аЯрЁБс>ўџ 46ўџџџ3џџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџьЅС7 №ПN)bjbjUU .47|7|%7џџџџџџlЬЬЬЬЬЬЬр0008h tр ””(ММММММ ƒ ƒ ƒ ƒ ƒ ƒ $ "jЇ ЬМММММЇ |ЬЬМММ |||М.ЬМЬМ |М |Ž| 5 ЬЬ Мˆ @™lŽ‘xХрP0ъdM  в 0 U ,ŒN.Œ |ррЬЬЬЬйDon Maisch, April 2001. Emfacts Consultancy Possible microwave effects other than cancer: A brief history of Soviet vs. Western radio frequency & microwave (RF/MW) research. While most of the current research with mobile phone use examines the possibility of brain cancer, a far different picture is seen in the former Soviet Union medical literature, where a condition of "Microwave sickness" has long been accepted by many scientists. During the Second World War, concerns began to be raised in the USSR that military personnel may be subject to health hazards from working with radar. In the cold Siberian winters, servicemen soon found that standing in front of the radar antenna was a great way to keep warm but rumours began to circulate that it also caused sterility. In the 1940's various American military and government agencies also began investigating the possibilities of RF/MW-induced health hazards. While they claimed to have found no evidence of hazards they did recommended that radar and radio operators should avoid prolonged exposure as a precautionary measure. In the late 1940's and early 1950s several new studies came to light that raised the possibility of health hazards involved with the use of microwaves. In 1948 two U.S. studies reported a possible link with cataract development and testicular degeneration in dogs. These studies were mostly ignored, largely because the companies that had developed microwave technology for the military began to see consumer commercial possibilities. This was the time when wide commercial use of microwaves saw the development of diathermy equipment, civilian radar and later microwave ovens - all of which were seen as the wonders of that age. In the techno-euphoria that followed the war, there was little interest in funding research which could put a damper on expanding business opportunities. Then the Cold War began and military uses of radar and other new equipment were seen as paramount to the national interest. So any related human-health research became even more hidden and clothed in secrecy. However in 1953 a study of workers at Hughes Aircraft Corp. found excessive amounts of internal bleeding, leukemia, cataracts, headaches, brain tumours, heart conditions and jaundice in those employees working with radar. (7) As a result, the US military was forced to initiate the first 'open and public' investigation into the biological effects of microwaves. The aim was to establish 'tolerance levels' for both single and repeated exposures, because it was generally accepted that standard thresholds of tolerance exposure must exist. Since little research data of this kind existed at that time, it was decided that the known ability of microwaves to heat up tissue (its 'thermal effects') would be the main criteria, and with a safety margin applied, this has been the foundation of all so-called Western safety standards since. The decision to choose tissue heating as the key exposure parameter was based more on a lack of scientific data than for positive reasons, however it quickly gained favour with both the military and industry as it created something that could be claimed as a safety standard, and avoided (without openly dismissing) the possibility that low-level, non thermal health effects could exist without tissue heating. The "thermal school of thought" quickly became the accepted norm with Western standard setting organizations and as a result the vast majority of "science based" research was directed at short term, high-level exposures. Research into prolonged environmental level exposures that did not cause tissue