Saturday, April 25, 2009

Untested technology


Article in http://www.wiredchild.org

Untested technology

Cordless phones, Wi-fi, digital baby monitors and other wireless products have become ubiquitous. While their health effects are largely untested, there have been numerous studies of the effects of the electro-magnetic radiation emitted from these devices. All scientists agree that this radiation is dangerous at high levels but it is hoped that the low levels emitted from these household devices are safe. We are not convinced.

Radiation 24/7

The levels of radiation emitted from mobile and cordless phones on standby, and of wi-fi routers, digital baby monitors and bluetooth are a fraction of those of a mobile or cordless phone in use on a call. But this does not mean they are safer.

The radiation exposure from wireless products is a "chronic" exposure, constantly at a low level rather than short bursts of high power. There is evidence that this type of exposure might be more damaging in the long-term. It is thought that when the body first experiences a new source of radiation, it reacts by strengthening its immune defences, but then the immune system begins to weaken progressively as the radiation exposure continues. Read more at http://www.wiredchild.org/sciencealias/43-what-the-science-tells-us/69-health-effects-.html

There is evidence that long-term chronic exposure to electro-magnetic radiation has a range of health effects. We also know that children are more vulnerable than adults.

The German and French governments have advised against the use of wireless products like wi-fi and cordless (DECT) phones at home. Read more at http://www.wiredchild.org/government-alias.html#Germany

A phone mast in your home?

The clearest evidence that this day-in-day-out low-level exposure might be dangerous is from the studies of the health effects of mobile phone masts. Two studies have shown significantly increased levels of cancers amongst those living within a few hundred meters of a mobile phone mast. Other studies have demonstrated a host of other symptoms linked with exposure to mobile phone mast radiation.  One study has shown directly that wi-fi can affect children's cognitive skills like memory, attention and reaction time.

The radiation exposure from a wi-fi router at 5 meters' distance, a cordless DECT phone base unit at 3 meters' distance, or digital baby monitor at less than 1 meter are all experienced at roughly the same level as a mobile phone mast only 150 meters away. If any of these are closer, for example if you sleep with a cordless phone next to the bed, it is equivalent in radiation terms to being only about 50 meters away from a mast. Read more at http://www.wiredchild.org/parents/58-which-products-are-most-dangerous.html

There is now much annecdotal evidence of people experiencing symptoms in the short term, like headaches, nausea, dizziness and loss of concentration. Read more... For this reason, some government and public bodies have stopped the introduction of wi-fi in some public places and schools.

Read more about the health effects of cordless (DECT) phones at http://www.emfacts.com/papers/dect.pdf...

Wifi may be more damaging to some people than mobile phones...

Cumulative exposure

Even if the power level of one wireless router or computer is small, a child's environment may include many of these devices at once. Radiation exposure from a wi-fi system comes from the router and each of the computers. A cordless DECT phone emits radiation from the base stations and the handsets. A mobile phone on standby, or worse on a call, also adds to the radiation "load". 

At school, a set of wirelessly connected computers in a classroom is known to result in exposures much higher than one computer being used alone. The radiiation level has been found to be equivalent to being in the main beam of a mobile phone mast (which official guidelines state should not fall on school grounds without the consent of parents and the school). In 2007 a BBC Panorama programme found that the readings next to a classroom laptop showed radiation at double the level experienced only 100 metres from a mobile phone mast. This exposure from wi-fi is additional to mobile phones, cordless DECT phones and bluetooth used around the children in schools.

So at any one time a child may be exposed to cumulative levels of radiation much higher than each product emits alone. They may be exposed constantly at school and at home, even when asleep.

Formative exposure

This exposure generally starts young and continues throughout children's lives. Children are now being exposed to wireless products from a very early age and often throughout their developing childhood and teenage years. This is experimental - no-one has any idea of the cumulative effect of such long-term exposure starting at such a formative age.

