Search This Blog

Wednesday 18 December 2013

Dear Santa,

The links (below my signature) about The Quiet Zone with this post are a series of 3 short CNN videos about what I'd like for Christmas, please. I realize this item is available for U.S. residents, but that one isn't available for Canadian residents and there aren't any in Canada. So please, I'd like one available in Canada.

If you wonder why, it's because like the telescope in the video, my body is a really sensitive radiowave receiver and now it hurts pretty much all the time (my heart, my brain, my ears) because more and more radiowaves are being continuously generated and pumped into the air everywhere to make the constantly changing invisible platform that carries wireless networks and connections. This is like an overdose for me, and it's an overdose that repeats over and over and over again at every moment of my life. And that non-stop repeated overdosing breaks a lot of my body functions temporarily and sometimes permanently damages them.

If you ask Mother Nature, she can explain how from Day 1 all of us were designed on purpose to be sensitive to that type of radiation ... when it's from a natural source ... in order for our bodies to survive. And probably you can easily understand that some babies, and kids, and adults would be more sensitive and react worse to this type of radiation, especially when it's a non-natural type of the radiation ... just like any person can have their own different reactions at different times and like one person's reaction isn't the same as another person's reaction ... peanut butter, cigarette smoke, fragrances, sugar, dietary fat, sunlight, alcohol, prescription drugs (and, well, everything else that the inside and outside of anyone's body comes in contact with).

I know that there are a lot of people who suffer from bad reactions to this radiowave radiation. Probably something like at least 28,000 people in my City of Toronto in Canada have these bad reactions. I'm lucky because at least I've figured it out. Most people don't know that's what is making them sicker, so they don't know to try to avoid their firsthand and secondhand exposures whenever they can. Even most medical doctors find it hard to understand, but thankfully more and more of them are raising awareness about this.

I realize this is a pretty big Christmas wish to ask for, and especially on such short notice! I know it's on a lot of Canadians' wishlists, so maybe it would help you take care of thousands of wishes at once. But I totally understand if it would have to wait until after Christmas. If you'd like to learn more about it and Mother Nature is too busy to take the time to fill you in (also totally understandable, as she certainly must have her hands overfull because of all the not-so-smart humans doing their best to destroy the planet), you will find many wisdoms shared at facebook page Wendy Walks for ES. And of course, you can always message me.

In the meantime, it would be great if you would please consider my smaller Christmas wish. That family, friends, and other people in the world respond only with kindness and doing everything within their control to reduce our exposures when we're suffering and must ask for their help to reduce the overdose exposures near wherever we are, so that we can even spend any time with them at all. It physically and emotionally hurts a lot when they choose to not help only because they don't understand or feel the pain themselves, or when they choose to only help as much as they think is enough (such as thinking their mobile phone on 3 feet away from me is enough, when they could easily turn it all the off for a short time and their life and their body would not suffer, or thinking that it won't hurt me if they use their mobile phone for "just a second"), or when they outright or silently laugh and ridicule me and my need. It emotionally hurts a lot to be asked to prove there's any reason for me to need to ask for their help, when so many of them help anyone (family, friends, or strangers) who might anytime ask them to stop doing something that is physically hurting those people and will even ask other people to stop doing the hurting.

Thanks very much for reading about my wishes.

I hope you have a nice holiday after all your much appreciated seasonal work.

p.s. There's a hamlet in Ontario where the municipality welcomes the idea of becoming one of these zones: Port Franks. I don't live there but several people do who suffer in this way and some of them are very ill now (and other residents there are newly ill) because this hamlet didn't have any strong artificial source of this radiation before this year and now they do (a telecommunication network tower with a lot of antennas on it that non-stop 24/7 generate and emit this radiowave radiation).

do it WITH wires 

Sunday 8 December 2013

Don't be a dodo (a flightless bird)

I wanted to be on the other side of North America tomorrow but I can't fly anymore. Exactly because everyone uses wireless electronic devices. I'm one of the "lucky" few who has figured out that wireless radiation emissions make me ill. It ain't pretty, and I wasn't always like this, and it could happen to you. [btw, I will not be responding here to anyone who decides his/her life is so awful that it can only be improved by trying to ridicule this sensitivity to electromagnetic fields or by being mean to me. Newsflash: I've heard all that before; and to anyone so inclined, I sincerely hope that your life improves enough so that being unkind to other people isn't what makes you feel good.]

Newsflash: Everyone's exposure dose when inside a metal container (like a car, an airplane, a train car) goes up, because this type of radiation ricochets around bouncing off all the metal and makes really bad "hotspots"; and that wireless radiation doesn't bounce off your body, it pierces into your body, and the piercing happens both by emissions from your own device(s), so firsthand exposure, and by emissions from the network equipment that provides the telecom or wi-fi connection, so secondhand exposure.

When there's no emergency, consider keeping your wireless gear all the way powered off. And in general prefer cords/cables/wires to communicate (and provide them for others to use). Just because something is "convenient" doesn't mean it's "best."

I urge all of you who fly as passengers or crew to insist on decreased wireless radiation exposures, especially inside the metal cans! Probably most of you know that when you fly your body gets pierced by the other kind of radiation; you don't need to be piercing your body with wireless radiation too. And it's especially unfair to pierce all the bodies who aren't using any wireless gear (involuntary exposure doses). Plus the flight crew's bodies day after day being pierced by all the ricocheting radiation -- that's not fair either.