heating was not encouraged, simply because it was perceived as a possible threat for technological development. This situation was well described by Dr. Rochelle Medici, a researcher on animal behaviour, who said, "It is as though scientists had retreated from doing challenging, frontier studies because such work engendered too much controversy or elicited too much criticism. We are left with "Safe" but meaningless experiments. The results of such experiments are a foregone conclusion". In the USSR however, a vastly different political and economic system resulted paradoxically in giving their scientists far more democratic and academic freedom (and funding) than their Western counterparts in choosing the focus of their research efforts. Private corporations did not exist and the Soviet military was EXEMPT from having to comply with exposure standards. They could happily design and deploy their equipment without fear of conflict with regulations, or research findings. The result was the lowest EMF Standard worldwide, designed to provide protection against prolonged - low level (non-thermal) exposures. While microwave thermal effects are accepted by both Western and Soviet scientists, it was only the Russians that expanded their own research to include extensive studies with human workers that were exposed to non-thermal electromagnetic fields. This research, gathered from actual human exposure experience, led to the recognition of a condition called "Microwave Sickness", characterised by the following symptoms: Increased agitation (Emotional upheavals) in combination with nervous exhaustion, fatigue, muscle weakness, reduced intellectual activity, absent mindedness / inability to concentrate, increased sensitivity to external factors such as noise, bright light, disturbed dreaming / sleeplessness, headaches, attacks of giddiness / dizziness, unstable gait, cold hands and legs, heart problems such as palpitations, fast or slow heart beat, breathing problems, overactive thyroid and irregularities in the menstrual cycle. (8) The relevance of "Microwave Sickness" to mobile phone use is that, when a phone is being used with the antenna near the head, the microwave exposure to brain tissue can be in the range of the exposures reported to cause microwave sickness. In addition, various mobile phone surveys in several countries have found that users report similar symptoms that they link to their use of the mobile phone: They complain of frequent headaches, fatigue, burning sensations, dizziness, concentration difficulties and memory loss. Not everyone experiences these symptoms of course, but some people appear to be much more sensitive than others. Such biological (rather than psychological) differences have been widely reported in research in such areas as microwave hearing, where some people are certainly able to detect the direct effects of high-frequency radio waves on the nerves of their inner ears. Are mobiles proven to be 'safe'? Back in 1995, an Optus brochure titled: "Health effects of Mobile Phones" said that: "After more than 6000 scientific studies the world over, there is still no convincing evidence of any adverse health effects caused by electromagnetic fields from mobile phones . . . the international body of scientific research concludes there is no link between mobile phones and adverse health effects." This viewpoint has not changed much since. For instance, in a letter to the Australian newspaper on February 6, 2001, Keith Anderson from the Australian Mobile Telephone Association assured readers that mobile phones were safe because they are designed, built and tested to meet "science-based safety standards" and that phones with this "accreditation are safe". However, what is not said by the industry is that their often-quoted "international body of scientific