Citizens for Safe Technology
Empowering the public to protect children
and nature from unsafe wireless technologies.
Similar symptoms of ill health are reported worldwide by people of all ages who are exposed to wireless technologies. These include cell phones and cell towers, wireless internet (Wi-Fi), portable home telephones, Wi-Max, utility "Smart" meters, microwave ovens, lighting fixtures, CFL light bulbs and other home and business devices and appliances.
Looking for a specific topic or a past article? Search for it below:
A briefing on EHS for Health Professionals, Research Scientists, Government Officials and concerned members of the Public - November 27, 2013
"My name is Steven Weller and I wrote this Electromagnetic Hypersensitivity (EHS) case study that is included with this covering statement with the hope it may be of benefit to those who either find themselves in a similar position to me, or, maybe just interested in a getting a better understanding of what EHS is and the likely cause.
"The study documents my personal journey towards self-diagnosis as being EHS, the ensuing questions it raised, along with information which might assist fellow sufferers to better cope with a condition which, until relatively recently, was unknown on our planet.
"Initially, I wasn't even aware that there was such a condition as EHS. It was purely by accident that I discovered that I was sensitive to certain radiofrequencies (RF). I have 25 years' experience working in Information Technology. Radiofrequencies have been a significant part of the landscape for me for a number of years.
"At the time I first made the connection between my symptoms and exposure to certain technology, it was a simply a matter of making a few minor adjustments, and I was able to manage my condition. Life continued as normal. The mandatory rollout of wireless smart meters in my neighbourhood unfortunately changed all this.
"I was torpedoed onto a path which has involved me in spending countless fruitless hours seeking answers from the medical establishment and government agencies, innumerable amounts of time conducting my own research, followed by a quest to seek answers from the authorities who pronounce upon the safety of our RF standards. A high level of protection is offered I am told.
"I have been sorely disappointed by their response. Unfortunately, Governments and the Industry appear to be focused only on the perceived benefits of these technologies (and money) without considering any potential long term health implications that they may bring.
"We are bio-electrical systems. Our bodies do not incorporate elaborate shielding and we are not impervious or hardened against this form of radiation, which today can be billions or more times higher than what occurs naturally. Representatives of the industry and RF Standard bodies often assert that there is "no clear or conclusive" scientific evidence regarding the biological effects of low level or "non-thermal" RF exposures, a statement that has also been continually recycled for many years. But in actuality, a large body of scientific research documentation exists that shows RF exposures at low (non thermal) levels can produce adverse effects that have serious health implications.
Many countries around the world including Australia have adopted ICNIRP 1998 RF Guidelines. In an ICNIRP Statement released in 2002 which is obfuscated with a document title of "philosophy" http://www.icnirp.de/documents/philosophy.pdf clearly says on p 546
"Some guidelines may still not provide adequate protection for certain sensitive individuals nor for normal individuals exposed concomitantly to other agents...." that "Different groups in a population may have differences in their ability to tolerate a particular NIR exposure. For example, children, the elderly, and some chronically ill people might have a lower tolerance for one or more forms of NIR exposure than the rest of the population." (NIR - Non Ionising Radiation) The World Health Organisation also has the following to say about current ICNIRP RF "Guidelines"
"What guidelines cannot account for...
"...Guidelines are set for the average population and cannot directly address the requirements of a minority of potentially more sensitive people...." Source: http://www.who.int/peh- emf/about/WhatisEMF/en/index4.html
It is obvious in my eyes that there is no desire to uncover the truth because of the legal implications to governments and the industry around the world. It seems that we who are EHS are collateral damage in the name of progress.
It's been a lonely and frustrating journey. Hopefully, this study might make the road a little easier for those that follow. Sadly, with rapidly escalating levels of electro-smog around the globe, I believe these numbers will undoubtedly be increasing.
In closing I would like to quote Dr Julian Hollis:
"Science is all about free investigation in order to discover facts, regardless of popular 'consensus'. Theories are always open to and under review and data are re-examined; no matter how much 'truth' is valued; even ideologically protected. There is also a vital role to be played through constructive imagination...what would happen if? There is always a need to remain fearlessly open to new, unexpected, even unwelcome discoveries. Past history records over and over again unwelcome discoveries that have forced change: thus those scientists brave enough to challenge vested interests or systems of mass belief have usually been dismissed, sidelined; even brutalized" ('Geology of Change' class notes 10th February 2012 provided to me by an associate).