We know from the scientific studies relating to mobile phones that children are more vulnerable to this type of radiation, absorbing more radiation than adults through their thinner skulls. Given the many studies that show this radiation could be very dangerous, do we not have a duty to protect children from the possibly serious future health effects of this exposure?

Read about the dangers of mobile phones at http://www.wiredchild.org/sciencealias/43-what-the-science-tells-us/66--what-the-science-tells-us-mobile-phones.html

Read more about children's greater vulnerability at http://www.wiredchild.org/sciencealias/43-what-the-science-tells-us/66--what-the-science-tells-us-mobile-phones.html#children

Read more about this global experiment at http://www.wiredchild.org/sciencealias/43-what-the-science-tells-us/59-children-as-guinea-pigs.html

Re: Free wireless Internet plan remains in limbo

Letter by Carl Katz to the Editor in Vancouver Courier on Wi-Fi Projects

To the Editor:
Re: Free wireless Internet plan remains in limbo, April 10

I am astounded that our city councilors are still trying to find a way
to roll out Wi-Fi in pubic buildings without considering the emerging
body of science that is saying that Wi-Fi represents a considerable
health risk.

I have heard those in favour of pubic Wi-Fi cite the World Health
Organization (WHO) and Health Canada (who bases their radiation safety
guidelines on the WHO’s guidelines) and as two public bodies that say
Wi-Fi is safe and falls within their safety guidelines. In reality, Wi-
Fi does fall within these guidelines, however there are the following
important points to consider:

Health Canada’s Safety Code Six is based on thermal guidelines. It
allows human tissue to increase in temperature by one degree Celsius
over a six minute period when exposed to microwave radiation. All the
deleterious health effects from microwave radiation that are
documented in current peer reviewed research occur at levels thousands
of times lower than Safety Code Six. Some of these health effects
include headaches, dizziness, cognitive difficulties, sleep
disturbances and unexplained anxiety. At a biological level, leakage
in the blood-brain barrier, DNA breakage, and disruption in
intracellular communication have all been documented.
If you watch the BBC Panorama episode “Wi-Fi: A Warning Signal” at
mastsanity.org, you will hear Sir William Stewart, U.K.'s top
scientist and former science adviser to Margaret Thatcher and Tony
Blair saying the WHO is wrong about safe levels of non-ionizing
radiation and that the whole basis of their safety limits are
inadequate to protect the population, especially our children.

Ditto for the German government, who in 2007 warned all citizens not
to use Wi-Fi. Then there are Doctors Gerd Oberfeld and Henry Lai, who
are world renowned for their research into electromagnetic radiation
and biological effects - they both said they would pull their children
out of any school that had Wi-Fi. Professor Olle Johansson of the
world renowned Karolinska institute in Sweden, has found biological
effects at radiation levels lower than those associated with Wi-Fi.
In 2002, following research on wireless radiation in the ‘90’s, the
global insurance industry pulled liability coverage for the health
effects from wireless technology. Given that insurance companies
quantify risks and then associate a dollar value on that risk, this
represents a huge liability issue for cities, school boards and anyone
who rolls out wireless technologies – they are virtually uninsured.

Last December, in an effort to improve traffic flow for buses by
wirelessly controlling traffic signals, Translink rolled out a Wi-Fi
network along Main Street from 57th Avenue all the way downtown, with
no public consultation or transparency. This Wi-Fi network subjects
all residents and businesses along Main street to radiation without
their awareness or consent. Now there is serious talk of putting Wi-Fi
into all community centres in Vancouver, which will expose our
children, the employees and the general public - all the while schools
all over Europe are pulling out Wi-Fi based on the aforementioned
warnings. Lakehead university in Thunder Bay has held off on
implementing campus-wide Wi-Fi for the same reasons.

City council and the city of Vancouver must take a step back and look
at independent the body of research that is clearly saying we may have
a huge public health problem in the future. For the sake of our
children and all our citizens, the City of Vancouver must apply the
Precautionary Principle, and hold off on implementing this technology.
Anything less would be irresponsible.