research" and "science-based safety standards" are irrelevant to mobile phone use. They almost exclusively refer to research into biological effects from short term (acute) exposure to high level RF/MW exposure - yet most of the disease conditions which are believed to be relevant to RF/MW exposure are those with long-low-level incubation periods - and are multi-causal (cancer, Alzheimer’s, immune system compromises). A fact admitted by the International Commission on Non-Ionising Radiation Protection (ICNIRP). To quote: "Most of the established biological effects of exposure to RF fields are consistent with responses to induced heating. Most studies examined endpoints other than cancer; many examined physiological and thermo-regulatory responses, effects on behaviour and on the induction of lens opacities (cataracts) and adverse reproductive outcome following acute exposure to relatively high levels of RF fields. Very few studies are relevant to the evaluation of RF exposure on the development of cancer in humans.” (9) What is obvious from the ICNIRP statement is that the research needed to give an assurance of safety for mobile phone use has not yet been done. It is unscientific and profoundly irresponsible for the industry to refer to unrelated research and attempt to use them as proof of safety for mobile phone use. For further information please contact the author, Don Maisch on e-mail: emfacts@trump.net.au References McLauchlin JR. A survey of possible health hazards from exposure to microwave radiation , Hughes Air craft corp. Culver City, Ca. 1953. Hecht K, Balzer HU. Biological Effects of Electromagnetic Fields on Humans in the Frequency Range 0 to 3 GHz: Summary and results of a study of Russian medical literature from 1960 - 1996 , Berlin 1997. International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection. Health Issues Related to the use of hand-held Radiotelephones and Base Transmitters. June 1995. EMF Consultancy Page  PAGE 3 of  NUMPAGES 3 P[ и!# &&Ў&А&'''.'w'М'c(Г())))).)/)5)6)7)8)<)=)G)H)I)J)K)N)§§§§љїєыщщщцурйрйбйрйрйбйр0JmHnHu j0JU0JaJCJ6OJPJQJ^JCJ5 *5 *%./ВКЛGHТ У 1 2 z{ЗИ7ЎЏ]^hiс󧧞§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§ћ)M)ўў[‘’!!#{#|%А&В&''''Ј't()))L)M)N)§§§§§§§§§§§§§єяяяэ§ш§§$a$ & FЄЄ[$\$,1hА‚. АЦA!АŠ"А7#S$S%ААХАХ Ф i8@ёџ8 NormalCJ_HaJmH sH tH J`J Heading 3$Є№Є<@&5:CJ\^JaJ<A@ђџЁ< Default Paragraph Font6`ђ6 Footnote TextCJaJJ^`J Normal (Web)ЄdЄd[$\$OJPJQJ^J,`, Header  Ц9r &)`Ђ!& Page NumberN%4џџџџ./ВКЛGHТУ12z {   ЗИ7ЎЏ]^hiсу[‘’{|!А"В"####Ј#t$%%%L%O%˜0€€˜0€€(0€€˜0€/˜0€/˜0€/˜0€/˜0€/˜0€/˜0€/˜0€/˜0€/˜0€/˜0€/˜0€/˜0€/˜0€/˜0€/˜0€/˜0€/˜0€/˜0€/˜0€/˜0€/˜0€/˜0€/˜0€/˜0€/(0€€˜0€у˜0€у˜0€у˜0€у˜0€у˜0€у˜0€у˜0€у˜0€у˜0€у˜0€у˜0€у˜0€у˜0€у˜ 0€у˜ 0€у˜ 0€уš0€€ 0š@0€€ 0666669N)N)M)!&139!дџ•€дџ•€%%.%8%<%J%O%{АjЗ$`#m#_$e$С$Ш$%&%L%O%3333333%%.%8%<%J%O%џџPeter=C:\DVD2\WART\DoctorPack\05 - emf consultancy highlights2.docэCчoю‹ ^џџџџџџџџџh„а„˜ўЦа^„а`„˜ўo(.h„ „˜ўЦ ^„ `„˜ў.’h„p„LџЦp^„p`„Lџ.h„@ „˜ўЦ@ ^„@ `„˜ў.h„„˜ўЦ^„`„˜ў.’h„р„LџЦр^„р`„Lџ.h„А„˜ўЦА^„А`„˜ў.h„€„˜ўЦ€^„€`„˜ў.’h„P„LџЦP^„P`„Lџ.эCчoџџџџџџџџ~jTЃ        џ@€%%ьd%%N%P@џџUnknownџџџџџџџџџџџџG‡:џTimes New Roman5€Symbol3& ‡:џArialI&€ ‡: џ?Arial Unicode MS"1ˆ№аh3Т–І3Т–І]”AY№ŠSДД20%%2ƒQ№џџDon Maisch, April 2001PeterPeterўџ р…ŸђљOhЋ‘+'Гй0x˜ИФдрьќ  4 @ LX`hpфDon Maisch, April 2001on PeteriseteeteNormalsPeters1teMicrosoft Word 9.00@@ЪHv‘xХ@ЪHv‘xХ]”ўџ еЭеœ.“—+,љЎ0 hp€ˆ˜  ЈАИ Р уфHomesA%  Don Maisch, April 2001 Title ўџџџ !"ўџџџ$%&'()*ўџџџ,-./012ўџџџ§џџџ5ўџџџўџџџўџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџRoot Entryџџџџџџџџ РF@™lŽ‘xХ7€1TableџџџџџџџџџџџџWordDocumentџџџџџџџџ.4SummaryInformation(џџџџ#DocumentSummaryInformation8џџџџџџџџџџџџ+CompObjџџџџjObjectPoolџџџџџџџџџџџџ@™lŽ‘xХ@™lŽ‘xХџџџџџџџџџџџџўџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџџўџ џџџџ РFMicrosoft Word Document MSWordDocWord.Document.8є9Вq