Magnetobiology and Organisms - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Pollution, global warming, urbanisation etc.
Forum rules: No one line posts please.
#14915421
You should read Magnetobiology: Underlying Physical Problems by Vladimir N. Binhi

You should read Health and Light: The Effects of Natural and Artificial Light on Man and Other Living Things by John Ott.

You should watch this:


You should consider the following articles:

Out-of-Sync Biological Clock Could Be Linked to Depression
Our bodies are made up of clocks that keep time with the rotation of our planet — and when these clocks are thrown out of whack, it does more than disrupt sleep. Now, a new study from the United Kingdom adds more evidence that disrupting your body's clock may also be linked to mood disorders.

The study — which is the largest on this topic done to date with more than 90,000 participants — found that disruptions to the body's clocks were associated with a higher risk for mental health conditions, including depression and bipolar disorder. However, the researchers cautioned that the study found only an association between the biological clock and these conditions; it didn't prove cause and effect. [9 DIY Ways to Improve Your Mental Health]

The body's so-called master clock lies in an area of the brain called the suprachiasmatic nucleus. Using light cues from the sun, the master clock can figure out what time it is and relay that information to the "peripheral clocks" found throughout the body. Indeed, most cells in our body have a cluster of proteins that rotate on and off of each other to keep time throughout the day on a near-24-hour rhythm.
https://www.livescience.com/62574-mood- ... ythms.html

Major depression on the rise among everyone, new data shows
“There’s a lack of community. There’s the amount of time that we spend in front of screens and not in front of other people. If you don’t have a community to reach out to, then your hopelessness doesn’t have any place to go.”
https://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-n ... ws-n873146




High frequency, specifically 2.45 GHz Wi-Fi radiation, induces a decrease in sperm parameters along with an increase in apoptosis-positive cells and caspase-3 activity in the seminiferous tubules of Wistar rats, specially in 7-hour group. It reduced seminal vesicle weight following 2.45 GHz exposure. Considering the progressive privilege of 2.45 GHz wireless networks in our environment, we concluded that there should be a major concern about the time-dependent exposure of our body to the higher frequencies of Wi-Fi antenna.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4503846/


Call for Protection from Non-ionizing Electromagnetic Field Exposure was made by the International Electromagnetic Field Scientist Appeal, initial release date May 11, 2015, latest version's date January 29, 2017 with 222 signatures from 41 nations: 'We are scientists engaged in the study of biological and health effects of non-ionizing electromagnetic fields (EMF)… Effects include increased cancer risk, cellular stress, increase in harmful free radicals, genetic damages, structural and functional changes of the reproductive system, learning and memory deficits, neurological disorders, and negative impacts on general well-being in humans. Damage goes well beyond the human race, as there is growing evidence of harmful effects to both plant and animal life.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5504984/



You should browse this
EFFECTS OF NON-IONIZING ELECTROMAGNETIC RADIATION
https://www.cia.gov/library/readingroom ... 0003-8.pdf


You should listen to this






Thanks for reading,

-RT
#14937637
The inconvenient truth about cancer and mobile phones

On 28 March this year, the scientific peer review of a landmark United States government study concluded that there is “clear evidence” that radiation from mobile phones causes cancer, specifically, a heart tissue cancer in rats that is too rare to be explained as random occurrence.

Eleven independent scientists spent three days at Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, discussing the study, which was done by the National Toxicology Program of the US Department of Health and Human Services and ranks among the largest conducted of the health effects of mobile phone radiation. NTP scientists had exposed thousands of rats and mice (whose biological similarities to humans make them useful indicators of human health risks) to doses of radiation equivalent to an average mobile user’s lifetime exposure.

The peer review scientists repeatedly upgraded the confidence levels the NTP’s scientists and staff had attached to the study, fuelling critics’ suspicions that the NTP’s leadership had tried to downplay the findings. Thus the peer review also found “some evidence” – one step below “clear evidence” – of cancer in the brain and adrenal glands.