Carl Katz
Vancouver

Thursday, April 23, 2009

電磁波敏感症-生理傷害

文取自:台灣電磁輻射公害防治協會

電磁波過敏症問卷

Posted: 22 Apr 2009 07:55 PM PDT

問卷說明:下面問卷可測試您是否有電磁波敏感症狀,有25題問題,請仔細思考您曾經遭受過這些電磁波過敏症狀,如您有遭受過下列情況症狀,如是—“經常,得2分”, “偶而,得1分”,”不曾,得0分”,把每題得分寫在括號內,統計總分,判定是否有電磁波敏感症狀。

評分標準
( )1.四肢或關節有感到麻木、軟弱或刺痛:經常--(2分), 偶而--(1分) 不曾--(0分)
( )2.不能從日常生活作息去解釋不正常的疲憊或軟弱:經常--(2分), 偶而--(1分) 不曾--(0分)
( )3.依據您個人的位置,會影響日常生活的思緒或不能專心:經常--(2分),偶而--(1分) 不曾--(0分)
( )4.會癢、痛、抽稸或肩膀、手臂、腿、腳、腳踝、手肘、骨盆、等關節附近的肌肉痙孿:經常--(2分),偶而--(1分) 不曾--(0分)
( )5.頭痛:經常--(2分), 偶而--(1分) 不曾--(0分)
( )6.緊張:經常--(2分), 偶而--(1分) 不曾--(0分)
( )7.不安定性,焦慮:經常--(2分), 偶而--(1分) 不曾--(0分)
( )8.喪失記憶:經常--(2分), 偶而--(1分) 不曾--(0分)
( )9.睡眠干擾,失眠:經常--(2分), 偶而--(1分) 不曾--(0分)
( )10.微弱,暈眩,震顫:經常--(2分), 偶而--(1分) 不曾--(0分)
( )11.會有皮膚紅腫、癢、起疹子 、痛或皮膚乾燥:經常--(2分), 偶而--(1分) 不曾--(0分)
( )12.胃腸痛、消化系統問題、腸子不規則蠕動:經常--(2分), 偶而--(1分) 不曾--(0分)
( )13.感覺很熱,會發燒:經常--(2分), 偶而--(1分) 不曾--(0分)
( )14.刺激性感覺,眼睛感覺刺痛有如一沙子飛入眼中。視野模糊或眼前看東西會閃爍:
經常--(2分), 偶而--(1分) 不曾--(0分)
( )15.流鼻血或血壓改變:經常--(2分), 偶而--(1分) 不曾--(0分)
( )16.心律不整、心悸或胸口痛:經常--(2分), 偶而--(1分) 不曾--(0分)
( )17.牙痛或神經痛:經常--(2分), 偶而--(1分) 不曾--(0分)
( )18.易掉髮:經常--(2分), 偶而--(1分) 不曾--(0分)
( )19.耳鳴 (如 咑咑聲、嗡嗡聲、噓噓聲等聲音)或高頻嗚咽聲:經常--(2分), 偶而--(1分)
不曾--(0分)
( )20.對光會過敏,尤其是螢光燈或電腦螢幕。(有罕見的會對陽光過敏) :經常--(2分), 偶而—(1分) 不曾--(0分)
( )21.會反覆感到焦躁、憤怒、暴力、破壞力及感到敵對:經常--(2分), 偶而--(1分) 不曾--(0分)
( )22.甲狀腺問題:經常--(2分), 偶而--(1分) 不曾--(0分)
( )23.推斷有持續一段急性流行性感冒的感覺:經常--(2分), 偶而--(1分) 不曾--(0分)
( )24.沮喪:經常--(2分), 偶而--(1分) 不曾--(0分)
( )25.漏失時間 (例如不知道自己於的時空) :經常--(2分), 偶而--(1分) 不曾--(0分)

