is happening to some subjects, please let us know. 01353-778151

Would you know if you are electrically sensitive?

Well we can help you to check it out, it’s a new illness which few authorities recognise and that includes all but the most up to date GPs. It could be confused with other afflictions very easily, especially in the early stages, so if you are concerned for yourself or someone else read on and we may clarify things for you. We are here to help, not to panic or encourage worry. If you think we are just scaremongers then go direct to 'scaremongering, that's all we are'

It is serious, a minority of people for reasons unknown, are less able to cope with the mass of electromagnetic fields, the ‘electrosmog’ we are now creating with all manner of electrical and transmitting devices, than others are, it may be in your genes.

The problem is the old one of 'the personal being political' in a broad sense. Resistance against granting credibility to electrically sensitive sufferers, especially from fantastically wealthy businesses, is keeping it off the agenda of many research establishments, it is a 'hot potato' upsetting funders. The media are ambiguous and spend half their time on 'Ooh what a crank nutcase perspective' alternating with sensational 'Your mobile phone will sear your testicles off and deform unborn children in the womb' scares.In which there is often some real truth culled out by research, but written up so it looks barmy.
The NHS is implacable in its frozen categories, especially psychiatry, ES does not exist. One doctor told an old suffering lady who had worked it out for herself as most have to:

"Stand up...now walk towards the door...go through...then close it behind you.Your computer cannot be harming you, nor can mobiles or masts.There is nothing wrong with you."

So if you have it then you haven't, tough old 'catch 22' as they say. GPs do not diagnose it, many people turn to alternative medicine, homeopathy or whatever for relief and in desperation.

After hours at your computer do you find?

Your head aches.

You redden in the face with flushes.

Your eyes feel sore.

Or maybe you forget these things because your short-term memory is playing up…again…it did that yesterday…was it yesterday?…um…

When I use my mobile a lot too I feel my head is warmer on that side, I don’t suppose it matters, does it?

So.. oh.. worried a bit, not feeling too good you try checking it out with your GP, mumble on and what will you get? Usually not much, general advice to take it easy and even some tranquilisers or anti-depressants. Why?

SIMPLE. Because that will get you out of the busy surgery and he/she has no idea what the heck you are talking about. You sound like a head case. Generally electrical sensitivity is not medically taught, talked about, diagnosed or recognised. If you want to know what THAT feels like refer to our personal stories page, and by the way there is plenty more detail about symptoms there too, it would not do to have you unnecessarily worried now, we want to warn you, not scare you, precautionary we are.

WHO ARE WE?
Well we are ES sufferers, we have EHS, electrical hypersensitivity, the people, if I may speak on their behalf, who have become so electrically soaked with man-made emissions we can no longer function in an electrical environment. Some call us the Vermeers, after a lovely painting by him of a lady in glorious isolation, others call us Essers, which could be some kind of acronym thing for Electrically Super Sensitive. Simply put we are the ZAPPED. Straight out of the old comic books and science fiction films, we are the ones the rays got, ZZZING. Occasionally we can carry a charge large enough to knock out the equipment in front of you now, switch machines on or off by just entering a room.

Only this ain’t fiction, it ain’t funny and it surely isn’t glorious.
We are more often called ES sufferers because we certainly do, suffer that is.

Many of us cannot watch TV or use a computer.
Some of us cannot use telephones, certainly not mobiles or base station types.
All of us get very uncomfortable or downright painful feelings around electrical fields, maybe headaches, flu-type symptoms or fatigue, with much more serious and life threatening possibilities looming ugh.
Sometimes we even get locked up as loonies, sectioned in the correct parlance, section 28 for our protection, shot up with tranquilisers. Fancy that?
Even our families are sometimes convinced we are making it up, not quite right, funny in the head, touched or whatever darn euphemism you fancy when in fact we are bloody ill, yes, and often angry about it as no-one takes us seriously in the UK, outside of a few specialists.

