Tell National Grid:

"Remove my

 'smart' meter!"

Call them at

855-377-7627

O

O

orcester

pts

ut

W

Biological Impacts on

Plants, Animals & Insects


     Just as humans are adversely affected by seemingly low power, non-thermal levels of RF (Radio Frequency) electromagnetically radiated fields, particularly those in the lower microwave spectrum, birds, bees and even mammals are shown to become disoriented. Magnetite-based nanocrystals capable of sensing the Earth's magnetic field have been found even in microorganisms.  Such nanocrystals are also influenced by EMFs. [399,399a]

Physiological affects on leafy material have also been noted. [400,400a,400b,400c] As with people, these symptoms can be caused by cellphone, WiFi / WiMAX use or by lower frequency, longer wavelength broadcasts.  While the radiation sent out by broadcast stations is of higher power and non-stop by definition, it is of much lower frequency and longer wavelength than microwave energy.





















http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=018C2oG2Rcs 


      Smart Grid & Smart Meters use WiMAX channels (2.5-2.7 Ghz) on an ongoing basis. Their wattage is not enough to "cook" you but they are much closer to the resonance frequency of water molecules (2450 Mhz or ~2.4 Ghz) used in microwave ovens AND ALSO in WiFi devices and many cordless phones.  That means seemingly miniscule amounts of power can have biological effects on plant & animal tissues that are made up largely of water.

     The Department of Commerce has been cleared to blanket even remote areas with cell phone towers under the aegis of its First Responder Network Authority (First Net). [101]





















      The U.S. Dept. of Interior stated in 2014 that “the electromagnetic radiation standards used by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) continue to be based on thermal heating, a criterion now nearly 30 years out of date and inapplicable today,” in reference to the current limits on radiation exposure from WiFi and other services. [102, 103a]  DOI also expressed two concerns on their impacts on migratory birds:  One being the injury & death of birds from collision with towers.  The other "significant issue associated with communication towers involves impacts from non-ionizing electromagnetic radiation emitted by these structures.

      Radiation studies at cellular communication towers started in 2000 in Europe and continue today on wild nesting birds.  Study results have documented nest and site abandonment, plumage deterioration, locomotion problems, reduced survivorship, and death (e.g., Balmori 2005, Balmori and Hallberg 2007, and Everaert and Bauwens 2007). Nesting migratory birds and their offspring have apparently been affected by the radiation from cellular phone towers in the 900 and 1800 MHz frequency ranges- 915 MHz is the standard cellular phone frequency used in the United States. However, the electromagnetic radiation standards used by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) continue to be based on thermal heating, a criterion now nearly 30 years out of date and inapplicable today.  This is primarily due to the lower levels of radiation output from microwave-powered communication devices such as cellular telephones and other sources of point-to-point communications; levels typically lower than from microwave ovens.  The problem, however, appears to focus on very low levels of non-ionizing electromagnetic radiation.  For example, in laboratory studies, T. Litovitz (personal communication) and DiCarlo et al. (2002) raised concerns about impacts of low-level, non-thermal electromagnetic radiation from the standard 915 MHz cell phone frequency on domestic chicken embryos- with some lethal results (Manville 2009, 2013a). Radiation at extremely low levels (0.0001 the level emitted by the average digital cellular telephone) caused heart attacks and the deaths of some chicken embryos subjected to hypoxic conditions in the laboratory while controls subjected to hypoxia were unaffected (DiCarlo et al. 2002).  [103] 

      We need to know more about the use by migratory birds of “faux” metal branches on cell towers that disguise the towers as trees, but which birds use for nesting and roosting including Bald Eagles, which are almost certainly impacted by thermal and non-thermal radiation effects.  Birds can also be impaled from the sharp metal arms and prone to injury and death from disturbance by tower maintenance.  Even if these “faux” branches are not constructed, Eagles for example tend to use the tallest objects available for roosting, so impacts from roosting, feeding and breeding on the antenna supports must all be considered by the authorities. [104] 

