(reproduced by permission)

Abstract

Many people suffer one or more of a wide variety of symptoms when exposed to weak non-ionising electromagnetic radiation, including that from cell phones and Wi-Fi. Those responsible for the radiation deny that these effects exist, saying that there is no plausible explanation. In this submission I explain just how these effects can arise, and how virtually all of them share one of two common mechanisms. The pieces of the jigsaw fit together remarkably well and leave little doubt that the majority of the reported effects are real and must be taken seriously. Knowledge of the mechanisms makes it possible to mitigate the worst of these effects and I have made a number of suggestions as to how this might be done. I have also explained how a simple test, taking just a day or two to perform, could be used to assess the biological safety of both new and existing wireless technologies. Until this has been done, it would be wise to halt the roll-out of new wireless technologies and withdraw from sale particularly hazardous items such as DECT baby monitors which radiate continuously next to a very young child.

Introduction

There are literally thousands of scientific papers written on the non-thermal effects of weak non-ionising radiation such as that from cell phones (www.bioinitiative.org ). Well over half of them show some sort of biological effect, many with either direct or indirect implications for human health. However, the results lack consistency and the cell phone industry uses this to imply that there are really no ill effects and that it is all due to experimental error. This argument is, however, flawed because it does not take into account biological variability.

Biological variability

It is a common mistake made by physicists and engineers alike that living organisms behave like simple physical systems and must always respond in the same way to physical or chemical perturbations.  Nothing could be further from the truth. Living cells are not just chemical factories run by a fixed computer program. They are the product of thousands of genes that interact in countless ways, both with each other and the environment. Their physiology changes continuously to cope with rapid alterations in the environment and there are also epigenetic changes to their DNA that can be semi-permanent over the lifetime of the whole organism. It is these characteristics that enable the genes from two different parents to adapt to one another and give a viable offspring rather than a genetic disaster. You could not take a random mix of components from an Apple Mac and a PC, throw them into a box and hope to get a machine that worked. However, living organisms do this sort of thing easily.

It follows that living cells and organisms cannot always be expected to respond in the same way to chemical insults or to electromagnetic radiation. For example, not every smoker dies of cancer and we do not all suffer the same (if any) side effects from taking a medicinal drug. We cannot therefore expect non-ionising radiation to affect everyone equally. Because not everyone is affected by the radiation does not mean that no one is. Although it is understandable why the Industry prefers to use this argument, it is deeply flawed and potentially dangerous to those who are susceptible to the radiation.

This is an emailed response to Cliff Mason of OFCOM following a proposal by Vodafone that it should be allowed to increase the power of its base stations by a factor of four. The email explains the mechanism by which base station radiation may be responsible for the increased incidence of cancer around them, the decline of the bees, and the loss of many trees within range to pathogens. It also explains how a simple modification to the signal could put it right.

It remains to be seen whether they are prepared to do anything about it.

Dear Cliff Mason,

As an ex-amateur radio enthusiast, I am a great believer in the value of mobile communications, but things are not yet right. There is compelling evidence for a mechanism by which the continuous radiation from mobile phone base stations can weaken the immune systems, not only in humans, but also in animals and plants.  In addition, the same mechanism is probably responsible for colony collapse disorder in honey bees and their increased susceptibility to various pathogens.

It is based on a family of pigments called cryptochromes, which occur in virtually all animals and plants and some micro-organisms. They have a number of functions, including navigation in the Earth’s magnetic field and the regulation of the “body clock”, which is needed for solar navigation and also for the regulation of the immune system. This pigment is very badly affected by a wide range of radio frequencies, so that all of these processes can be disrupted by the modulated radiation from mobile phone base stations.  This can explain the clusters of cancer cases believed by many people to have formed around mobile phone base stations as well as the decline and incipient loss of the honey bee population, which will have far more serious consequences for mankind. Insofar as the mobile phone operators say that there is no known mechanism by which their radiation can have these effects, we can only assume that they are unaware of its effects on cryptochrome.

I am attaching a document entitled “Making Mobile Phones Safer”, which sets this out in more detail and makes some simple suggestions to mitigate these effects.  I am also attaching the original “Nature” paper by Ritz et al. in which they first discovered the effects of radio-frequency radiation on cryptochrome and animal navigation.

I am quite happy for you to forward this email, with attachments, to Vodafone, but I would suggest that they postpone any increase in power until this has been sorted out. It may not be that difficult.