Read on and find out what life is like for us, the guinea pigs, the canaries in the cage of the electrical age.
This is the website of ES-UK and provides a place to find out in the UK about electrical sensitivity, also known as electrical hypersensitivity, EHS, or just ES. You can find out in more detail how to recognise ES under common symptoms . It is an idiopathic (allergic) condition increasingly recognised as a disabling illness which affects a minority of sensitive individuals.It is well known and recognised abroad, especially in Sweden, where their association for the ElectroSensitive 'FEB' has been established since 1987.There are similarities to Multiple Chemical Sensitivity (MCS) to which it is sometimes linked.

Electrosensitivity is caused by exposure to electromagnetic fields, waves of energy which are generated by all electrical sources. EMFs are also produced by the earth and natural weather conditions. Common electrical sources of EMFs are all manner of ordinary domestic and office equipment such as microwave ovens and computers and VDU screens, as well as electrical transmission systems (power lines on pylons), mobile phones and masts and even household electrical wiring. All these sources create non-ionising radiation. Currently low frequency EMFs are being associated not only with electrical sensitivity but also immune system disorders, cancer, depression, suicide, miscarriage, Alzheimers disease and birth defects.

Dr Cyril Smith in 'Electromagnetic Man' refers to the "electromagnetic smog" of today's environment consequent to the widespread nature of
"things pleasant but potentially harmful in excess - the television and all the other electromagnetic devices of twentieth-century convenience and delight".

Some of us differ from the general population and find it affects us more quickly than others or at lower power or frequencies. Symptoms vary between individuals but have similarities, this is dealt with in more detail in 'Science and References'. Low power electrical systems are an essential and natural part of our own normal functioning, our brains and nervous system especially. The basis of the body's'hard-wired' telecommunications network is the excitable nerve cell. This is stimulated to give its action potential by depolarising the cell membrane with a destabilising pulse. Communications between certain of our systems as well as between cells and inside cells rely on electrical discharges and these can become destabilised through chronic over-exposure to other external fields creating a hyper-sensitive reaction making us ill. Our capacity for self-repair can be damaged reducing our ability to withstand stressors..

"Melatonin production is decreased by exposure to EMF. Though most known as the hormone necessary for good sleep, melatonin has such numerous functions that health is not possible when it is insufficient.Besides regulating our internal clock, it affects gonadal hormones, moods and behavior and the immune system and exerts direct effects on the growth of cancers in the breast, prostate and colon."

This is according to the work of R.P. Liburdy et al. (as they report in ELF magnetic fields, breast cancer and melatonin, Journal of Pineal Research,vol. 14, p. 89, 1993)

As the widespread and pervasive use of electricity is a twentieth century phenomenon, its unfortunate by-products or side effects are only now becoming apparent.A previous industrial age using energy from coal left its polluting detritus in the form of slag heaps and dead water-courses. Oil fuels used for transport have distributed lead and other emissions throughout the length and breadth of our islands. Personal ill health resulted from these also which took time for us to recognise.

Companies and institutions resist recognising electrosensitivity as an illness as they do the dangers posed by EMFs. Electricity is constantly advertised as being modern,clean, safe and convenient.The mind-sets of individuals and consequently institutions were fixed at a time when schools, colleges and researchers largely failed to cover the issue. This may change as the government has made available some £7 million for investigating dangers of eg mobile phone systems. This may sound a lot but compared to the £23 billion charge by the treasury for the license of a single operator may be seen as miniscule. Some commercial organisations feel threatened and resist acknowledging conditions which they feel may inhibit their expansion or profits. One specialist doctor in the field, David Dowson "fears that getting recognition of electrical sensitivity is an uphill struggle.'

In conclusion, if you are worried then take the usual steps and seek help but be prepared for disbelief and rejection. Read thoroughly on this site or better still use the links to contact those who make it their business to publish more detailed helpful information. Contact us and ask, we are ready to help with advice and our accumulated experience, we have created this organisation to help ourselves if you are one of us join in, as there is precious little help out there.
Good luck.
Rod Read, Manager ES-UK

Scaremongering.
Ionising radiation from nuclear weapons and power stations, X rays and so on breaks molecular bonds, it is extremely dangerous, it kills, no doubt about it, whatever.