Medical experts haven't yet decided exactly how people get ill from these exposures, because it seems to vary (what illness/disease doesn't vary?), but more and more MDs are now diagnosing this sensitivity and urging precaution. Please think about reducing your exposures -- it isn't that hard to do.

Any flight crew who would like to connect with other flight crew suffering due to sensitivity to electromagnetic fields, you could send a message at facebook page "Wendy Walks For ES" (one of that page's administrators is an airline Captain who is affected in that way, and so you could connect with other flight crew through there).


Tuesday 5 November 2013

Homo sapiens ... we label ourselves "wise"

The World Health Organization's International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) recently declared “outdoor air pollution” as: "Class 1, Carcinogenic to Humans." In 2011, the same IARC declared all wireless communication emissions as: "Class 2b, Possibly Carcinogenic to Humans." Aren't we humans supposed to be wise enough to learn from our mistakes?

Do we really think it's wise to be constantly in air that is polluted with the non-natural electromagnetic radiation that pumps out from all big and small wireless electronic devices and networks? Are we too stubborn or too lazy to learn from our "traditional" outdoor air pollution mistakes?

I'd like to think that we're wise enough to see the sense in making choices that reduce this relatively "modern" type of air pollution before it gets out of hand.

It took centuries for "outdoor air pollution" to make its way to the worst recognition at the top of IARC's 5-level ranking regarding carcinogenicity. IARC positioned wireless communication emissions at the midpoint of that 5-level ranking in 2011, and their reasoning included a need for more research to be conducted because this is a relatively new air pollutant in human experience and because it's heavy and widespread exposure. A mere 2 years later (not centuries), scientists are already urging that wireless communication emissions be raised to the next level in the IARC ranking (closer to the top level where "outdoor air pollution" is).

There are plenty of existing ways to personally, publicly, and globally reduce this modern air pollutant. Plus, we're talking about technology ... we know that Homo sapiens are clearly capable of making innovations in technology that reduce harm, eliminate harm, and prevent harm. That would be real progress. Just do it.

Sunday 15 September 2013

Back To The Future

So many people pretend it would be a fate worse than death for anyone to be not participating in and enabling massive use of wireless connectivity. That is absolute non-sense (yes, I purposely hyphenated that). Other than for money or power gains, it's non-sense (regarding any topic) that so much effort occurs to stifle all extremely forward-thinking research, scientific, behavioural, and medical experts and accuse them of wanting to impede progress. And this continues to astound me: why do the collective "we" repeatedly allow ourselves to be duped into handing over all our money and power? Ahh, lack of knowledge and understanding; yes, I get that. So when these experts who have no share of any related money or power deliver new knowledge and understanding to us, suddenly our DNA mutates and we become Homo un-sapiens. Hmm, why are there all these rumours that we love to learn new things, "lifelong learning," bla-bla-bla? Oh, only if our opinion is that we like what we're learning.

Sure, lots of things are possible, and then new knowledge and understanding comes along: oops.

Wasn’t it progress to move from the oh-so-marvellous invention of cigarettes and suggest and then insist that people reduce or stop cigarette smoking? Wasn’t it progress to move from the oh-so-marvellous, innovative, beneficial ways to use asbestos and suggest and then insist that people reduce or completely eliminate use of asbestos? Isn’t it considered progress to move from the oh-so-marvellous inventions of certain methods of electricity generation to other methods of electricity generation? Wasn’t it progress to outright ban peanut butter from schools?

In Canada, people certainly have a right to live in a home, or attend a public school, or get care at a hospital without having cigarette smoke, asbestos, unrestricted radiation, or peanut butter forced upon them.

In many jurisdictions, if you tell a school that your child has an allergy or special need, a Principal (in the year 2013) does not shrug his/her shoulders and say to you, Gee, that’s unfortunate. I can't keep this doctor's note explaining your child's diagnosis. I can't keep the note because we don't care about it and certainly wouldn't do anything differently because of it. If that doesn't suit you, you can home-school your child. Don't give me any more information about this, ever. And I will never answer questions about it. And if you tell anyone else about this, I will publicly state that your concerns are invalid and should be disregarded and ignored.

Wireless communication is always-on radiation everywhere there is coverage (WiFi and telecommunication networks and other personal or commercial or other devices and networks). It's a type of radiation that pierces through solid objects and into everyone’s body and into everyone’s home whether or not a person is using a wireless device or never uses a wireless device. At present, it is legal that this happens, however, if it's hurting anyone, isn't that extremely unfair, cruel, and inhumane? 
Most people who understand this tell people about it because they don’t want anyone to suffer.

By aiming to reduce or eliminate individual and public exposures to the radiation used to communicate wirelessly, NO ONE IS TRYING TO TAKE ANYTHING AWAY FROM ANYONE — quite the opposite. This understanding is a great gift that you can give yourself and others. And it is progress.

Saturday 7 September 2013

Email from Dr. Magda Havas: EHS Children Forced from School

An attachment is mentioned below. I will paste its contents at the bottom here.