      A University of Southampton researcher has found that fruit flies are affected by electric fields.  Their wings are disturbed by static electric fields so that they avoid the charged areas.  Professor Newland explains:  "Static electric fields are all around us but for a small insect like a fruit fly it appears these fields' electrical charges are significant enough to have an effect on their wing movement and this means they will avoid them if possible."  The effect on the wings being moved seems to agitate the flies, as revealed by changes in their brain chemistry. [107] 

      Exposing tobacco leaves to low level, non-thermal microwaves can either ease or worsen the plants' degradation from tobacco mosaic virus. [108]

      Dutch researchers found ash trees very close to Wi-Fi access points showed an increase in cracks, bumps, discoloration and other forms of tissue death over recent years.  Over a three month period, leaves within 50 to 300 centimeters of a 100 milliwatt, 2412-2472 megahertz radiation source showed “a metallic luster appearance, a discoloration of the leaves that appeared to result in the disappearance of the outer cell layer of the leaves. The metallic luster was followed by desiccation and death of a portion of the leaf.”  [109]  Pine needles have aged prematurely in radar; the number of white storks within 200 meters of a cell base station had decreased from unsuccessful nesting and deformed or dead embryos; artificial magnetic fields bursts caused changes in bees′ orientation ability; both cell & cordless phones have negative impacts on bees ability to stay in their hive and also promote aggressive behavior. [110][111] 

      Worker bees are induced to abnormal piping signaling and foraging flight.  Decline in bee colony strength, [112] reduced egg laying ability of the queen and loss of ability to store honey are also reported. [113]  Both bees and sparrows experience reduced egg-laying ability in close proximity to cell towers for just a few minutes, the bees becoming aggressive, the queens begin laying 1/3rd the amount of eggs, the sparrows have reproductive and co-ordination problems.  They also became aggressive. [114] 
 


​​








RF Cancer Promotion:  Animal Study Makes Waves

A new animal study from Germany has challenged many of the assumptions which lie at the heart of claims that RF radiation —whether from cell phones, cell towers or Wi-Fi— are safe.

The study, a replication of an earlier experiment, also from Germany, found that weak cell phone signals can promote the growth of tumors in mice.  It used radiation levels that do not cause heating and are well below current safety standards. Complicating matters even further, lower doses were often found to be more effective tumor promoters than higher levels; in effect, turning the conventional concept of a linear dose-response on its head.

And for those with the stamina to have stayed tuned to the slow-moving RF–health soap opera, the new paper offers an unexpected surprise. The lead author of new animal study is Alex Lerchl, who for years has charged that the only science showing low-level RF effects is bad science. Now the one whom activists had accused of being an industry lackey is being hailed as a hero.

Read the full story at:
http://www.microwavenews.com/news-center/rf-animal-cancer-promotion


BEES, BIRDS AND MANKIND
Destroying nature by “electrosmog”

The series intends to maintain a high level of technical information, without being unreadable to the interested layman.  (1.5 MB PDF)

http://www.hese-project.org/hese-uk/en/papers/warnke_bbm.pdf


Microwaves Damage Plants & Animals

Bees are known to be disoriented by Microwaves.  Right here in Worcester, yard plantings unfortunate enough to be near a smart meter have died only a month after the meter was installed.