We are dealing with non-ionising radiation at ES-UK, a different range in the continuous electromagnetic spectrum. It was known in the past to be able to cause 'radiation sickness', especially among power industry workers, but about which today in ordinary environments there is conflicting science over contemporary health effects, particularly with low-level radiation emissions from masts and mobile phones. Though the causal links may be unproven, and as with other toxins like tobacco and asbestos this can take years and millions, we are helping those who are definitely ill, we help them understand what we and they sincerely believe is causing it, namely electromagnetic fields.

There is lots of evidence, plenty, though it cannot be described as conclusive. There was enough for Sir William Stewart's MTHR (Mobile Telephony Health Report) committee to recommend a precautionary approach be adopted. This has been brushed aside as he has lamented, especially his strong words against children using mobiles.

Perhaps you think we are well-intentioned but ill-informed?
From day one, this site has invited your informed comment to counter our own concerns about this health issue, we stand by the science we reproduce and we give credibility to our witnesses. On a daily basis formerly healthy (often but not always), intelligent, wide-awake and aware adults tell us they are sickened, with often vivid symptoms, when close to sources of electromagnetism. That is where electrical current is running, or there are microwaves and radiofrequency transmissions. Tell us where and when you think we are ill-informed, even critiques of the science we offer can be made, but we do not say we will necessarily agree with your interpretation as profitable companies often do not agree with ours. That is in the nature of the beast.

Do you really think we are just out to scare you?Perhaps you ought to question your own cynicism. Do you believe we have no better motive or intention? Are we peddling half-truths and poorly-understood science? Are we working for peanuts to just have a go at an unconcerned and massive industry with some political agenda? Or are we hiding from the two sides of the argument in order to persuade you to be frightened? What would you make of anecdotal evidence, individuals first-hand stories as told to us, often with the identity of the person publicly revealed, allowing ridicule or worse. These stories of suffering are re-told elsewhere on this site?

We have grown out of an unmet need for answers, an urgent asking, maybe the most urgent question there is:

WHY AM I IN PAIN?

Why am I suffering and even why am I in such torment, this is put to us on a regular basis.

All over the UK local groups are forming in their hundreds in opposition to mobile phone masts, thousands even, possibly tens of thousands if added together. They are vociferous ordinary citizens raising legitimate concerns caused by their own health worries and many of them predate our recent coming in to existence. We are not one of them. Our business is supporting those already made ill by ALL forms of electromagnetic radiation, not just microwaves. Visit tetrawatch.net and see if they are scaremongering, or Mast Sanity or Mast Action, the links are there. We have much in common with those but we are dealing with the ill health consequences of the risks and dangers they are trying to warn us all about.

In 'The Boiled Frog Syndrome, Your Health and the Built Environment' (ISBN 0-470-84553-8) Thomas Saunders presents compelling evidence to show that the source of the majority of the Western diseases of civilisation that have multiplied over the past 100 years, ranging from cancers to debilitating sicknesses and allergies, can be traced to the modern built environment, our increasing exposure to electromagnetic radiation and the indiscriminate use of untested technology.

It is on this ground that we make our stand, firmly in tune with the science that reveals the need for caution to stop us building an environment in which little by little, incrementally, we are drowning ourselves in a toxic soup, being boiled unaware if you like, by increased radiation emissions we never evolved to cope with. Now that scares us, legitimately so.

More on

The Health Effects From Microwave Radiation
From www. Good Health Info.net

We’re all participating in a giant experiment in involuntary epidemiology—irradiated by cell phones and towers, cordless phones, satellites, broadcast antennas, military and aviation radar, TVs, computers, wireless internet, wireless LANs in schools and the workplace, and now these meters, waiting to see what it does to us. Actually, we know what it does to us, so the results shouldn’t come as any surprise.

The main problem isn’t cancer, although the industry would like you to believe that, because then they can pull out statistics showing how infrequently it occurs as a result of low-level radiation. Cancer takes a long time to develop. Typically, other problems show up first: neurological, reproductive, and cardiac. Problems with severe headaches, sleep disturbances, memory loss, learning disabilities, attention deficit disorder, and infertility show up long before cancer. When cancer does appear, it’s typically brain tumors, leukemia, and lymphoma.

