EHS

EHS Page

This Page is meant to explore all things electro hypersensitive (also called “microwave sickness”). I find it extremely interesting that there are credible accounts of people who become or are electro hypersensitive to RF radiation and that some medical experts, scientists and countries recognize it as a medical condition; and yet there is a denial by representatives of utility companies (and their experts) that this condition  is related to electromagnetic fields.

11/28/11 This recent article by Christopher Ketcham discusses health effects and EHS.  I will link it via Microwave News as Louis Slesin gives a great introduction to it.  From Microwave News: “November 30… Christopher Ketcham, who made a splash early last year with his GQ piece, “Warning: Your Cell Phone May Be Hazardous to Your Health,” is back on the EMF beat with a cover story in the latest issue of Earth Island Journal: “Warning: High Frequency.” The first warning centered on brain tumor risks; the new one focuses on electromagnetic hypersensitivity. . .  .” (see right sidebar, Nov. 30, 2011 of Microwave News for the rest of his introduction.)

11/28/11. Excellent series of articles in the Washington Times by a scientist who was one of the 30 experts who was invited by WHO to evaluate whether cell phone radiation caused cancer. . .In this first article, see the comments as there is an interesting discussion about EHS (electro hypersensitivity)

***

11/12/11 Issues with studies for EHS, including it causing too much illness for subject

***

11/7/11 “I am Electrically Magnetic hyper sensitive–a condition which doesn’t exist.” See talk  in  http://emfsafetynetwork.org/Ceo
by British CEO Brian Stein who developed EMF sensitivity after using a cell phone for 15 years.

11/5/11. This is about a family in Australia that seems to have become electro hypersensitive from their neighbors’ Smart Meters.   It was interesting that writer mentioned the Calif. Public Utilities Commission,  and he said that Dr. Karl Meret’s report helped convince the CPUC to okay our current temporary opt-out

***

11/1/11 Stop Smart Meters Australia posts this document about electro hypersensitvity, which has references and links to various reports/studies.

***

11/1/11  Notes: This second article is fascinating.  According to this article there is a preponderance (frightening) of scientific studies which connect low level non ionizing radiation to DNA and health issues.  This is actually a stunning article because it’s so professional and thorough.   (I quote a page of it below) Scroll down on the Weep Initiative Web Site to Bevington.

Attitudes to Health Dangers of Non Thermal EMF’s: A review of the polarisation in attitudes towards research into the health dangers of non-thermal electromagnetic fields (EMFs).  by: Michael Bevington, January 2008

“The current crisis of the two divergent approaches appears to be the most serious dichotomy in science since the 1940s, given that both approaches cannot be simultaneously correct. In many ways, the current crisis in polarised attitudes is the direct consequence of Schwan’s arbitrary decision in 1953 to ignore much existing research and to propose US exposure limits which were purely thermal. By assuming a priori that exposure to EMFs at non-thermal levels produced only beneficial results, he did not research the non-thermal effects at all.
It appears that at first military involvement hid much of the medical research into the dangers. Thus the public polarisation covers mainly the last 20 years of some 85 years of sustained research into health effects of EMFs. It seems to reflect the reaction of business interests to the ever-growing evidence of serious non-thermal EMF health effects. In turn it raises issues about the workings of western democracies where business interests can dominate governments and regulators who would otherwise be expected to protect their own citizens from major health risks.
In fact most of the international scientific community researching in the field of bioelectromagnetics seem to have accepted non-thermal EMF effects for over 20 years. Only parts of the telecommunications industry and some governments and regulators, supported by a small minority of the media, prefer to cling to outdated science in the hopes of maximising short-term profit at the expense of long-term illness. Thus, for instance, a standard textbook on bioelectromagnetics (2007 edition) states that ‘the biophysical lore prevailing until the late 1980s and lingering to this day was that external EFs had no effect on human tissue unless they could trigger an excitable membrane, such as in the heart by a pacemaker, produce heating (thermal), or move an ion along a field gradient. ‘However, the position had to be changed as the evidence for weak (nonthermal) EMF bioeffects became overwhelming’. Thus, for the last 20 years or so the balance of evidence has suggested that exposures to radio frequency, ELF and microwave EMFs at non-thermal levels, all well below the ICNIRP thermal guidelines, cause significant adverse health effects to the general population.
Professor Henry Lai, who in 1995 discovered that non-thermal EMFs can break DNA and could thus be linked with cancer, reportedly said in 2007, ‘I think it’s irresponsible to just set standards. . . “