SHOCKING US SENATE HEARING CONFIRMS DANGERS OF CELL PHONES  

Witnesses before a Senate Committee testified about research into cell phone use and its potential impact on human health, as well as the potential side effects such as brain and salivary gland tumors.

In 2008, cell phones were identified as a contributor to salivary gland tumors. Dr. Siegal Sadetzki, who testified in September 2009 at the U.S. Senate Hearing, is the principle investigator of the study that made this finding.

The report states that your risk of getting a parotid tumor on the same side of your head that you use for listening to the mobile phone increases by:

• 34 percent if you are a regular cell phone user and have used a mobile phone for 5 years.
• 58 percent if you had more than about 5,500 calls in your lifetime.
• 49 percent if you have spoken on the phone for more than 266.3 hours during your lifetime.

About 4 billion people are now using cell phones around the world, despite the fact that their safety is being increasingly called into question. In fact, there are no safety standards for testing cell phones before they are released to the market.

Meanwhile, government agencies, similar to their stance on tobacco before the evidence became overwhelming, have essentially ignored all the danger warnings.

Just like smoking tobacco, they fail to realize that it can take anywhere from 10 to 30 years for brain tumors to develop from cell phone exposure, so we are just now beginning to see some of the tragic effects of heavy cell phone use. The truth is, we are on the verge of a brain cancer epidemic. It could grow to 500,000 cases worldwide in 2010, and there may be over a million cases in the U.S. alone by 2015.

Sadly, children and teens are at an even higher risk, as their thinner skull bones allow for greater penetration of cell phone radiation. The radiation can enter all the way into their midbrain, where tumors are more deadly. In addition, children's cells reproduce more quickly, so they're more susceptible to aggressive cell growth. Their immune systems are also not as well developed as adults. Lastly, children face a far greater lifetime exposure.

Professor Lennart Hardell of Sweden has found that those who begin using cell phones heavily as teenagers have 4 to 5 times more brain cancer as young adults!

Increasing evidence is pouring in that cell phones are not only a risk factor for brain tumors, but also salivary gland tumors, eye damage, Alzheimer's disease and more.


The second video below by Electromagnetichealth.org, filmed at Columbia University Law School at a presentation on Wireless Hazards, explains how wireless radiation creates cognitive problems, damages DNA, diminishes fertility, causes disorientation and navigation difficulties for birds, bees and other wildlife, and may contribute to Bee Colony Collapse, which, if not reversed, will jeopardize the future of life on earth.

Your Safety is Now Riding on a Severely Flawed $30-Million Cell Phone Study

You may be wondering why, if there is so much data showing the risks of cell phone use, no warnings are being made. First, the telecommunication industry is even BIGGER than drug industry, and they have far more influence in Washington.

This is compounded by the fact that a large percentage of retirement funds from several powerful lobbying organizations are invested in telecommunications.

Second, institutions like the World Health Organization (WHO) and the European Commission have cautioned that conclusions about possible cancer risks from cell phones cannot be drawn until the INTERPHONE study is published.

The INTERPHONE Project -- a massive 13-country epidemiological study of tumors among users of mobile phones -- is already lagging years behind its scheduled completion date.

Part of the delay in putting together the final report now appears to be internal strife, as scientists are reported to differ in their interpretation of the results.

The GSM Association, a global trade organization of mobile operators, and the forum, which includes Nokia and about a dozen other manufacturers, contributed more than $3.5 million to the $30-plus million project. The European Commission also helped fund it with contributions passed through the International Union Against Cancer in an effort to create a barrier between the mobile phone industry and the scientists.

Further, a team of international EMF activists -- the International EMF Collaborative -- has released a report detailing 11 serious design flaws of the INTERPHONE study. They say a ‘systemic-skew’ in the study is greatly underestimating brain tumor risk, and they pointed out the following flaws, among others:

• Categorizing subjects who used portable phones (which emit the same microwave radiation as cell phones) as ‘unexposed’
• Excluding many types of brain tumors
• Excluding people who had died, or were too ill to be interviewed as a consequence of their brain tumor
• Excluding children and young adults, who are more vulnerable

You can read the full report Cellphones and Brain Tumors: 15 Reasons for Concern, Science, Spin and the Truth Behind Interphone here.

If the wrong conclusions are drawn from the Interphone studies, the resulting lack of public warnings could have disastrous consequences for the generations to come. And this is why I urge you to take action NOW. Do not wait for the results of more studies to come in or for the final conclusions of this meta-analysis, and please do not be swayed by cell phone safety spin.

As Lloyd Morgan, lead author of the report and member of the Bioelectromagnetics Society says:

“Exposure to cell phone radiation is the largest human health experiment ever undertaken, without informed consent, and has some 4 billion participants enrolled.

Science has shown increased risk of brain tumors from use of cell phones, as well as increased risk of eye cancer, salivary gland tumors, testicular cancer, non-Hodgkin's lymphoma and leukemia.

The public must be informed."

AMERICAN DOCTOR APPRAISES HEALTH CARE CONCERNS OF congressman Dr.RON PAULBy Dr Mercola

There are many reasons why I support Ron Paul, but a major one has to do with his devotion to your freedom of choice.

He is a shining example of how one solitary voice can inspire necessary change. Dr. Paul is nearly single-handedly leading the charge against the perverted relationship between multi-national corporations and the U.S. government.