Here are a few things to keep in mind about the health effects of microwave radiation:

1. Effects at low levels can be more noticeable than at higher levels.

The existence of a “window effect” is well documented, in which effects occur at certain frequencies and power densities but not at those immediately above or below them. However, it’s not as simple as just mapping these frequencies and power levels, because the local geomagnetic field and individual susceptibility also influence the result.

Following are a few examples of the nonlinear nature of the effects, from Arthur Firstenberg’s book 'Microwaving Our Planet' (see bottom of page for information). In each case, emphasis has been added:

Firstenberg points out (p. 41) that “calcium ion efflux from brain tissue is extremely sensitive to irradiation with radiofrequency waves.” He cites four studies and a literature review. In particular, a 1986 study by Dutta et al. at 915 MHz and various exposure levels showed that “The effect at 0.0007 mW/g SAR [specific absorption rate] was quadruple the effect at 2.0 mW/g, in other words 3000 times the intensity had 4 times less of an effect under these particular conditions.” Looking at it the other way, an intensity three thousand times lower had an effect four times greater.

Firstenberg describes a number of studies on microwave radiation and blood cells. In one, “Chiang et al. (1989) in their epidemiological study found that white blood cell phagocytosis was stimulated by chronic exposure to the lowest intensities of radio waves and inhibited, sometimes severely, by higher intensities. . . . Exposure levels ranged from 0–4 mW/cm2 to 120 mW/cm2.” (p. 22) In another study on blood, “These results were further refined by a 30-day experiment with guinea pigs at 1, 5, 10, and 50 mW/cm2 (Shandala and Vinogradov 1978). All these intensities increased complement in the blood and stimulated phagocytosis by neutrophils, but 1 mW/cm2 had the biggest effect, and 50 mW/cm2 the smallest effect.” (p. 23)

The September 2000 newsletter of the Cellular Phone Taskforce, No Place To Hide, reported on some studies presented at the June 2000 European Parliament meeting on mobile phones and health. In one presentation, Dr. Lebrecht von Klitzing, of the Medical University of Lubeck, Germany, said, “Some people become ill at power densities of less than 10 nanowatts/cm2. . . . Small children are very sensitive to these emitters, down to field densities of 1 nanowatt/cm2.”

Another article in the newsletter says that Dr. Leif Salford, of Lund University, Sweden, “had previously reported that short exposure to microwaves at 915 MHz damages the blood-brain barrier. . . . ‘The most remarkable observation in our studies,’ said Salford [at the conference], ‘is the fact that SAR values lower than 1 mW/kg give rise to a more pronounced albumin leakage than higher SAR values. . . . The situation that the weakest fields, according to our findings, are the biologically most effective, poses a major problem.’ ”

2. Another effect independent of power level is resonance, which occurs at certain frequency ranges where the wavelength is near the size of a body part. An example is the 900 Mhz range, which has a wavelength of approximately one foot—a size that can cause resonance in a child’s head (because some of the radiation is absorbed, and the wavelength decreases). This intensifies the biological effect. Also, children’s skulls are thinner, so microwaves penetrate more easily. (Another problem is that children’s cells are dividing rapidly, which creates more chance for DNA damage. Their immune systems are not fully developed and can’t defend them against this.)

3. Pulsed radiation, of the type produced by these meters, is more harmful at the cellular level than continuous-wave. The meters emit pulses twice in two seconds, although the interval is random.

4. Studies are typically done for short exposure periods at higher intensities, because running studies longer costs more money. This allows the industry to claim that few studies have been done that show effects for long-term, low-level exposure and that “nonthermal” effects do not exist. But public health scientists point out that duration is also important, and long-term, low-level exposure can have equivalent effects.

5. The effects of radiation are cumulative, in both senses. The meters add to the cumulative radiation as sources proliferate, and microwave radiation is cumulative in sense of increasing the body’s sensitivity over time. Research shows that test subjects don’t always recover completely and that subsequent exposures can cause effects at lower levels.