"Whilst the above statements are in the context of the Earth Sciences, I would suggest the comments are perhaps even more relevant to the debate currently raging within the scientific community over evidence of adverse effects in the non-ionizing area of the electromagnetic spectrum. . . .
BioInitiative 2012 - A Rationale for Biologically-based Exposure Standards for Low-Intensity Electromagnetic Radiation
The BioInitiative Working Group is pleased to announce a new feature on this website called 'What's New'. From time to time, we will post new information that is of interest to our readers. This may include updated technical chapters, BioInitiative Working Group expert comments on scientific reviews, perspective pieces and individual commentaries, letters and press releases from the BioInitiative Working Group and important new developments on electromagnetic radiation issues.
16/10/2013 - Two important new papers - Lennart Hardell, Michael Carlberg, F. Soderqvist, K.H. Mild
RF-EMF emissions from wireless phones are class 1 human carcinogens
"Using the long-established and respected Bradford Hill criteria for assessing causality, this paper shows that RF-EMF exposure from mobile (and cordless) phones should be regarded as an IARC class 1 human carcinogen (cancer causing agent). Current guidelines for exposure need to be urgently revised. . .
Case-control study of the association between malignant brain tumours diagnosed between 2007 and 2009 and mobile and cordless phone use
"This new study confirms previous results of an association between mobile and cordless phone use and malignant brain tumours. The findings provide support for the hypothesis that RF-EMFs play a role both in the initiation and promotion stages of carcinogenesis. . .
From the Science Blog on Mobile Phone Radiation and Health by Dariuz Leszczynski
"Recent publication of the Canadian report on Safety Code 6 (RF-EMF and health) brought again to limelight the problem of electromagnetic hypersensitivity - EHS.
"Yet again, scientists and lay audiences were fed with the standard mantra in the Canadian report: "The symptoms are real, but what causes them is a mystery". The same mantra is propagated by WHO, ICNIRP and numerous expert committees.
"I have the feeling that this mantra was introduced to the EMF research area few years ago for the sole purpose to "get the EHS people off our backs". Designers of this mantra assumed that by showing compassion for the suffering of EHS people they will alleviate tensions that exist between EHS sufferers and decision-makers.
"They were mistaken. The mantra did not alleviate tensions and EHS sufferers more and more forcefully demand solution to their problem. Simple admission that their symptoms and suffering are real is not enough. What is needed is both, precautionary approach and a serious research effort to find out what and how causes EHS.
"Unfortunately the arena of EHS research is polluted with bad science. Badly designed studies waste money and produce bad conclusions. This status quo is perpetuated and new funding is granted for new badly designed studies. Are scientists gone mad? Don't they understand what they are doing?
"One of the problems with EHS research is its domination by psychologists and psychiatrists. This leads to generation of research studies that by design are unable to detect EHS. Using methods of psychology or psychiatry will not answer whether biochemically physiology of our body is affected by the exposure to EMF. . .
EMF-PORTAL Hypersensitivity/well-being/subjective complaints
Click on the headline of a column to sort the specific parameter in chronologic or alphabetical order. Click on a particular author to view the full summary.
Look at the table of EHS studies in this EMF Portal database. It shows what the difficulty is in finding what causes EHS. Some of the studies listed in the table are cohort studies. Their reliability is questionable because of the lack of control populations. Everywhere we all are exposed to wireless communication-emitted radiation. Since we do not know what might be the level of exposure that triggers EHS symptoms it is not possible to determine who can serve as control cohort. Furthermore, besides a diverse number of EMF sources in our environment, there is an even more diverse number of other environmental stressors that lead to serious bias in evaluation of the results. . . .
Stephen Genuis and Christopher Lipp (2011)
As the prevalence of wireless telecommunication escalates throughout the world, health professionals are faced with the challenge of patients who report symptoms they claim are connected with exposure to some frequencies of electromagnetic radiation (EMR). Some scientists and clinicians acknowledge the phenomenon of hypersensitivity to EMR resulting from common exposures such as wireless systems and electrical devices in the home or workplace; others suggest that electromagnetic hypersensitivity (EHS) is psychosomatic or fictitious. Various organizations including the World Health Organization as well as some nation states are carefully exploring this clinical phenomenon in order to better explain the rising prevalence of non-specific, multi-system, often debilitating symptoms associated with non-ionizing EMR exposure. As well as an assortment of physiological complaints, patients diagnosed with EHS also report profound social and personal challenges, impairing their ability to function normally in society.
