Ladies, Your Bra is Not a Cell Phone Holster
So, You Enjoy Wearing a Microwave Transmitter on Your Breast?
I hear about this more and more often: people tell me that they have gotten into the habit of wearing their cell phones inside their bra. All day. Every day.
What's worse, is that they gush about how convenient it is because they can keep the phone on vibrate and never miss a call. Or go run an errand or walk the dog and not have to worry about having pockets or a purse to carry the phone.
What's Wrong with This Picture?
Maybe I'm old-fashioned. Or maybe I just have common sense. Or maybe this just demonstrates the white-washing efforts of the telecommunications industry in making the average American woman believe that putting a microwave transmitter in contact with delicate breast tissue for several hours every day couldn't possibly have any effect whatsoever on her likelihood for developing breast cancer. Judging by the growing body of scientific studies showing adverse biological reactions on a cellular level in the presence of chronic exposure to pulsed wireless radiation, I don't think I'm being an alarmist. There is cause for concern. What's alarming is the widespread disconnect between perception and reality across the globe about the "safety" of cell phone and wireless technologies.
Read More...
Cordless Phones, Wi-Fi and Heart Arrhythmias
The Ticking Time Bomb
I had hoped something like this wouldn't happen. But like the steady ticking of a time bomb, I feared it was inevitable. A member of my extended family has had significant health challenges for many years now, and the latest development was a type of chronic tachycardia (racing heart beat) that the doctors treated with several rounds of catheter ablation. The results were less than desirable and may not control the arrhythmia. She was taken to the emergency room today with chest pain. Tests came back negative. The doctors still don't know what triggers the arrhythmia or if they've succeeded in stopping it.
The Environmental Factor
What's sad about this scenario is because I've had to sit back and watch it unfold, knowing that there is an environmental factor—pulsed RF signals—that has been scientifically shown to affect heart rhythm in individuals who are sensitive to those frequencies. It's largely overlooked by most doctors, as in this person's case, and although I've mentioned RF and its health effects to the family a few times, trying to give information without jeopardizing or challenging the family's faith in their doctors, I've learned the hard way that unless a person asks you for advice about something, it's best to keep your mouth shut if you want to preserve the relationship.
But today, thinking about how frightening the situation has become, I opened my mouth and let the evidence speak for itself, because I believe this environmental factor must be ruled out in order to find the root cause of the problem.
What do we know about pulsed RF radiation in relation to heart problems?
- The long-term health effects of non-ionizing forms of microwave radiation, including that emitted by cordless phones and wi-fi are unknown. Their safety has never been proven.
- The existence of electrically sensitive people has been scientifically corroborated since 1989 with Dr. William Rea's groundbreaking study on electrical sensitivity.
- While immediate detrimental effects on the general population may not be widespread, in electrically sensitive individuals, the same level of exposure can cause drastic changes in parasympathetic nervous system function and can express itself in a variety of symptoms, from headaches to tinnitus to chronic fatigue, heart palpitations, tachycardia (racing heart beat), memory loss and seizures.
- In a recent study by Magda Havas, Ph.D., the exposure to pulsed radio frequencies emitted by 2.4 GHz cordless phones and Wi-Fi routers produced immediate dramatic changes in heart rate and heart rate variability (an indication of the heart's adaptability to stress) in electrically sensitive individuals, at exposure levels 200 times lower than the federal guidelines in Canada and the U.S. Read More...