6. There are no longer any control groups, because we are now exposed to so much radiation. Alasdair Phillips points out the problem in an email to the Roy Beavers list (archived on the Library page at www.wave-guide.org).

Recently an American epidemiologist, Dr Sam Milham, re-analysed Doll’s own data presented in his 1956 (Doll & Hill) paper which showed that heavy smokers were 23.7 times more likely to die from lung cancer than non-smokers. However when you compare the figures for heavy smokers vs light and moderate ones the ORs [odds ratios] fall to 3.5 and 1.9. When you compare light smokers with moderate ones you get an OR of only 1.8.

Applying this concept to microwaves, there are no unexposed and few highly exposed subjects. So experimental results showing harm compared to a control group can be deceptively low—like comparing lung cancer in heavy smokers to light or moderate smokers rather than nonsmokers. This allows the industry to downplay the implications of health effects.

7. Even in full studies, sometimes the abstract and/or conclusion may not accurately reflect the study’s data, especially if the industry was involved or the researcher is concerned about funding.

For example, Kathleen Thurmond, M.D., in a 1999 talk, said, A study presented by Dr. Ross Adey at the 1996 annual meeting of the Bioelectromagnetics Society in Victoria, B.C., Canada, showed a decrease in the incidence of brain tumors in rats chronically exposed to digital cellular telephone fields. However, there was no mention in his study of the increased incidence of spinal column tumors found in his research according to a reliable source. It would be standard scientific practice to at least note this finding regarding spinal column tumors. Dr. Ross Adey’s research funding by Motorola has now been terminated.

Dr. Henry Lai was quoted in the London Times as saying, “They are asking me to change my whole interpretation of the findings in a way that would make them more favorable to the mobile phone industry. This is what happened in the tobacco industry. They had data in their hands but when it was not favorable they did not want to disclose it.” The European Parliament report says, “[A] relatively recent reanalysis of the Lilienfeld report on the Moscow US Embassy irradiation during the ‘cold’ war, based on information that only became fully available following the Freedom of Information Act . . . reveals that the original verdict of no serious health effects was, in fact, a sanitised version of Lilienfeld’s findings, in which his statements of concern had been deliberately removed by the State Department.”

Alternatives to reading every study include abstracts, books or reports that summarize the research, and capsule descriptions of studies in tabular format. Following are some sources for each of these:

Dr. Henry Lai, a well-known bioelectromagnetics researcher at the University of Washington, Seattle, has compiled a 97-page collection of abstracts from studies conducted between 1995 and 2000. The list, in pdf format, can be found on the Research page of the EMR Network’s web site. As the web site points out, “80% of these studies demonstrate some kind of biological effect.” www.electric-words.com contains abstracts of many studies.

The Physiological and Environmental Effects of Non-Ionising Electromagnetic Radiation is a 34-page report issued in March 2001 by the European Parliament Directorate General for Research, Scientific and Technological Options Assessment (STOA). Written by Dr. Gerard Hyland, it pulls no punches in warning of the hazards of microwave radiation.

Potential and Actual Adverse Effects of Radiofrequency and Microwave Radiation at Levels Near and Below 2 uW/cm2,

is a 200-page report by Dr. Neil Cherry, of Lincoln University, New Zealand.
The introduction says, “Strong claims by industry representatives and their consultants that there is no scientific evidence to justify the public’s fears is scientifically demonstrably wrong.” An April 2001 press release by the ECOLOG-Institut, in Hanover, Germany, says that the institute’s report on cellular microwave exposure presents “the results and recommendations of the comprehensive study carried out by order of the German T-Mobil, in which physicists, medical scientists, and biologists took part.” (The press release and study are available in German on the Institute’s web site.)