This paper offers a review of the sparse literature on this perplexing condition and a discussion of the controversy surrounding the legitimacy of the EHS diagnosis. Recommendations are provided to assist health professionals in caring for individuals complaining of EHS.
This ES-UK handout provides information about Electrosensitivity
by Diane Craig - includes CHART and LINKS
Diane Craig is currently recovering from symptoms described as
"an autoimmune response partly triggered by manmade EMFs."
She was asked by her doctor to prepare some information about electro-hypersensitivity. She wrote this and her doctor has been sharing it with his patients.
As the level of microwave radiation increases in our everyday environment more people are going to begin to suffer sensitivity. It is crucial that information be given to our doctors as well as to friends.
This handout is for information only and is not medical advice. For medical advice, please contact your doctor. Future developments may supercede information included on this handout.
A briefing on EHS for Health Professionals, Research Scientists, Government Officials and concerned members of the Public - November 27, 2013
I felt compelled to write this personal case study because through my own personal experiences I have found that there is a serious lack of understanding of what Electromagnetic Hypersensitivity (EHS), also commonly referred to as Electrosensitivity (ES), is and its cause. For some people, EHS can be completely disabling and in some extreme situations, can lead to hospitalisation due to aggravation of pre-existing medical condition(s), development of tachyarrhythmias, which at times can result in a loss of consciousness, and other acute effects on the neurological system.
"The main problem being faced by people who are suffering from EHS is that they are left in a tenuous position where there is a complete absence of government support. EHS is declared to be "not a medical diagnosis"  by the WHO and so sufferer's symptoms are ignored and often misdiagnosed by the medical profession. This then can lead to the prescription of unnecessary and ineffective medication. Only Sweden recognises EHS as a functional impairment while the Austrian Medical Association has provided guidelines on the diagnosis and treatment of EMF related illnesses 
"My hope in writing this case study is to dispel misconceptions some members of the scientific community, government bodies and the general public have on this functional impairment. I also hope that by detailing my own personal experience with EHS that I can help those who may be suffering similar symptoms recognise the cause and help them understand how they can manage their condition, and to some degree, protect themselves. . .
Ms Alicia Ninou - TimeForTruth.es - Entrevista - English / Espanol
Interview with Olle Johansson, Ph.D. and Neuroscientist at the Karolinska Institute in Stockholm. Co-author of the Bioinitiative Report and therefore one of the foremost authorities on electromagnetic fields and health effects, with more than 30 years of research behind him.
One time donation: Click the donate button below and follow the instructions on the screen.
Monthly donation: If you wish to contribute every month, please select the amount from the Donation Options list below and click Subscribe. Your contribution will be sent for you every month for the amount you selected.
Citizens for Safe Technology (CST) is funded and supported solely by those who wish to help us. Thank-you for learning, sharing and helping if you can.
Meetings and events on the issue of wireless technologies in homes and communities throughout North America.
Click the button above to sign our online petition to return to hardwired computers in schools.
Click the button above to sign our online petition against Smart Meters in British Columbia.
Citizens For Safe Technology
"Wi-Fi: Is It Safe?"
Citizens for Safe Technology is a not-for-profit educational society made up of parents, grandparents, teachers, business professionals, scientists, politicians and lawyers concerned about the exponential increase in public exposure to harmful wireless technologies.
We believe a profound urgency exists to protect the unsuspecting public, especially children, youth and pregnant mothers from unsafe wireless technologies.
The content of the Citizens for Safe Technology website is provided for information purposes only. Information is subject to change without prior notice. Every effort has been taken to ensure that the information on this website is accurate, but no guarantees can be made.
Neither Citizens for Safe Technology nor its authors are liable for damages resulting from the use of information obtained from this site. The authors are not responsible for any contents linked or referred to from this website or any damages resulting from information on those sites.
The responsibility for the interpretation and use of the information on this site lies with the reader.