Not one major news organisation in the US or Europe reported this scientific news. But then, news coverage of mobile phone safety has long reflected the outlook of the wireless industry. For a quarter of a century now, the industry has been orchestrating a global PR campaign aimed at misleading not only journalists, but also consumers and policymakers about the actual science concerning mobile phone radiation. Indeed, big wireless has borrowed the very same strategy and tactics big tobacco and big oil pioneered to deceive the public about the risks of smoking and climate change, respectively. And like their tobacco and oil counterparts, wireless industry CEOs lied to the public even after their own scientists privately warned that their products could be dangerous, especially to children.

...

There is a catch, though: the Internet of Things will require augmenting today’s 4G technology with 5G technology, thus “massively increasing” the general population’s exposure to radiation, according to a petition signed by 236 scientists worldwide who have published more than 2,000 peer-reviewed studies and represent “a significant portion of the credentialled scientists in the radiation research field”, according to Joel Moskowitz, the director of the Center for Family and Community Health at the University of California, Berkeley, who helped circulate the petition. Nevertheless, like mobiles, 5G technology is on the verge of being introduced without pre-market safety testing.

Read full article: https://www.theguardian.com/technology/ ... ent-truths


#14939339
Blue light is harmful... John Ott discovered this in the late 1960s and early 70s. McLuhan told us over and over again, the medium is the message. The following information is not new. If you understand how life works in a physical-biochemical system, then the following information shouldn't be an eye-opener.

Screens are killing your eyeballs, and now we know how

Blue light’s rap sheet is growing ever longer. Researchers have connected the high-energy visible light, which emanates from both the sun and your cell phone (and just about every other digital device in our hands and on our bedside tables), to disruptions in the body’s circadian rhythms. And physicians have drawn attention to the relationship between our favorite devices and eye problems, ranging from everyday eye strain to glaucoma to macular degeneration.

“Photoreceptors are like the vehicle. Retinal is the gas,” says study author and chemistry professor Ajith Karunarathne. In the lab, when cells from the eye were exposed to blue light directly—in theory, mimicking what happens when we stare at our phone or computer screens—the high-intensity waves trigger a chemical reaction in the retinal molecules in the eye. The blue light causes the retinal to oxidize, creating “toxic chemical species,” according to Karunarathne. The retinal, energized by this particular band of light, kills the photoreceptor cells, which do not grow back once they are damaged. If retinal is the gas, Karunarathne says, then blue light is a dangerous spark.

Catastrophic damage to your vision is hardly guaranteed. But the experiment shows that blue light can kill photoreceptor cells. Murdering enough of them can lead to macular degeneration, an incurable disease that blurs or even eliminates vision.

Blue light occurs naturally in sunlight, which also contains other forms of visible light and ultraviolet and infrared rays. But, Karunarathne points out, we don’t spend that much time staring at the sun. As kids, most of us were taught it would fry our eyes. Digital devices, however, pose a bigger threat. The average American spends almost 11 hours a day in front of some type of screen, according to a 2016 Nielsen poll. Right now, reading this, you’re probably mainlining blue light.

When we stare straight at our screens—especially in the dark—we channel the light into a very small area inside our eyeball. “That can actually intensify the light emitted from the device many many fold,” Karunarathne says. “When you take a magnifying glass and hold it to the sun, you can see how intense the light at the focal point gets. You can burn something.”

Some user experience designers have been criticizing our reliance on blue light, including Amber Case, author of the book Calm Technology. On her Medium blog she documented the way blue light has become “the color of the future,” thanks in part to films like 1982’s Blade Runner. The environmentally-motivated switch from incandescent light bulbs to high-efficiency (and high-wattage) LED bulbs further pushed us into blue light’s path. But, Case writes, “[i]f pop culture has helped lead us into a blue-lit reality that’s hurting us so much, it can help lead us toward a new design aesthetic bathed in orange.”

