I attended the Canadian Health Food Show a few weeks ago as a water consultant for a company that sells water filters and ionizers. When things were quiet, I got a chance to speak with a number of exhibitors. The exhibitors were very well informed about their products rather than simply being sales people. I assume that companies had their best people at the show because it was a show for health care professionals and health food store owners as opposed to the public.
One product that really jumped out at me was a telephone EMR (Electro Magnetic Radiation) blocker called Wave Shield (www.waveshield.ca). Their product doesn’t block all of the radiation emitted from cell phones and portable phones as that would be impossible unless you wrapped the entire phone in their mesh shield material. However, their shield does block up to 99% of the EMR transmission from the earpiece which otherwise would enter the ear canal.
I noticed that his booth had a few visitors like everybody else on Saturday, but then his booth was inundated with customers on Sunday. It seems that the word about what he was selling was spreading as the show progressed. Both vendors and visitors were flocking to his booth to pick up his product. I became intrigued with the product and asked the vendor lots of questions during the show. Following the show, I started researching the topic, which is why I have done so little writing on my blog in the last few weeks.
I quickly learned that the topic of electro magnetic frequencies being transmitted from cell and portable telephones is very controversial. On May 31, 2011 The World Health Organization’s International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) classified radiofrequency electromagnetic fields (EMFs) as a (group) 2B carcinogen. A 2B rating means that it has the potential to be a carcinogen. Other materials that you might be familiar with with a 2B rating are leaded gasoline and car exhaust. The announcement immediately set off a series of denials from phone companies who pointed out studies which denied the correlation between cell phone use and brain cancer. For example, a study published last month performed in Belgium on 300,000 people over the last ten years provided inconclusive results. However, the leading authorities in the world on the topic quickly pointed out the flaws in the study.
I can’t help but wonder who financed such a large study. I’m looking at funding a study of 20 people and I have been quoted a price of approximately $100,000. If it costs $5,000 per person for a proper scientific study, then a 300,000 person study would likely cost $1.5 billion. Hmmm….who has that kind of money?
The following are some facts that I have learned in the past few weeks. I have left out all the technical stuff because the few readers that actually care about that can find their answers online:
1) Children are much more susceptible to the effects of radiation from telephones than adults because their skulls are thinner and don’t fully develop until their early twenties.
2) Children under 14 years of age in many European countries are not allowed to use cell phones
3) The user manuals for most cell phones and portable phones recommend that you should hold the phone no closer one inch from your ear
4) Senator Ted Kennedy died last year from a tumor at the end of his ear canal (Glioma).
5) Johnny Cochrane (O.J. Simpson’s lead lawyer) died from the same type of brain tumor.
6) 50,000 Americans per year are now being diagnosed with the same type of malignant tumor.
7) It is expected that 500,000 new cases of brain tumors are expected to be reported by 2015. This estimate is based upon the fact that the transmission signal of the phones is much stronger than in the past, and also due to the fact that so many more people are using cell and portable phones these days
Q & A With The Wave Shield Guy:
I have provided a Q & A section below of questions that I asked Mr. Howard Kalnitsky (the gentleman that I met at the show who is the rights holder of the Wave Shield in Canada) to answer. The answers are not exact quotes, but they are accurate in content:
Q. How could a little piece of screen block the radiation?
A. The screen is made of the same material that is used in the suits of the workers who clean up radiation spills such as the recent Nuclear Reactor disaster in Japan. When you seal the Wave Shield around the speaker, 99% of the radiation is blocked from entering the ear canal.
Q. How do you know it actually works?
A. We have all kinds of testing from accredited research labs around the world. However, a simple experiment that you can see on our website shows that if you take the material used in a Waveshield and wrap it around a cell phone, the phone can’t send or receive messages. You can’t get anymore clear about the blocking capabilities than that.
Q. Can you explain why the phone companies and governments claim there is no danger from cell and portable telephone radiation?
A. The tobacco companies and governments denied the claims that cigarette smoke was harmful for generations despite growing and eventually overwhelming evidence. The governments didn’t do anything until successful lawsuits forced them to act.
We approached Panasonic’s head office in Canada about including the shields with their cordless phones. Although they loved the product, they chose not to enter into business with us. The reason that they declined was based upon feedback from their head office in Japan. They explained that there was a concern that if the company started providing a blocking device like ours now, why hadn’t they been providing the device for the past ten years.