Ron Paul is a constitutionalist who seeks to minimize abuse by government; therefore, he is not a very popular figure in many corporate circles. Nevertheless, there is an increasing groundswell of public support for him, which the completion of the 2008 presidential election did nothing to deter.

He is in the news every bit as much now as while he was campaigning—actually probably more so now, as a growing number of Americans are realizing the fatal flaws in our existing health care system.

With the recent focus on health care reform, I believe Dr. Paul’s ideas are spot-on in bringing about the changes this country really needs.

Ron Paul is one of the few physicians serving in Congress, and one of even fewer Congressmen who are trying to decrease government involvement in your health care.

In terms of your health, Ron Paul:

• Wants to expand your ability to use alternative medicine and new treatments
• Opposes legislation that increases the FDA‘s legal powers
• Believes the government should never have the power to force you to get vaccinations

Sound familiar? These are things I’ve been passionate about for decades. Ron Paul could almost be my personal spokesman!

One of the courageous actions Dr. Paul has taken was introducing the Health Freedom Protection Act to Congress in 2005, a bill that would strongly and positively affect Mercola.com and many other natural health organizations, and the field of natural health in general. The bill would curb restrictions imposed by the FDA and FTC regarding health claims for dietary supplements.

Dr. Paul indeed favors health care reform, but NOT in its present form—meaning the “Affordable Health Care for America Act,” the bill that is the focus of debate right now in the Senate.

This bill could cost the U.S. nearly two trillion dollars.

And What Exactly Would Those Two Trillion Dollars Buy You?

a. The limiting of unnecessary, ineffective treatments and the elimination of fraud

b. The lowering of exorbitant health insurance premiums, along with incentives for physicians to provide charitable care to the poor

c. The provision for effective, inexpensive, holistic treatment alternatives and the establishment of new nutritional guidelines that actually make sense

d. Promotion of health instead of preoccupation with disease

e. None of the above

If you answered “e,” you get an A.

The fact is, Big Pharma has a choke hold over our government, which is most likely why you do not see any discussions about these very real, underlying problems.

The fact that our political entities are so subject to influence by special interests, combined with the monumental amounts of money big corporations spend to manipulate them, means that a government-run program cannot fix America’s broken health care system.

Because the government is PART OF America’s broken health care system.

In fact, the “solution” might even be worse than the problem. Already many of your personal freedoms are being threatened at the hands of the government, and there is language in this new reform that gives the federal government unprecedented power to meddle in your personal health care affairs.

What’s REALLY needed is a radical change in consciousness about what health and health care really is.

As long as your focus is on drugs and surgical interventions, you will never see the fundamental changes that are so desperately needed. It can only be accomplished by a radical change in how you, and how society as a whole, think about health.

Old Geezers Unite!

David Brooks, columnist for the New York Times, published a great article entitled “The Geezers’ Crusade”[i] which addresses the question of who and what is needed to propel social change.

Brooks predicts that the changes we need won’t be coming from Washington, and he makes the case that our eldest generation—not our youth—are in a unique position to be the catalyst for this change.

In order to make this argument, he cites the following research findings:

• Your brain is capable of creating new connections and even new neurons throughout your life, which refutes outdated views that old people are no longer educable due to declining brain function.
• People report being happier, more outgoing, more self-confident and warmer as they pass from middle age into old age, and advanced age affords them a better ability to grasp “the big picture.”
• The elderly tend to want to provide for future generations, and they are happier after doing so. Seniors who perform service for the young have more positive lives and better marriages than those who don’t.

If you’ve ever spent any time listening to a wise grandparent or other elder, you’ve probably already witnessed the wisdom that comes with age.

However, Brooks says that the odd thing is, in politics, the opposite behaviors are true.

Politicians by and large, are taking valuable resources from younger generations—in the form of money, freedom, and opportunity.

The federal government now spends seven times as much on the elderly as it does on children. In the private sphere, seniors provide wonderful gifts to their grandchildren. But in the public arena, they take them away.

Brooks writes:

“Spontaneous social movements can make the unthinkable thinkable, and they can do it quickly. It now seems clear that the only way the U.S. is going to avoid an economic crisis is if the oldsters take it upon themselves to arise and force change.

The young lack the political power. Only the old can lead a generativity revolution—millions of people demanding changes in health care spending and the retirement age to make life better for their grandchildren.

It may

seem unrealistic—to expect a generation to organize around the cause of non-selfishness. But in the private sphere, you see it every day. Old people now have the time, the energy and, with the Internet, the tools to organize.”

We often hear that children are our future. And the expanding enthusiasm Dr. Paul is generating among the youth in this country is truly remarkable.

Dr. Paul says:

“I think [my support] is rapidly growing, and I go to the college campuses frequently and always get large crowds out, and the young people are really very receptive to these views. I think that’s very important.

I don’t think true revolutions occur if you don’t have the next generation ready to accept those ideas. And it doesn’t mean that only young people do it, but if you get the support of the young people, it means they know there is something wrong with the system. They have to think about the change in the system and the reception there is very, very good.”

The younger generations are going to be making tough, critical decisions in the future, which affect the world. But perhaps the elderly are even more important in leading them where they need to go.

There is something that every one of you can do to move us onto the right path.

There are 1.5 million people who receive this newsletter. We CAN make a huge difference. If only a small fraction of you spread this message within your little community of family, friends, and coworkers, just imagine what we can accomplish together.

[i]Brooks D. “The Geezers’ Crusade” (February 1, 2010) New York Times http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/02/opinion/02brooks.html?emc=eta1