Wireless Tech and Our Kids

WIRELESS TECH & OUR KIDS: 

The biggest window of vulnerability occurs in utero and
during childhood when the immune system and brain
are developing.

Important links listed within this description, additional articles in comments.
June 2016

Check out this excellent Website:

Parents for Safe Technology
http://www.parentsforsafetechnology.org

FACT #1 Children absorb more of this radiation than adults. “The average exposure from use of the same mobile phone is higher by a factor of 2 in a child’s brain and higher by a factor of 10 in the bone marrow of the skull.” The World Health Organization’s International Agency for Research on Cancer’s (IARC) 2011 Monograph on Radio Frequency Fields; the complete monograph is downloadable on the IARC web site.

FACT #2 US exposure standards do not protect children. Standards are 18 years old and based on the radiation absorption into a model of 200-pound, 6-foot tall male brain (called the SAM). Wireless radiation standards do not protect the 97% of the population with heads smaller than this adult male SAM model. Read more about children's absorption compared to adults and all about the research that informed the picture above here.

FACT #3 Current exposure limits are based solely on the heating of tissue. They do not take into account accumulating research showing serious biological effects at low level "nonthermal' radiation levels. These effects include DNA impacts, sleep damage, altered brain activity, increased cancer, cellular changes, skin tissue changes, damaged sperm motility and viability, decreased cognitive functioning, memory impairment, and disruption of the blood brain barrier.

FACT #4 The biggest window of vulnerability occurs in utero and during childhood when the immune system and brain are developing. Small insults can have large effects while cells are rapidly dividing. Microwave radiation has been shown to more strongly impact stem cells and children have more active stem cells.

FACT #5 Wireless radiation is classified by the World Health Organization’s International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) as a Class 2 B carcinogen. This classification is based on evidence of increased brain tumors in heavy users of cell phones observed over ten years. Heavy use was defined as 30 minutes a day. Adults who started using wireless devices as teens had a 4 times greater risk of brain tumors. Other Class 2 B Carcinogens include: lead, dioxin, DDT, chloroform, and ethylbenzene.

FACT #6 Wireless radiation impacts brain maturation. Accumulating research shows significant impacts on the neuron development of young brains. Dr. Hugh Taylor, Chief of Obstetrics at Yale, lead in utero research showing that wireless radiation during pregnancy resulted in developmental and behavioral problems in offspring. The baby mice had impaired memory and increased hyperactivity. Dr. Suleyman Kaplan did several research studies showing decreased neurons in the hippocampus and cerebellum after exposures to wireless radiation. He summarized his state of the art research in his FCC submission. Furthermore, brain imaging studies show changed electrical activity during wireless exposures. A picture of a brain from the National Institute of Health study showing increased glucose metabolism in the brain areas exposed to wireless radiation.

FACT #7 The United States is lagging behind on protections for Children. The governments of France, Belgium, Israel, Finland, Russia, India and the European Union have all taken steps toward reducing children’s exposure to radiation from wireless devices – ranging from banning the marketing of cell phones to children under 14 to restricting wireless routers at schools. The latest nation to join in this precautionary principle is Belgium. As of March 1, 2014, sale and advertising of cell phones especially designed for children under the age of 7 years old is banned, as is advertising for cell phones during children's programs on TV, radio, and the internet. Recently, France's National Assembly passed legislation banning Wi-Fi from nursery schools and strongly recommended wired connections rather than Wi-Fi until safety is proven.

FACT #8 NO ONE is offering safety assurances. The EPA states "More research is needed to clarify the question of safety." We know of no medical organization stating that this radiation is safe. Instead, they all state more research is needed. Dr Samet of the World Health Organization states that the IARC clasification means that "safety cannot be assured- a particular concern, given the prospect that most of the world’s population will have lifelong exposure to radiofrequency electromagnetic fields.” Several World Health Organization scientists have now stated that the evidence has increased and that the proper classification for this radiation is in a higher risk catagory. Please see Dr. Anthony Miller testifyingto the City of Toronto that wireless exposure should be a 2A (probable) carcinogen.

FACT #9 Low power does not mean LOW effects. When it comes to Wi-Fi radiation many will say that Wi-Fi is “lower” power so we should not worry. We wish that were true. Our children are now exposed to chronic low-level radiation for hours a day and no research has been done to quantify this risk. Scientists are specifically concerned with the erratic nature of the pulsed digital signal rather than the power. In addition to the radiation from routers, the wireless devices in a classroom emit radiation. Unlike cell phone radiation, this results in full body exposures on our children. When children rest their laptops on their laps, their reproductive organs are absorbing most of this radiation. Since experimental research is showing damage to sperm and ovaries from this radiation, we can assume that there is a serious risk to our children's reproductive health as well as their brains. No comprehensive research has been done to evaluate the levels of radiation exposure in classrooms where 30 or more devices are in use in a single room.

FACT #10 The latest science confirms RF-radiation causes cancer. We can act now to reduce or eliminate exposure. The US National Toxicology Program released partial findings in May 2016 confirming RF-radiation causes cancer. Additionally, recent studies by Lennart Hardell, PhD, MD, demonstrate these exposures should be considered carcinogenic, stating that "guidelines need to be urgently revised."

As thoughtful parents, we are not comfortable playing Russian Roulette with our children's health. Why endanger our children's future? Proven, safe technologies exist. Let's use them! via National Association for Children and Safe Technology

Website: http://www.nacst.org

Environmental Health Trust:

1.) Educate Yourself - http://ehtrust.org/…/educate-yo…/children-and-wireless-faqs/

2.) Wireless Radiation And The Developing Nervous System - Dozens of peer reviewed research studies indicate that wireless and electromagnetic fields alter brain function and affect the nervous system. Research links these exposures to altered sleep, damaged mitochondria, increased oxidative stress, cellular damage, genotoxicity, and blood brain barrier permeability. When our bodies have increased stress at the chemical, immune and electrical levels, our brain health is compromised. Children are more vulnerable as their brains are still developing so the neurological effects will be greater. http://ehtrust.org/…/autism-adhd-wireless-electromagnetic-…/

Parents for Safe Technology
Website: http://www.parentsforsafetechnology.org

WIRELESS TECH & OUR EYES: 

https://www.facebook.com/ldhemm/posts/10209985307615498

WI-FI IN SCHOOLS: The Basics (2013)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QQryZbxlqXI

Compilation of Doctors' Letters on WiFi in School Compiled by Lennart Hardell, MD, PhD https://drive.google.com/…/0B8Oub2Nx5eSLNEthQmNlb3ZGcTQ/view

STUDY: “Based on the Hill criteria, glioma and acoustic neuroma should be considered to be caused by RF-EMF emissions from wireless phones and regarded as carcinogenic to humans, classifying it as group 1 according to the IARC classification. Current guidelines for exposure need to be urgently revised.” (2013) Hardell L, Carlberg M.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24192496