------------------


399   Magnetite-based magnetoreception; Joseph L Kirschvink, Michael M Walker and

           Carol E Diebel; Current Opinion in Neurobiology, 2001, Vol. 11, pp 462–467

           http://web.gps.caltech.edu/~jkirschvink/pdfs/COINS.pdf 

399a Radio waves zap the biomagnetic compass, Joseph L. Kirschvink, Magnetobiology, NATURE,

           Vol 509, 15 May 2014, p. 296, © 2014 Macmillan Publishers Limited. All rights reserved

  https://ecfsapi.fcc.gov/file/1071413202273/radio%20Waves%20The%20bio%20magnetic%20compass.pdf

       http://web.gps.caltech.edu/~jkirschvink/pdfs/Kirschvink_NatureNewsViews2014_postprint.pdf
400    Radiofrequency radiation injures trees around mobile phone base stations;

          Cornelia Waldmann-Selsam, Alfonso Balmori-de la Puente, Helmut Breunig, Alfonso

          Balmori; Science of The Total Environment, Vol. 572, 1 Dec 2016, pp 554–569

          • High frequency non ionizing radiation is becoming increasingly common.

          • This study found a high level of damage to trees in the vicinity of phone masts.

          • Deployment has been continued without consideration of environmental impact.

          http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048969716317375 

          https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2016.08.045 

          https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27552133
400a Trees in Bamberg and Hallstadt in the radiation field of 65 mobile phone base stations ,

          (Rec. 9/9/16)  Examples from a documentation about 700 trees (2006-2016) (58 pg)

          The radiation is killing the trees!- with lots of photographic evidence. The trees of the

          Bamberg-Documentation are numbered from 1 to 700. Those trees which are part of the

          study „ Radiofrequency radiation injures trees around mobile phone base stations“

          (Science of the Total Environment 572 (2016) 554-569).

     http://padrak.com/vesperman/Trees-in-Bamberg-and-Hallstadt-Documentation-2006-2016.pdf

400b Tree damages in the vicinity of mobile phone base stations, Cornelia Waldmann-Selsam

          and Horst Eger.  Translation of the german article: Waldmann-Selsam, C., Eger, H. (2013):

          Baumschäden im Umkreis von Mobilfunksendeanlagen, umwelt-medizin-gesellschaft,

          26: 198-208.

          https://ecfsapi.fcc.gov/file/1001669617135/Tree-damages-in-the-vicinity-of-mobile-phone-base-stations.pdf

          http://kompetenzinitiative.net/KIT/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/Tree-damages-in-the-vicinity-of-mobile-phone-base-stations.pdf
400c  Review: Weak radiofrequency radiation exposure from mobile phone radiation on plants;

          Halgamuge MN; Electromagnetic Biological Medicine, Sep 20, 2016, p 1-23. "data from a

          substantial amount of the studies on RF-EMFs from mobile phones show physiological

          and/or morphological effects (89.9%, p < 0.001). Additionally, our analysis of the results

          from these reported studies demonstrates that the maize, roselle, pea, fenugreek,

          duckweeds, tomato, onions and mungbean plants seem to be very sensitive to RF-EMFs.

          Our findings also suggest that plants seem to be more responsive to certain frequencies,

          especially the frequencies between (i) 800 and 1500 MHz (p < 0.0001), (ii) 1500 and 2400

          MHz (p < 0.0001) and (iii) 3500 and 8000 MHz (p = 0.0161)."

          https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27650031?dopt=Abstract# 

101    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=soIvrkfKg-I

102    https://apps.fcc.gov/els/GetAtt.html?id=170563&x

103    http://www.ntia.doc.gov/files/ntia/us_doi_comments.pdf

103a  Ibid, Enclosure A

104    A BRIEFING MEMORANDUM:  What We Know, Can Infer, and Don’t Yet Know about

          Impacts from Thermal and Non-thermal Non-ionizing Radiation to Birds and Other

          Wildlife — for Public Release,  Albert M. Manville, II, Ph.D., C.W.B.1 ; Principal, Wildlife

          and Habitat Conservation Solutions, LLC2 ; Adjunct Professor, Johns Hopkins

          University’s Krieger School of Arts and Sciences, DC Campus3 ; and former U.S. Fish

          and Wildlife Service agency lead on avian-structural impacts — including from

          radiation, July 14, 2016

​          http://nebula.wsimg.com/6604901702145f9f6235820c4f9b1663?AccessKeyId=045114F8E0676B9465FB&disposition=0&alloworigin=1 

          https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B14R6QNkmaXucU5LUk5GRVBzMkU/view 