總分:___________ (您的分數高於25,您可能已有電磁波過敏症,如果您的分數介於10 ~15分,您可能是遭受一些程度的電磁波。)

資料來源: http://www.powerwatch.org.uk/

電磁波敏感症

Posted: 22 Apr 2009 07:46 PM PDT

翻譯:鄭美莉

How many people suffer from ElectroSensitivity?
有多少人具有電磁波敏感症

瑞典已將電磁波敏感症正式視為一種生理傷害,該國有超過230,000人(佔總人口2.5%)具有電磁波敏感症。

除了瑞典之外,其他國家沒有正式的數據,如果套用2.5%的比例,則英格蘭的電磁波敏感症的人數可能達到一百五十萬人,美國則有六百五十萬人。

在2002年有兩個電磁波敏感症人口的研究,第一個研究[Hillert等人所作] 利用的是隨機寄發問卷的方式(10600份),結果回信的人有1.5%表示具有電磁波敏感症。第二個研究[Levallois等人所作]利用電話隨機訪問2000人,結果有3.2%表示具有此症,而0.5%表示他們高度敏感。

Is ElectroSensitivity recognized by the medical profession and/or the authorities?
醫界或有關當局是否已承認電磁波敏感症?

世界衛生組織WHO 承認電磁波敏感症是一種確實的病症,有時甚至是一種殘障的情況。然而,大多數的政府並未將此症視為一種殘障。遺憾的是,在政治上體認電磁波具有負面健康危害的程度,就如同將這事實當作是一種尚未全面了解的新情形,這兩種程度一樣的低。

目前瑞典是唯一一個將電磁波敏感症正式視為一種生理殘障的國家。

what other names is it known by?
類似的名詞

Electrical HyperSensitivity(EHS) 電磁波高度敏感---最常用的詞,同於ElectroSensitivity.

VDT Sickness -- 描述一群電磁波敏感症患者,這種患者在電腦螢幕前時,會有灼熱感、刺痛感、疼痛感這些電磁波敏感症狀。

Idiopathic Environmental Intolerance (IEI) -- 這是世界衛生組織在2004年提出的詞,但並未取代常用的詞。

其他的詞

Electromagnetic Sensitivity
Electromagnetic Oversensitivity
Electromagnetic Hypersensitivity
Electrical Sensitivity
Electrical Supersensitivity
Elcetrical Oversensitivity

What can I do to help someone who is affected?
可以為電磁波敏感症患者做什麼?

通常無法尋求正式的幫助或治療,大多數醫生會一笑置之,專家不把這些情形當作一回事,有時甚至朋友或家人會嘲笑這種事,你會覺得非常孤單,但最重要的,當患者說他們對電磁波敏感症的時候,你可以相信他們的話;當患者採取步驟來屏蔽電磁波或避免敏感物時,你可以支持他們的行動。

Have there been any high-profile cases?
有任何備受矚目的案例嗎?

前任挪威總理以及世界衛生組織Director-general Gro Harlem Brundtland 是電磁波敏感症患者,她被選為近二十五年內最有影響力的歐洲人,她名列第四,僅在教宗聖保祿二世、戈巴契夫、柴契爾夫人之後。她對手機和電腦都會敏感。她本身是位合格的內科醫師。

她說 “一開始我感到耳朵附近有溫熱感,之後痛苦加重,轉成強烈的不適與頭痛,只要使用手機就會發生.... 不是只有對聲音有反應,而是對電磁波有反應。我的高度敏感症嚴重到只要離手機不到四公尺就會有反應。”

她接著談到嚴重性”我相信這情形應該認真看待。有些人變得對手機或電腦所發出的電磁波敏感,究竟這樣的敏感性會不會導致健康的負面影響,例如癌症或是其他疾病?我們還不知道!但我認為我們應該遵循預警原則,特別是在牽涉我們的子女的時候。”

1998年,易利信的一家子公司裡,發現在公司屋頂架設手機基地台之後,有60名員工出現電磁波高度敏感症。公司因此試著保密,然而該公司收到一筆來自瑞典基金會的資金,要利用這筆資金 ($1,000,000) 來改善工作環境。現在那些員工中還是有許多人仍然患有敏感症。

Who was the first person to suffer from Electrosensitivity?
誰是第一個患有電磁波敏感症的人?