------ Forwarded Message
From: Magda Havas <>
Date: Sat, 7 Sep 2013 15:05:24 -0400
To: Protecting People <>
Subject: Fwd: EHS Children Forced from School

for distribution:

Normally I don't forward emails that request financial support but I believe this situation is precedent setting and very important to those who want to protect children against microwave radiation in Canada and in other countries.

School is a very important part of a child's education, but more and more schools are installing Wi-Fi for the convenience of wireless internet access.  Parents who know their children are sensitive and those who do not want this additional daily 6-hour exposure to microwave radiation have had limited success convincing schools boards, superintendents and principals that this technology may be unsafe for students and their teachers.

Since Health Canada is ignoring the science documenting adverse effects at levels well below their guidelines and since they are reluctant to change their guidelines it is time to take steps that do not include Health Canada.  This involves educating the public, medical professionals, school boards, lawyers, policy makers, the media and this is being done by groups around the world.

At some stage, when rights are ignored by those in authority,  it becomes necessary to take legal action.  This is a situation where legal action is required.

Schools need to use wired access to the internet for the health of their population and for safety, security, and speed of delivery.  The cost is minimal and many schools have wired ethernet access but prefer to use wireless access because they were told by Health Canada that it is safe.  Even the manufactures don't make this claim.  Their claim is that exposures are within Health Canada's guidelines and based on measurements–in at least one school–this is inaccurate information.

While C4ST (Canadians for Safe Technology) is making a concerted effort trying to improve HC's guidelines this will take time and students don't have the luxury of time.  They need an education now and home schooling, which may be excellent, is not the only answer.

We need schools without Wi-Fi radiation and we need them now.  We need to protect students.  They should not have to experience heart palpitations, headaches, nausea, difficulty concentrating because of Wi-Fi (microwave) exposure at school.

Years from now, Health Canada will recognize that this radiation is much more dangerous than asbestos ever was in the school setting.  But students and their teachers should not have to pay the price for Health Canada's willful ignorance. They have been wrong before and they are wrong now.

Please support parents trying to protect their children.

Please consider distributing this email to your friends and colleagues and to those who truly care about the health of children and their teachers.  Any size contribution will help pay the financial bills associated with this legal action and a small victory can help the rest of those who are fighting similar battles in their own communities.

If you are unable to contribute, at this time, consider other ways you may be able to help.

Please share this email with others.  

Thank you,
-magda havas
A society that doesn't protect its children won't last more than one generation.

 Begin forwarded message:

 From: "Dennis and Sharon Noble"
Subject: EHS Children Forced from School
September 6, 2013 8:25:10 PM EDT
To: "'Magda Havas'" <>

Dear Magda,

I am going to ask you for a favour -- would you please circulate the attached letter to your contacts?

You most likely have heard that these 2 families are fighting for the right of their children to attend schools without being exposed to wifi. Both families have children who are sensitive, suffering severe headaches, rashes, and sleep disturbances. When away from wireless devices, both children are fine and able to function well.

It is a sad state when parents must take legal action to protect their families, but that is where they are. I believe it is only a matter of being unaware of the cause of health problems that explains why more people are not participating with the Hoffmanns and Jeskes in this action. With C4ST's efforts in raising awareness of symptoms, and if we are able to get more doctors educated on the topic, more families will be making the same plea. If this law suit can set a precedent, every family with sensitive children and even families who want to prevent their children from becoming sensitive or harmed, will benefit, even those in the US.

They desperately need financial help to continue with their legal actions. Both Tammy Jeske and Janis Hoffmann are dedicated members of the Coalition and have been fighting the proliferation of wireless devices for years. Now they are fighting for their families. They have spent much of their savings to pay the legal bills so far and cannot carry on without help. It would be tragic if they could not proceed with this ground-breaking lawsuit for lack of funding.
>>> That attachment says the following. And if the links in it aren't clickable, please do copy-paste. Thanks.

Parents for Safe Schools:
Request for Donations Please

Our two families continue to fight the unjust dismissal of our children’s appeal for a ‘Wi‐Fi free’ learning environment that would prevent the ill symptoms they experience with the mandatory exposure to microwave radiation emitted by the commercial Wi‐Fi routers installed in our schools. Our request is simple: one school in the district free of wireless technologies, with hardwired communications only.

These purposeful actions are not only for our children but also on behalf of all students and parents across Canada who simply ask for a safer mode to connect with the Internet that doesn’t pose a serious risk to health. Our experienced lawyer, David Aaron, is recommending a judicial review, citing many errors in the arbitrator’s reasoning and application of the law. He believes we have a very strong case.

We are now asking for your financial support to help us continue this vitally important fight for accommodation in schools; to set a precedent whereby all EHS students across Canada can have access to public education without fear of ill symptoms.

So far our legal expenses have totaled $17,500 and we will need approximately another $20,000 to have our case judicially reviewed by the BC Courts and, if need be, by the Human Rights Tribunal. A successful appeal will open the door to more far‐reaching changes at an occupational health and safety level, benefiting all workers with a safer environment.

We must pull together and act for the protection of all our children. Now is the time please.

Thanks so much for your support!
Janis Hoffmann & Tammy Jeske

Donation site for EHS Children Forced from School

Cheque donations can also be made c/o:

‘Parents for Safe Schools’
Add to memo line: ‘EHS Kids- legal fund’

Videos: Jeske/McGinnis interview – Citizen’s Forum

Hoffmann/McGinnis interview – Citizen’s Forum

EHS Stories by Kim Goldberg

Background Information:

Friday 30 August 2013

Is there an app that teaches Compassion 101?