I have approached every major newspaper in the country about doing an article and have never received a response. That is not a surprise to me because of the massive amount of advertising revenue the newspapers receive from the cellular phone companies.
I have had 2 different on-air radio interviews suddenly terminated when we began discussing that cell phones are potentially dangerous. In both cases, the radio stations were owned by corporate entities that are involved in the Telco industry.
Q. I have been checking out a number of shields for sale online. Do they all work?
A. We have checked them all out. Most of the products don’t do what they claim to do. Unless a company is willing to provide you with scientific evidence from certified research facilities indicating their test results, I would save my money.
In 2002, when the shields started gaining in popularity, someone (he didn’t name the Telco’s but he didn’t have to) contacted the FTC (Federal Trade Commission) in the USA in regards to the claims being made by various vendors. The FTC shut down every company except Wave Shield. The reason that the Wave Shield survived while the others were shut down was due to the fact that we had proper testing to meet and exceed the requests of the FTC and we didn’t make unsubstantiated claims.
Q. Cell phones are getting all the press. What about the safety of the portable phones that we carry around in our houses?
A. There has been less testing on portable phones, but our research indicates that they may be up to three times as dangerous as cell phones. People should leave their portable phones in the cradle as opposed to sitting them elsewhere to let the battery run down. In addition, people should set the phone a foot or two away and use the speaker during conversations.
Q. Are the “blue tooth” products safe as they have a weaker transmission?
A. While blue tooth signals are not as powerful, there is still radiation being delivered into the ear canal and the effect over time is cumulative. Think about having a blue tooth device turned on and in your ear all day for five days per week…..not good!
Q. Any recommendations to offer readers?
A. People should limit their conversations as much as possible while on a cell or portable phone. They should use the speaker phone whenever possible. Texting should be encouraged, especially for kids. They should always have a shield on both types of phones. Parents should pay particular attention to their kid’s phones as they are more susceptible. Portable phone users should always leave the phones in the cradle except when in use. The base stations for portable phones should not be placed on a bedside table. People, or more specifically kids should not be going to bed with cell phones under their pillows. People should not be carrying cell phones in their pockets or attached to their hips.
Q. If people shouldn’t carry cell phones in their pockets or on their hip, where should they keep them?
A. Women should carry their phone in their purse. If that is not an option, protective cell phone carrying cases available on the market that block the majority of radiation. However, the phones have to be removed from the cases each time you want to use them which is cumbersome. If you do carry a cell phone in your pocket, always turn the screen side towards your body.
Q. Are wired headsets safer than talking on a cell or portable phone?
A. Until recently, it was thought that wired headsets were a safer alternative. We now know that the wire running between the headset and the telephone is acting as an antenna and can magnify the signal up to three times. Therefore, this is not a safer solution.
Howard’s final commments
He explained to me that every inch that a phone is away from the body is of critical importance. For example, if you keep the phone just six inches away from your body, the potential risk goes down by over 10,000 times.
He indicated that the Wave Shield is not a total solution to block all radiation, but is in fact designed specifically to block radiation entering the ear canal. This is important because the ear has the highest absorption rate of radiation in the body at 94%.
Ultimately the best solution for preventing brain tumors from the radiation emitted from cell or portable phones is a combination of the use of a legitimate blocking shield and intelligent usage of the telephones.
I can’t prove that cell phone and portable phones cause cancer. However, after reading extensively, I put shields on our portable phones at home. I have also put shields on our kid’s cell phones as well as the phones that Mary and I use. The kids (we have 5) all asked me to put shields on the phones of their respective boyfriends and girlfriends, which makes me happy.
I have no doubt that the Telco’s will continue to deny the correlation between the transmissions emitted from their products and brain tumors. I also have no doubt that they will be the subject of class action lawsuits in the future and I expect the scenario to play out in much the same way that it did for the tobacco companies. This all seems so stupid to me because the Telco’s could just start putting the shields on their products now. Yes, they would likely get hit with some legal costs, but it would be a fraction of what it will be in the future. The Telco industry is the second largest industry in the world, so the numbers are only going to get bigger over time.
While it continues to be a struggle for me to educate people about the benefits of drinking clean healthy water, the dangers of cell and portable phones is gaining widespread awareness through the media. The fact that the shields only cost about $20 makes them affordable for anyone. Even if the WHO and all the leading authorities in the world on the subject (not including those on the payrolls of the Telco’s) are wrong about the dangers of radiation from phones, doesn’t it make sense to protect yourself for $20 “Just in Case”?