The companies are now spending millions trying to discredit
me because, basically, they didn’t like what I told them....
They have shown total disregard for mobile phone users,” Dr.
Carlo stated in an October 1999 interview with the British
newspaper, The Express.
The Begich/Roderick article mentions that the industry has
largely put forward studies that “looked at the effects of
radio waves outside the cellular frequency, or at exposure
levels that are different from those experienced by cellular
phone users....Very limited information has been available
to the public about the risks of cell phones or various
electromagnetic fields outside of some obscure research and
academic circles. The fact is that increasing evidence has
been mounting and the true risks of these energy fields are
becoming well known.”
The authors criticize the Federal Drug Administration and
the United States government for being reluctant to take
action against the risks of cell phone usage and blame this
reluctance on “lobby efforts, public relations gimmicks and
the manipulation of the facts.”
But as the cell phone industry and US government agencies
are downplaying these risks, Begich and Roderick write that
“[t]he risks associated with cell phones are being
considered too risky even by the biggest risk takers in the
insurance industry.” Underwriters from big insurers like
Lloyd’s and Stirling have refused “to cover manufacturers
against the risk of being sued if mobiles turn out to cause
long-term damage,” according to the April 11, 1999 issue of
The Observer.
The Begich/Roderick article concludes: “The research
continues and the health effects mount. With over 1.3
billion people projected to be using these devices in the
year 2005 the risks must be understood and addressed.
Perhaps we will see the litigation of the 21st century
overtake the incredible tobacco settlements as the record
holder for ‘damage by industry when its head’s in the
sand.’”
Another indication of the possible dangers in cell phone
usage involves the cell phone industry itself. Patents taken
out by the industry contain revelations of health hazards
connected to their products. Baltimore attorney Joanne Suder
has recently filed a high-profile lawsuit against the cell
phone industry and is considering 36 more suits. Her
contention that cell phone are dangerous is based on the
“dozens and dozens” of patents filed by the industry to
create radiation-shielding technology.
For example, a Nokia patent for a shield layer between the
antenna and the user to reduce the electromagnetic
irradiation of the user, received on July 28, 1998, states:
“[I]t has been suggested that modulated radio-frequency
radiation induces changes in the electrical status, i.e., in
the ion balance of nerves. A continuous localized exposure
to radio-frequency irradiation has been suggested to weaken
myelin sheets of cells and to eventually lead to an
impairment of hearing capability, vertigo, etc. It has been
suggested that radio-frequency irradiation may stimulate
extra growth among supportive cells in the nerve system,
which in the worst case it has been suggested could [lead]
to a development of malignant tumors, e.g., glioma....
Although the consequences described above have not been
scientifically verified, the uncertainty has some effects by
reducing the speed of growth of the market of radiophones.”
Motorola, Ericsson and other handset manufacturers own
similar patents, Suder said.
The degree and magnitude of the health risks involved in
cell phone usage have yet to be determined in a
comprehensive manner. It is not clear whether the risk is
comparable to that posed by smoking (potentially fatal), for
example, or by passing through a metal detector in an
airport (minor, with an offsetting benefit). A factor making
it more difficult to ascertain the potential hazards has
clearly been the influence of the firms with enormous
amounts of money invested in cell phone production. Can
anyone doubt that without this big business influence the
true facts about cellular phone usage could be established
by a coordinated scientific effort in relatively short
order?
However, the cell phone manufacturers, telecommunications
companies and those who profit enormously from this new and
booming industry, would apparently rather use 1.3 billion
people as human guinea pigs in a radiological experiment
than investigate any potentially life-threatening
“consequence.”
Vietnam, Hanoi
Bosnia, Sarajevo
Penrith, Australia
Latvia, Riga
Israel, Jerusalem,
Norway, Oslo
Solomon Islands, Honiara
Spain, Madrid
Russia, Moscow
Paterson, New Jersey, USA
Try any
Q-Link or
cell chip
for 3 months, absolutely
RISK-FREE If you do not feel Q-Link improves your
focus, energy, or well-being, simply return it for a full
refund.
Airtube headsets have
30 a day refund.