Our advocacy groups know that many parents and most teachers who are concerned regarding wireless radiation in school environments feel as if they have been muzzled regarding this issue.

I can’t comment on whether or not any impropriety or discrimination or harassment or other harm is intended or disregarded. I know that whatever transpires, it’s a fact that there are many teachers who personally feel ridiculed and that their job security and related normal expectations are imperiled by their efforts to investigate and be prudent about these radiation exposures to school children and for reasons of workplace safety.

It’s also a fact that there are many teachers — and children — who are made ill by exposure to this type of radiation.

Even if it is legal to urge and insist that teachers and parents must ‘voluntarily’ agree to accept the presence of a physical radiation agent in schools, and even if it is legal to insist that teachers ‘voluntarily’ agree to not discuss the topic of wireless radiation in schools with their peers nor anyone else (and I’m not saying whether or not such insisting is legal, because I don’t know), it’s certainly unconscionable to accept this approach when supposedly we all care about each other and care about children, and where certainly we live in a country where usually no one should ever feel attacked or afraid to speak up in the best interests of children (or anyone else).

Saturday 10 August 2013

What would YOU do with $1,442,000,000?

In case anyone wonders who’s pumping how much into that constant swamp of wireless radiation we’re all wallowing in, and some astounding (although not surprising) stats, please visit the link above the headline shown at the bottom of this post. The headline happens to mention they’re swamping the general population — i.e., it’s the coverage area, regardless whether or not anyone in it happens to be using a mobile device.

Also, stats and the discussion in the article are reminders of emphasis on corporate health, with the people population reduced to a collection of numbers and status as earning units. “wireless revenues increased to $1,442 million” << that’s only one company in Canada, Bell Mobility; and they refer to it as “Q2 results,” so I guess $1,442,000,000 is only a 3-month chunk of revenue. The article doesn’t mention profit, but I’m pretty sure it’d be safe to assume that expenses were no where near $1,442,000,000.

Also, the 73% is referring specifically to LTE — I don’t know for sure but I’m pretty sure that there are still other Bell network transmitters providing coverage in areas not yet covered by Bell LTE. So I doubt it’s that Bell provides a radiation coverage swamp that inundates 73% of the Canadian population; that stat would be higher than 73%.

I’ll take this opportunity to point out Bell’s coverage map that certainly visually portrays (to a layperson) the look of an unwanted spread of disease/virus (if it isn’t automatically selected, please choose the button for “4G HSPA+”). And indeed here their website reads, “Covering over 97% of the population.” (Friendly reminder: If you click on this coverage link, please remember to end up back here so that you also visit the link at the bottom of the post.) English: or French:

I didn’t at all go looking for that article with the Q2 results and stats ... oddly, google considered it the second most relevant result today when I did a basic search for “population of Canada 2013” -- directly below the first result of the official federal government’s Statistics Canada website.

the headline:
"Bell Q2 2013 results: Subscriber base now at 7,715,641, ARPU $56.85 and LTE network reaches 73% of the Canadian population"

Monday 5 August 2013

Do you really want to be an e-zombie?

[Please note there is contact information included here. Perhaps this Show/Station is interested in requests to hear more interviews about this and other EMF topics.]

Following is an unofficial transcript prepared by Barb Payne (not by CJAD).
[CJAD staff advised that generally it’s okay to share a CJAD listener’s transcript and post it on a website if the following requirements are met: the transcript text includes an obvious and clear statement that it’s an unofficial transcript and was not prepared by CJAD; the posting website’s focus is not intended to be defamatory to the participants nor CJAD.]

Live broadcast August 5, 2013 beginning at 11:30 a.m.

800 AM
Tommy Schnurmacher Show
9:00am - 12:00pm

1717 boulevard René-Lévesque Est Montréal (Québec) H2L 4T9
Main Switchboard: (514) 989-CJAD (2523)
Studio Line: (514) 790-0991
Long Distance Line: 1-800-491-CJAD (2523)

T:        = Tommy Schnurmacher (host)
D:        = Dr. Devra Davis (guest)

T:        We know that elderly people may suffer from dementia, but is it really possibly your teenager could be suffering from digital dementia? Could that be possible? The answer to that question coming up.

[radio station commercial advertisements]

T:        Do you love your smartphone? Can you not go a minute without checking for new texts, tweets, emails? Don’t look now: you’re turning into an e-zombie. Think that’s silly? Actually, it’s serious. Are there long-term consequences to smartphone addiction, and is something like digital dementia is that actually for real? I’m joined by Dr. Devra Davis, President of Environmental Health Trust, who offers us her take. Good morning.

D:        Good morning, Tommy. Thank you for inviting me to talk with you about this important issue.

T:        Dr. Davis, can dependence on something like a smartphone really be called an addiction?

D:        Well, neuropsychiatrists in Korea have actually classified children with digital dementia based on their analyses of their brains after they start using phones at a very young age. And, as you may be aware, in the United States and Canada today, some people who are uninformed are giving smartphone-like devices to children as early as six months of age. And there are many apps—thousands of apps—designed for very young children today. So for young children whose brains double in the first year of life, there’s little question that electronic stimulation of these devices is not a good idea.