There are a number of scientific findings from investigations on sub-populations with an elevated exposition to high frequency electromagnetic fields and from animal experiments that have to be taken seriously. These findings point on a cancer-promoting effect of high frequency electromagnetic fields used by cellular telephone technology. Experiments on cell cultures yielded clear evidence for geno-toxic effects of these fields, like DNA breaks and damage to chromosomes, so that even a cancer-initiating effect cannot be excluded any longer. The findings that high frequency electro-magnetic fields influence cell transformation, cell promotion and cell communication also point on a carcinogenic potential of the fields used for cellular telephony. Moreover disturbances of other cellular processes, like the synthesis of proteins and the control of cell functions by enzymes, have been demonstrated.

In numerous experiments on humans as on animals influences on the central nervous system were proven, which reach from neuro-chemical effects to modifications of the brain potentials and impairments of certain brain functions. The latter effects for instance have been demonstrated by animal experiments and e.g. showed up as deficits in the ability to learn simple tasks when exposed to the fields. From experiments with volunteers, who were exposed to the fields of mobile telephones, there is clear evidence for influences on certain cognitive functions. Possible risks for the brain also arise from an increased permeability of the blood-brain barrier to potentially harmful substances, observed in several experiments on animals exposed to mobile telephone fields.

The scientist at the ECOLOG-Institute also found some evidence for disturbances of the hormone and the immune system. High frequency electromagnetic fields cause stress reactions, showing up in an increased production of stress hormones in experimental animals and they lead to a reduction of the concentration of the hormone melatonin in the blood of exposed animals. The latter finding is important, because melatonin has a central control function for the hormone system and the diurnal biological rhythms and it is able to retard the development of certain tumours.

Dr. Peter Neitzke, coordinator of the institute’s working group, says this: "80 per cent of the papers published in scientific journals do not contribute anything to the evaluation of possible health risks due to the electromagnetic fields emitted by cellular telephones and their base stations. The remainder however, on which our assessment relies, is made so good and is in itself so consistent that we must take the findings referring to health risks seriously. In order to improve the protection of the public against the possibly harmful effects of the electromagnetic fields from cellular telephones and their base stations, we need much lower precautionary standards. . . .” [Italics added.]

The report says, “The ECOLOG-institute recommends not to exceed a precautionary standard of 0,01 W/m2 [ = 1 microwatt per square centimeter] when siting cellular telephone base stations in the proximity of dwellings, schools, kindergartens, hospitals, and similarly sensitive uses.”

In a commentary to this, Dr. Neil Cherry, a well-known EMF researcher in New Zealand, says, “The actual expose levels at which these genetic effects are shown are about 0.5 to 1.2 microWatt/sq cm. These are not safe levels, they are just experimental levels that show that at extremely low experimental levels genotoxic response occur—cell-by-cell. There is no safe threshold.”

In other words, the maximum level the ECOLOG-Institute recommends is already the level at which, as Dr. Cherry points out, genetic effects occur. This also happens to be about the same exposure level from a cell-phone tower with a single set of antennas, sometimes as much as 1000 feet away or more, depending on terrain, obstructions, signal strength, etc. When another telecom with the same signal strength colocates on the tower, the radiation increases.

A list of about two dozen studies on low-level microwaves, compiled by Cindy Sage, a consultant on EMF mitigation, can be found on the Library page at www.wave-guide.org. The list is grouped by exposure level (from .1 to 120 mW/cm2) and SAR (Specific Absorption Rate). As part of his Radio Wave Packet, Arthur Firstenberg, president of the Cellular Phone Taskforce, has created a list of about 40 studies grouped by exposure level, beginning as low as 10–13 mW/cm2 and extending to 10 mW/cm2. Therefore, it has little overlap with Cindy Sage’s list and is more applicable to the levels encountered with microwave meters and cell towers. It also includes Soviet and Russian research.

Arthur Firstenberg has also written a book, Microwaving Our Planet (currently out of print), with brief descriptions of studies grouped by the affected system (nervous, reproductive, heart, respiratory, etc.) and, under each system, by whether the study was done on humans, animals, or cells.

IS IT NOT SCARY in the light of all the above that Dr Michael Clark of our very own UK HEALTH PROTECTION AGENCY RADIATION PROTECTION DIVISION says on Radio 4 and repeats in 'The Guardian', "There is no scientific evidence of health effects from electromagnetic fields".