一般相信,第一名電磁波敏感症患者是 Nikola Tesla 特斯拉,他是發明家,物理學家以及機械工程師,被譽為天才,公認為最偉大的工程科技科學家之一,在他的晚年,他患有嚴重的症狀,這些症狀被認為是因為他一生接觸了高劑量的電磁場所導致的。

特斯拉的傳記曾獲普立茲獎,作者是特斯拉的好友 John O’neill,書中描述:
“有名望的內科醫生表明--醫學幫不了他,其中一種症狀就是他敏銳的感官,一直以來他的感覺就很敏銳,但後來敏銳的程度變得很誇張,效果如同是一種折磨,三間房間之外,一只手錶的指針移動聲,對他而言,就好像鐵鎚敲打在鐵鉆上一樣;車輛經過的震動,透過椅子的傳遞,會讓他的身體感到鼕鼕地震動,因此他需要在床的四根柱子上加裝橡膠墊來消除震動,普通的說話聲在他聽來如同打雷;輕輕的碰觸所造成的生理影響就和拳擊一樣,日光照射在他身上就好像他的身上發生爆炸;即使在黑暗中看不到數呎外的物體,他也能感覺到物體的存在,憑藉的是他前額麻麻的感覺。他全身時常遭受痙癵發抖的折磨;他說,他的脈搏有時每分鐘只微弱跳動幾下,有時每分鐘超過150下,由於這些莫名的症狀使得他極力想要恢復正常。”

在 Electromagnetic Man 這本書中補充提到:
“這麼一位號稱是電機工程之父的人身上,他勢必接收了相當劑量的長期電磁波照射,以他在工作中沉迷於電機工程的程度而言,他是第一個電磁波敏感症的最佳候選人。”

特斯拉逝世於1946年,享年87歲。

Does sensitivity mean allergy?
敏感症就是過敏症嗎?

大多數的情形,答案是否定的,過敏指的是免疫系統對於外侵物的特殊免疫反應,包括抗體。電磁波敏感症的機制還不確定,但是通常與抗體無關。

然而在描述電磁波敏感症時,過敏這個詞有助於理解。

Why is it sometimes difficult for ElectroSensitive’s to work out what they are reacting to?
有時為何難以判斷出電磁波敏感症的反應來源?

很多情況下,當人們找出敏感或過敏物質(例如化學物質或金屬物質)時,往往是經過一系列錯誤嘗試才找出來的。

例如,假設一個人出現蕁麻疹,他們如何得知起因呢? 可能是他們開始對金屬材質的珠寶或新的噴劑起反應,有可能是他們的工作場所開始使用新的清潔化學品,而他們對那種化學品起反應,可能是食物引起的,可能是他們新使用的洗髮精,可能是油漆或地毯釋放出來的化學物質--可能性有無限多種,要找出過敏原可能要花費數月甚至更長的時間。

通常,電磁波敏感症的敏感來源很明顯,然而,高度敏感症患者有時對許多其他事物都會起反應,這種情形下就不容易找出來源,也就要花許多時間才找得出來。此外,

. 有時電磁波敏感性也對一系列的化學品有敏感性,化學品引發的敏感反應和電 所引發的敏感反應一樣。

. 如果對多重事物都會起敏感反應,多重敏感物所引發的反應會比單一敏感物嚴 重。
. 反應可能會延遲一兩天才會發生。

(資料來源:http://www.electrosensitivity.org/qa.htm)