T:        What is digital dementia?

D:        Well, it’s a term that has been coined by psychiatrists in Korea. Now, you understand, of course, that Korea is one of the most sophisticated and tech-savvy nations in the world. They have broadband connection speeds that are 50 to 100 times faster than ours, because they rely on wired—and not wireless. And that’s a very important thing, just as a start. Growing numbers of businesses recognize that if you continue to rely on wireless, you’re going to be damaging business because of security. And there are long-term health effects as well. And this category of digital dementia was developed in Korea because psychiatrists there were starting to see young people who were addicted to their devices. Literally, they were unable not to use them. And their brains were not developing fully. I think we’ve all seen young children who can’t look you in the eye, who would rather look at their tablet or their phone. And that phenomenon is actually having consequences physiologically, according to these psychiatrists in Korea. And the American Academy of Pediatrics has recently re-affirmed its position that children should have limited amounts of screen time and that they need more lap-time than app-time.

T:        So, tell me how much screen-time is acceptable?

D:        Well, for children under two, the American Academy of Pediatrics says almost none, all right. That they don’t need any stimulation; what they need is eye-hand contact, they need to feel and touch and smell another human being as they learn how to become a social creature.

T:        What exactly are parents giving kids who are a year-and-a-half or a year old?

D:        Well, believe it or not, you can get apps that you can program that you can put the phone next to the baby and when the baby cries, the phone will play Mommy’s voice saying, “Shhh. Now, it’s okay.” There are apps that are designed to be used to detect motion of a baby. You can get an app that will entertain a baby—literally with baby-like noises and giggly, using circles and triangles and squares to teach them shapes and numbers—the kinds of things parents have been teaching children for thousands of years directly, can now be done with machines. And there are… if you to babyapps, you’ll be astonished at the number of things. But this is not just a problem for babies. I think we all know people who, literally, cannot function separate from their smartphones. And I would say it’s not really a smartphone if it’s damaging your brain.

T:        Now, what about is it true that they have internet addiction camps in South Korea?

D:        As a matter of fact, there are… the Atlantic Monthly ran a story a few months ago that there are more than 100 internet addiction camps in Korea, in South Korea. And I know that a couple programs have been started in California—where, of course, people are very tech-savvy. And C-NET ran a story recently—that’s one of the computer-savvy online reporting sources—that said that many of the parents of Silicon Valley do not allow their children to have access to devices when they’re very young; and limit their own access, because people are starting to recognize that these devices can take over lives.

T:        Dr. Devra Davis is my guest, President of Environmental Health Trust. If you have any questions or comments for her: 514-790-0991, star talk, text your question, your comment to 514800. We’re talking about babies and teenagers. For an adult, what would be a normal amount of time to check on your Twitter feed and see what’s doing on facebook? How much per day would be acceptable?

D:        Well, like most things in life, one size does not fit all. And there are some businesses that have become completely dependent on these devices. And certainly, I’m not going to second guess that except to say that Environmental Health Trust—the group that I started—has safety tips on what to do, that can be downloaded from our webpage. And they include some very basic advice about never keeping phones directly next to the brain or body. If you look inside your iPhone now—and you go to Settings on your own phone… on iPhone, and then you click on General from Settings, and then you go to the top of that screen and go to About, and then you go scroll all the way to the bottom to something called “Legal,” and then all to the bottom of that “RF Exposure”—you will see inside the iPhone the following advice. And I read, “To reduce exposure to RF energy,” comma, “use a hands-free option, such as the built-in speakerphone,” comma, “the supplied headphones, or other similar accessories. Carry iPhone at least 10 millimetres away from your body to ensure exposure levels remain at or below the as-tested levels. Cases with metal parts may change the RF performance of the device, including its compliance with RF exposure guidelines.” That’s what’s inside your phone.

T:        But most people hadn’t seen it or heard about it ‘til… ‘til you just told them.

D:        Not until your radio program today, Tommy.

T:        Right.

D:        Right. Now, also there’s groups informed in Canada. There’s a group called “Citizens For Safe Technology,” which is trying to promote more sensible use of technology as well. And there are groups all over the world that Environmental Health Trust is working with. We just returned from a trip to Turkey and Greece. In Turkey, I met with the Governor and the Mayor of Samsun Province. And they are now issuing—in Turkish language—our doctors’ pamphlet telling people simple things they can do to use phones in a wiser way. I’m not telling people not to use phones, but they need to understand that phones are basically two-way microwave radios.

T:        We’re going to continue our discussion. Any questions you have for our guest, Dr. Devra Davis, President of Environmental Health Trust, 514-790-0991, star talk, text your comment to 514800. 11:45 the time, and check your traffic [traffic report and radio station commercial advertisements follow].

T:        Our conversation with Dr. Devra Davis. Not only is she President of Environmental Health Trust, she’s the author of Disconnect: The Truth About Cell Phone Radiation, What the Industry Is Doing to Hide It, and How to Protect Your Family. We’re getting all kinds of texts. I’d like you to react to them, Dr. Davis. This one says, “My best friend’s father developed a brain tumour attributed to overuse of a cell phone. He died less than two years following the diagnosis.” That’s from Richard. What would you say to that?

