Skip to content

Electromagnetic fields are the new smoking

I remember when I was one of the lone “nuts” who was against smoking

Editor, The Times:

I remember when I was one of the lone “nuts” who was against smoking; I was branded "anti-social' because I didn't allow smoking in my home and because I would (subtly) move away from a smoker who lit up beside me while I was eating.

I hope that Dr. Martin Blank’s book, “Overpowered”, will be widely read. An expert on the health-related effects of EMF (electromagnetic fields), he unveils many inconvenient truths.

Did you know:

• that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), in a draft report (1990) on the biological effects of EMF, recommended that EMF be designated as “probable human carcinogens”;

• that subsequent to this EPA draft report, $350,000 was cut from the EPA’s budget, and by 1996, due to “budget uncertainties” the report was never issued;

• that the RF/microwave bio-effects bibliography cites over 6,000 studies on the biological effects of exposure to EMF;

• that the wireless technology research program (a team of 200 scientific experts) found indications that radiation from mobile phones had caused irreparable DNA damage in cells;

• that subsequent to the WTR findings, the scientist that led the study was defunded and attempts were made to discredit him and the six years of research;

• that a major electronic manufacturer altered the language of another of its researchers, to express doubt as to the results (which had corroborated the WTR findings);

• that the 1996 Telecommunications Act banned any restrictions on placement of cell towers due to health concerns;

• that because of virtually no government funding for EMF research, private industry funds the studies, with bias towards those with results favouring the industry;

• that the scientist (sponsored by the Office of Naval Research) who demonstrated blood-barrier damage from EMF exposure was directed by the ONR not to publish further or he would lose his funding; and

• that research into microwave cataracts of the eye was discontinued due to the cessation of all military funding.

All these facts are substantiated in the bibliography of Dr. Blank’s book. We owe it to ourselves to become informed about EMF; to seek out independent studies before accepting the industry-funded propaganda; and to find safer ways to use the ubiquitous wireless technology.

Petrina Gregson

 

Upper Clearwater, B.C.