Newsletter (05 December 2003)

The truth about EMF radiation - spread it

! )

 Spread it through your network, to family and friends and tell everyone to do the same.

This will end up being the biggest health scandal ever if we don't stop it!

 Take very much care and keep shining.

 All the best

The Truth - May Justice Prevail!

Informant: Sandheden


Next to the Stanford Research

Dear Klaus.

Ed. Kats


Irish T.V. reports on Irish farmer adverse bioeffects from his farm mast

A well known Irish I.D.E.A. (Irish Doctors Environmental Association) doctor, Dr. Philip Michael from Bantry, Co. Cork, was interviewed as well on this EHS problem. Dr. Michael said that increasing number of patients are coming to him with what he would describe as EHS symptoms from cellphones and masts.

Then a divergent opinion on the health dangers posed by masts was sought from Professor Werner Blau, Head of the Department of Physics, Trinity College Dublin. He pointed out that there was no conclusive evidence that the radiation from masts, etc., could cause adverse effects.

Generally, however, it has been a terrific plus to our recognition of EHS campaign that this report actually featured on prime time Irish television. Just think  of all the Irish farmers and other citizens who have now been alerted to the whole EHS scene.


Message from a reader

Just a short note to tell you how valuable your news coverage is to me. Thank you.


Re: From Denmark


I can not at all see the logic in this. Did Mr Hanson-Mild really said that or is this a interpretation of what he said? (I had a fight only two years ago, when Mild promptly said that speaking of masts and the radiation emitting from masts there are no need to worry at all. There are many other sources such as radio, television and so on so emitting from 3G mobile masts is nothing to worry about. Then, I did not like his statement, and opposed it strongly. Today I don´t like it even lesser. Mr Milds position on masts today is somewhat unclear. He is concentrating to the mobile phone (thanks to Mr Lennart Hardell).

But the question was about the precautionary principle: WHEN, to be more specific, is it to be applied?

Yours Sincerely

Jan Åberg


and investigative journalist


Hi, It is now fairly well established that the IEEE/WHO/ICNIR standards for SAR and other exposure "standards" so called based on "heating effect" do not tell the whole story on the effects of exposure of humans of all ages, both genders and the range of physical sizes to RF at HF and above.

It has been known and shown repeatedly that there are bio-electrical effects that start at very low levels. Between 1/1000 and 1/10000 of the current "standard'. Further it is the type of modulation or intelligence placed on the RF that is significant; with pulsed signals being far worse then radio (AM or FM) and TV signals (that contain vestige sideband "sync pulses”) some where in the middle as far as effects are concerned.

Basicly the mechanism is beloved to be the cells and certain organs such as the middle ear, acting as a demodulator or detector resolving the envelope pattern of the RF signal. Where the demodulated signal has components at the various bio-active frequencies that are used for internal signals by the human body, they may be swamped by this "false" RF demodulated signal. These "false" signals interfere with the body's regulation at all levels from inside cells up to major sense organ inputs to the brain.

The results are to be seen at the cell level as calcium efflux, at the near level as false sensation, tingling, vertigo, sweating, cold sweating, tremors, flushes and other well known symptoms of RF exposure. In the limit, caused by the effects of direct RF exposure of the brain, hearing noise, seeing flashes, headaches, dizziness to the point of falling over, can be the result.

All the effects appear to be worse as the frequency is raised. A serious side effect of exposure at frequencies above 150 Mhz, (that is VHF and above), is that body parts can become resonant absorbers, which raises the amount of energy taken in, and reduces the threshold  exposure level at which effects are seen.

The range of variation of human "size" of hand, arm, leg etc within gender and age groups explains in part why some people are more affected than others.

All the above has been widely known for some 40 years, as these effects were first documented by Russian scientists from the late 1950s onward.

When it first became known in the "West" the US/NATO (yes the Yanks), dismissed it as black propaganda. Since 1990 the IEEE have repeatedly attempted to "harmonize" the Russian standards by raising the "safe" levels in Russia upwards by 1000 times. The answer is still NO.

The driving force behind maintaining the high unsafe standard in the West (UK/EU/USA/Can/Aus/NZ) is the financial implication for the cold war warriors.

If the lower standard were adopted the MILITARY would need to purchase many square miles of land around their high power radar and radio sites to remove the public from areas where the lower standard said was unsafe.

The MILITARY could also expect to pay out vast sums in successful death and injury claims to ex-military and civilian persons who have been affected by exposure to previously consider "safe" RF levels.

Eventually common sense, and the case against the current RF exposure standards will prevail, as it did in the case of tobacco.

In the mean time we are all subject to passive RF exposed while the "cell-idiots" deafen everyone with their conversations and spread the risk of pain or death to all around them.

Message from dja.

PS I spent most of my working life involved with radio safety and radio propagation involving high power sites from VLF to millimeter waves.


Passive Radar


Omega Links:

On Science and Mind Control

The Pain Merchants: Security equipment and its use in torture and other ill-treatment

Country Reports on Human Rights Practices 2002



Dear Klaus,

The use of cellular, radio, and TV signals for passive radar is somewhat a testimony to electrosmog. See article at  

Best wishes,

John McMurtrey


US Govt Climate Change Scientists: There's 'No Doubt' Industry is Primary Cause


Cracks in Earth's Defenses Let Space Storms In sletspacestormsin

Informant: azul azul


Protect the Tongass National Forest

We urgently need your help to protect Alaska's Tongass National Forest, which is now imperiled by timber industry allies in the Bush administration.

The Timber Products Company, which makes various types of plywood, veneer and laminate products, is currently negotiating with government officials in Alaska to re-open a veneer mill in Ketchikan that would jeopardize wild and roadless areas in the Tongass by increasing demand for ancient trees.

The Forest Service is exploiting the possible re-opening of the mill as an excuse to undermine the "roadless rule" that protects our wild national forests -- and to exempt the Tongass from the rule altogether.

Please go to

and send a message urging the president and CEO of the Timber Products Company to withdraw immediately from negotiations to re-open the mill.


Spain: save the Ebro delta from destruction


New GM Toxin Looms over Our Food


Keeping Europe GM-Free