D:        I’m sorry to hear that. And unfortunately, I have published an article with some of Canada’s leading epidemiologists that say that cell phone radiation is a probable cause of malignant brain cancer. Professor Tony Miller, Professor Emeritus at the University of Toronto, and Professor Colin Soskolne from Alberta, and I have authored a recent paper—that can be found on our website at—in which we review all of the world’s literature, and we conclude based on our expertise in epidemiology that long-term use of cell phones does increase the risk of brain cancer. But brain cancer is not the most important or worst problem we’re worried about right now; we’re worried about more immediate issues. And those issues involve what’s happening to our brains, our bodies, on the short-term with wireless exposure and cell phone radiation. It’s harder to pin down in some ways, but the effects are much more broad. And we’re all growing up now and living in a world where we have a sea of radiofrequency radiation that did not exist even five years ago.

T:        Now, let’s talk about… you mentioned before about what the instructions are if you go deep into the iPhone. Is it a good idea if you have your phone with you to turn it off completely and use it when you need to make a call, when you need to call somebody, or check if anybody has called you in the last couple of hours? Is that a good strategy?

D:        Well, you know, again it depends on your… your situation. But my advice is that you can… the best phone is one that’s turned off and you turn it on when you want to be interrupted, so that we get control of our lives again instead of the situation where so many of us feel like we’re constantly on standby for an emergency. There are emergencies but our life doesn’t have to be treated as though it is one. And so, having your phone on standby on airplane mode means you’re not getting microwaves signals at all. Steve Jobs famously refused to put an easy on-off switch on the iPhone, because he thought it would be, ironically, like death. And yet he himself ended up dying, tragically, at an early age. And I think in part his death was due to some of the things he was exposed to. But we are finding that if people can take control again—use their cell phones as answering machines—that it… it really improves your life remarkably.

T:        Dr. Devra Davis, my guest. 514-790-0991, star talk, text your question, your comment to 514800. Listen to this text, Dr. Davis, that just came in for you. It says, “If your reasoning is sound then every ham operator should be dead, as we use much higher power levels compared to cell phones. This is hokum,” he saids.

D:        Well, you know, I can appreciate that ham operators are… do get higher exposure. And in fact here’s the problem. Epidemiology studies patterns in people in time and space, and it takes a long time for brain cancer to develop. In fact, ham operators do have an increased risk of certain types of brain disorders and brain cancer. But because there are not that many ham operators, because we don’t have a registry of all of those who have ever been exposed, and because today exposure is universal, it becomes very, very difficult to study these things. What I rely on—and what I’ve written about in my book Disconnect—is that there’s experimental evidence that if you take brain cells and you exposure them under controlled conditions in a laboratory to the kind of pulsed digital signal that you get from cell phones today, you can actually damage those brain cells in ways that we didn’t understand. And the damage doesn’t come about from the weak signal that you get from the cell phone—because a cell phone does have less than a watt of power, much less than a ham radio—but it comes about from the pulsed, erratic, digital nature of the signal, which disrupts our normal healthy cells, which themselves function with electricity as well.

T:        Okay, this text for you, “What if we always use a bluetooth and always have the phone in a holster?”

D:        Well. For some people bluetooth seems to be all right. But bluetooth doesn’t mean no radiation, it just means a lot less. But keep the phone, I say, several inches off of your body, when it’s on. And that makes thousands or 10,000 times less exposure. So for those who can tolerate it, a bluetooth seems to be all right. But many people cannot. And it is a form of exposure although much, much lower.

T:        So you’re saying if you keep it away from you…

D:        Like, my phone right now is on my desk. Okay? It’s approximately 8 inches away. I happen to have it on airplane mode because I’m talking to you and I don’t want to be interrupted. I get in the habit of keeping my phone on airplane mode, and turning it on when I’m ready to call someone or have someone call me. It’s easier for women because we can use purses. Men are going to have to start to carry manbags or murses again.

T:        Or keep the phone off.

D:        Yes.

T:        Right. Okay. This one says, “My wife thinks I use it too much. I don’t. I’m not on facebook. And I’m an involved parent. What is too much?”

D:        You know, you gotta talk to your wife and figure that one out. I’m not going to get in the middle of it. But I’ll say that, you know, every… every family has its own standards and reasons for thinking and acting as they do.

T:        All right. We’ll continue our discussion. Dr. Devra Davis, President of Environmental Health Trust. The book: Disconnect: The Truth About Cell Phone Radiation, What the Industry Is Doing to Hide It, and How to Protect Your Family. Any questions or comments: 514800. You’re listening to the Tommy Schnurmacher Show on CJAD.

[radio station commercial advertisements]

T:        My guest is Dr. Devra Davis. The book is called Disconnect: The Truth About Cell Phone Radiation, What the Industry Is Doing to Hide It. And if you want to check out her website. This text for you from Alan. He says, “How much screen-time for my 8-year-old son?”

D:        Your son needs to be physically active. That’s most important. And we want we find is that in many children today they’re spending up to 6 hours a day in front of the television or some other screen. And as a consequence, there are all kinds of things happening to their bodies that should not happen. They’re not developing the muscles, the energy, the reflexes that they should. The American Academy of Pediatrics recommends measured use of such devices, appropriate to each family. I would say that, in general, for school purposes—because schools are using these things—they should be used only when necessary, and for maybe an hour or two a day throughout the day, so long as they’re not connected to the wireless but wired or you’ve downloaded the information to the device. So if you have to give your child an… a device to use for educational purposes, then make sure you’ve downloading the information to it and the device is not connected to the WiFi.