105    http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.433.7480

106    http://thesai.org/Downloads/Volume4No9/Paper_27-EICT_Based_Diagnostic_Tool_and_Monitoring.pdf

107    http://phys.org/news/2015-07-electric-fields-affect-wing-movement.html

108    Nonthermal microwave radiations affect the hypersensitive response of tobacco to

          tobacco mosaic virus.  by Betti L, et al, Department of Agro-Environmental Science

          and Technology, Faculty of Agriculture, Bologna University, Italy, 12/10/04.

          http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15673988

109    Maximal Wi-Fi signal and damage in trees, 11/28/10

          http://ChronicExposure.blogspot.com/2010/11/maximal-wi-fi-signal-and-damage-in.html

110    Mobile phone-induced honeybee worker piping, by Daniel Favre, April 13, 2011

          http://www.cellphonetaskforce.org/?page_id=672

111    http://www.ChronicExposure.org/Nature.html

112    Changes in honeybee behavior and biology under the influence of cellphone

          radiations by Ved Parkash Sharma, Department of Environment and Vocational

          Studies, Neelima R. Kumar, Department of Zoology, Panjab University,

          Chandigarh 160 014, India

          http://media.withtank.com/a49823b5aa.pdf

113    REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE ON THE BIOLOGICAL EFFECTS OF WIRELESS RADIATION

          ON INSECTS:  - A CALL FOR MORE STUDIES ON HONEY BEES -
          Abstract and references used for poster presentation, October 31st, 2014
          Entomological Society of Manitoba, 70th Annual Meeting

          M. Friesen M.Sc., safer.wireless@gmail.com

          https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/mobilfunk_newsletter/0RUPGTI4qQY

114    Cell towers killing sparrows, bees, says MoEF study  by Himanshu Kaushik,

          TNN, 10/25/11

          http://emfrefugee.blogspot.com/2011/10/cell-towers-killing-sparrows-bees-says.html 

          http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/ahmedabad/Cell-towers-killing-sparrows-bees-says-MoEF-study/articleshow/10481535.cms 

115   http://bemri.org/publications/wildlife-and-plants.html 

116   Mobile phone mast effects on common frog (Rana temporaria) tadpoles: the city turned into

         a laboratory; Balmori A.; Electromagn Biol Med. 2010 Jun;29(1-2):31-5.

         doi: 10.3109/15368371003685363. 

         https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20560769 

117  Radiofrequency radiation injures trees around mobile phone base stations; Waldmann-Selsam C, Balmori-de la Puente A, Breunig H, Balmori A.; Sci Total Environ. 2016 Dec 1;572:554-

         569. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2016.08.045. Epub 2016 Aug 24.
         https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27552133 

118  High frequency (900 MHz) low amplitude (5 V m-1) electromagnetic field: a genuine

         environmental stimulus that affects transcription, translation, calcium and energy charge in

         tomato; Roux D, Vian A, Girard S, Bonnet P, Paladian F, Davies E, Ledoigt G.; Planta. 2008

         Mar;227(4):883-91. Epub 2007 Nov 20.  https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18026987

119  Cows: a big model for EMF research, somewhere between Vet-Journals and “Nature”;

         Maren Fedrowitz; Sep 05, 2014; Department of Pharmacology, Toxicology, and Pharmacy

         University of Veterinary Medicine, Hannover, Germany

         https://www.bems.org/node/14835 

120   RF exposure damages natural wildlife; Drosophila oogenesis as a bio-marker responding to

         EMF sources; Lukas Margaritis and colleagues; Electromagnetic Biology and Medicine,

         July 2013

         http://www.powerwatch.org.uk/news/20131021-ants-and-drosophila.asp?pf=1