T:        Okay. All right. This one. Two quick questions. Andrea wants to know, “If you don’t have a bluetooth but use the wire earplugs, is that worse or better?” And André from Chateauguay wants to know, “What about tablet devices?”

D:        Well, tablets are approved to be used at a distance of 20 centimetres from the body. They’re tested. That means about 8 inches away, from you. And so that means that they not… should never be held directly on the body. Think about all these little children that are using these things. You… if you’re not connected to the internet, you’re only getting electromagnetic fields—which themselves we want to minimize. So I advise that anyone using a tablet should use it with a pillow, a book, or on the desk—as my computer sits right now.

T:        All right. And the earplugs… the wire earplugs instead of bluetooth?

D:        Wired is always better, but again if the wired earplugs are on you and you have them draped down the body and the phone in the pocket you’re really not achieving much of a reduction. Although you’re reducing your exposure to your brain, you’re increasing it to the rest of your body. BlackBerry comes with advice that says the BlackBerry device should be held 2.54 centimetres away from the abdomen of teenagers or pregnant women.

T:        Women. All right. Thank you so much for joining us. Dr. Devra Davis, President of Environmental Health Trust,

[end of interview]

[end of transcript]

Tuesday 30 July 2013


I continue to find it beyond mind-boggling that anyone has to try to convince anyone about electrosensitivity being common when at the crux of it really it’s an extremely simple principle that most people alive in 2013 already know: everything alive operates on natural forms of electricity plus everything inanimate is held together by natural electromagnetic fields (EMF), and when you add un-natural electricity that’s gonna screw up all of it, ALL of it. It’s TOO weird that most people alive pretend they don’t know that when really they DO know that. Also, despite addiction, the cool factor, or whatever, it’s TOO weird that people won’t give up their misuse/overuse of devices with a simple “oops”, because everyone knows that companies that make and sell stuff can always easily develop and give us different stuff that won't mess with our bodies, and there's no doubt that companies would—because companies have proven over and over and over again that they always can and they always will.

Hopefully all this “digital dementia” prevailing wind will last and fling seeds into the ground that take root. It’s more and more in popular culture, tv shows, etc. I suppose we need to luck into The Perfect corporation or celebrity or movie sending The Perfect words/visuals viral in order for the "oops" moment to be an a-ha moment. I can quite vividly envision all that and how the tech world can morph (and still be there), so hopefully the only reason I can envision it is because all those concepts are being flung around invisibly in the air (via unnatural EMFs or natural EMFs emanating from brains or collective consciousness).

There's a new tv series on NBC called "Camp." I don't know the official hours of "prime time tv" ... this show is either in prime time or close to it. The plot includes the usual rivalry and comparisons between fancy camp versus not-as-fancy camp (the main plot is about the not-as-fancy camp). Of course, the fancy camp has its own cell phone tower; the other camp does not. The not-as-fancy camp decides to give in and get a cell phone tower, but then before the one-hour show is over they're tearing it down because they don't want it. The not-as-fancy camp is always The Good Guy, right :)

That was a long introduction to the title I used for this blog post. Herbert Morrison was the reporter on-site at the crash of the Hindenburg; he's famous for exclaiming, "Oh the humanity!" Without using the excuse of some type of insanity, how is it at all possible that the majority of individuals will not turn off their wireless radiation-emitting devices when someone who is suffering due to electrohypersensitivity, or suffering due to whatever impaired health status (visible or non-visible), or with a child they must protect, etc. asks—or even begs—for a wireless device nearby them to be off so that its wireless EMF emissions are not causing pain and suffering?

For anything (never mind EMFs), it doesn’t matter whether or not the person being asked/begged understands the pain or suffering. In general, it’s supposed to be enough to say, “You’re hurting me, please stop!” and generally most people are kind enough to stop whatever harm it is (even if they really don’t want to), or they’ll leave, or at the very least they’ll themselves feel uncomfortable being mean.

And when it’s a NON-stranger who won’t reduce harm in these situations, that’s beyond insanity. 

And when it’s a person at a doctor’s office, or hospital, or daycare, or school, or long-term care facility—all places that brag about reducing harm, protecting, and trying to do The Right Thing—that’s simply beyond any explanation or words.

I would like to give a shout-out to all the humans out there who still have the instinct to want to care. And I hope we can help people who have lost that instinct get it back.

Monday 22 July 2013

Some stuff is good. Other stuff not so much.

Plenty of lifestyle choices demonstrate that “liking” something doesn’t automatically mean it’s “good” or that “more is better.” Most genetically-modified foods taste fine and are enjoyable to eat, right? Fuel production and use is related to many comforts and activities we prefer, right? 

So we do enjoy and prefer things, yet we also demand improvements to those things to prioritize human and environmental health. Along with that, many of us choose to improve our related habits and encourage others to do the same.

Simply, we must do the same with modern communication. We can use and enjoy it, yet also demand improvements to it, as filling all humans and environments with radiation is unhealthy. Along with that, we can choose to improve our related habits by preferring and providing more non-wireless connectivity and encouraging others to do the same.

Saturday 20 July 2013

Toronto meeting Tues July 23 / 6:30pm: RF-emitting Water Smart Meter Program

City of Toronto Water Department is rolling out water “smart” meters that emit radiofrequency (RF) radiation. Their plan is to install one of these RF-emitters indoors at every Toronto home. In a few Toronto Wards, these RF-emitting water meters were installed a few years ago and the roll-out is now continuing. City of Toronto Water Department and Toronto Public Health have been notified that there are important and valid health concerns regarding RF radiation exposure for residents of any age and any health status. Some residents have other concerns as well.

These RF emissions generated inside each home will wirelessly send the home’s water usage information to data collection equipment located outdoors in every neighbourhood. Further, the neighbourhood data collection equipment also communicates wirelessly sending more RF throughout all neighbourhoods and the City in order to transmit each household’s usage information to the Water Department.

TUESDAY, July 23rd at 6:30 pm
Earl Bales Community Centre, Room 3
4169 Bathurst St

Toronto Public Health,
City of Toronto Water Department,
and City Councillor Pasternak will be at this meeting.

This is an open invitation for anyone and everyone to attend – your family, neighbours, associates, your Councillor and other government representatives, healthcare providers, media ... anyone. All Toronto residents and people who support Toronto residents are welcome to attend this meeting. If you aren’t in Toronto, please distribute this email widely so that others who might be in Toronto have an opportunity to attend.

Amazing Darlene has been working very hard on behalf of all of us (whether you’re in Toronto or elsewhere). It’s important that as many Torontonians as possible attend (even if you must arrive later or cannot stay for the full session), so that officials and government representatives cannot deny the gravity of the situation. Hopefully this will also be a media opportunity – you can help with that by contacting any media in advance.

Darlene tried to ensure low-RF at the venue but cooperation may be limited in that regard. Definitely there will be an announcement near the beginning of the session requesting all personal devices are off, and PDO signage will be in the room.

Please widely distribute this e-mail, and you can also distribute by these methods where you’ll find the same message posted:
... Facebook at page “Wendy Walks For ES”
... on the internet at
... a link in a Twitter post by @EnergyCanaries

This isn’t a requirement but if you’d like to notify Darlene that you’re planning to be at the meeting, that could be helpful and you can email her at .

See you there!

From: Toronto Smart Meters <>

Please see the note below from Councillor Pasternak's office confirming the meeting for this Tuesday at at the Earl Bales Community Centre, Room 3. I plan to be there are 6:30, but the email below is confusing, as the subject line says 7:00 p.m. and the body says 6:30.

I could open up the discussion with concerns, and we will have some people who are quite educated in this field.

My objectives are as follows:

  1. Test the water meters to see what the actual emissions are. I will recommend Safe Living Technologies
  2. Offer alternatives to wireless emissions.
  3. Until we figure it out, stop the harassing letters.
Would anybody like to bring up the privacy issues?

Looking forward to meeting everyone on Tuesday evening. Please confirm if you are coming.

Thank you,


• <>
• <>
• <>
• <>
• <>
• <>

Begin forwarded message:

From: "Irina Fyfe" <>
Subject: Water Meter Program information meeting: Tue, July 23 | 7pm
18 July, 2013 5:03:21 PM EDT
To: "Irina Fyfe" <>

Dear residents,

The meeting regarding Water Meter Program has been rescheduled for Tuesday, July 23rd at 6.30pm and will be held at Earl Bales Community Centre, Room 3 (4169 Bathurst St). Both Toronto Water Department and Toronto Public Health will be represented at that meeting joined by Councillor Pasternak.

Best regards,
Irina Fyfe

Constituency Assistant
Office of James Pasternak
Councillor Ward 10, York Centre
T 416-392-1371
F 416-392-7299
E <>
Please visit us at <>

Stay in touch with Councillor Pasternak: <>

<>   <>   <>

Sign up for Ward 10 updates <> .

Thursday 11 July 2013


In your body there is something called a Blood Brain Barrier (BBB). Its purpose is to stop certain substances in your body from entering into your brain (both foreign substances and non-foreign substances). Your BBB isn't supposed to be open: "exposure to microwaves can open the BBB."

Microwaves are the non-natural electromagnetic energy waves generated and emitted to continuously flood throughout indoor and outdoor environments wherever there is coverage for using wireless technology. It's microwaves that are generated and emitted by: mobile phones/tablets and their networks; cordless phones; WiFi; baby monitors; wireless computer, game, entertainment; many smart meters for electricity and water; WiFi-enabled appliances; wireless security systems; and more. 

Each of those microwave emitters (each of all personal and other end-use devices/appliances/equipment, and each of all the base stations and network equipment) adds density to the continuous flood of microwaves everywhere.

Microwaves are also used inside metal-walled ovens because at various power levels microwaves can in shorter periods of time than traditional cooking greatly increase the temperature of water and fat. Now that our indoor and outdoor environments are filled with microwaves and their sources, this is all people (you=water+fat) being INSIDE the oven with the microwaves; and that oven is always on (24/365, not only for a short period of time).

Prefer wireline connections and provide them for others to use. Insist that manufacturers, service providers, infrastructure, and regulators provide wireline solutions and innovations that reduce or eliminate microwave exposure for you and your family in all public and private environments (home, work, school, play, retail). All that CAN be done, but it won't be done unless you ask for it and insist.

Now you know.