The military, she notes, still uses red or orange light for many of its interfaces, including those in control rooms and cockpits. “They’re low-impact colors that are great for nighttime shifts,” she writes. They also eliminate blue light-induced “visual artifacts”—the sensation of being blinded by a bright screen in the dark—that often accompany blue light and can be hazardous in some scenarios.

Apple offers a “night shift” setting on its phones, which allow users to blot out the blue and filter their screens through a sunset hue. Aftermarket products designed to control the influx of blue light into our irises are also available, including desktop screen protectors. There are even blue light-filtering sunglasses marketed to specifically to gamers. But as the damage done by blue light becomes clearer—just as our vision is getting blurrier—consumers may demand bigger changes.

Going forward, Karunarathne plans to stay in data-collection mode. “This is a new trend of looking at our devices,” he says. “It will take some time to see if and how much damage these devices can cause over time. When this new generation gets older, the question is, by that time, is the damage done?” But now that he appears to have identified a biochemical pathway for blue light damage, he’s also looking for new interventions. “Who knows. One day we might be able to develop eye drops, that if you know you are going to be exposed to intense light, you could use some of those… to reduce damage.”

https://www.popsci.com/screens-killing-eyes-blue-light


Duh. :roll:
#14947885
Scientists have been tracking a big global increase in cases of myopia. Is our love affair with screens to blame?


You don’t have to look far to see one possible cause. All around the world, people are staring at screens. At the same time, the average number of hours spent studying during childhood has also increased dramatically.

In today’s competitive global jobs market, a high premium is placed on education in many countries, including China, and children spend many hours staring at books or computer screens. So it does not come as a surprise to learn that researchers have found a direct correlation between shortsightedness and levels of educational attainment. In other words, there is truth in the old stereotype of the bespectacled swot.

But that is not the whole picture. Research in the US, Australia and Israel has suggested that time spent staring at books or screens is not the problem so much as the attendant reduction in time spent outdoors.

http://www.arabnews.com/node/1372166/lifestyle


China Wants to Combat Nearsightedness With Fewer Game Approvals

China’s Ministry of Education believes the increase in gaming and internet use among minors could lead to higher rates of myopia, or nearsightedness, and it’s laid out plans to address the problem, according to market researcher Niko Partners.

https://variety.com/2018/gaming/news/ch ... 202923112/
#14948397
General use or commercial EMF detectors and meters are unable to read future 5th generation wireless signals.

Millimeter wave spectrum is generally considered the band of spectrum between 6 GHz and 100 GHz, with 5G trials being conducted in a variety of bands within this range.

The Trifield TF2 (personal favorite) detects electric/magnetic fields and RF

Technical specs for RF: Frequency Range: 20 MHz – 6 GHz

Cornet ED88T EMF Meter

Technical specs for RF: Frequency range: 100MHz – 8GHz

Acoustimeter AM-10 RF and Acousticom 2

-Technical specs for RF: Frequency range: 200 MHz – 8 GHz ±3 dB

HF35C EMF meter

-Technical specs for RF: Frequency range: 800 MHz to 2700 MHz (2.7 GHz)

The main detection frequency range is 200 MHz to 6 GHz. This covers the bands where 5G will be initially. After about 2020 higher-frequencies (mm-waves) will start to be rolled-out for high-density city areas.
#14948400
Wireless Gene-washing

Researchers Develop "Radio-genetics" – New Method Triggers Gene Expression With Radio Waves or Magnetic Field

“The method allows one to wirelessly control the expression of genes in a living animal and could potentially be used for conditions like hemophilia to control the production of a missing protein. Two key attributes are that the system is genetically encoded and can activate cells remotely and quickly,” says Friedman, co-senior author on the project and the Marilyn M. Simpson Professor and head of the Laboratory of Molecular Genetics at Rockefeller. “We are now exploring whether the method can also be used to control neural activity as a means for noninvasively modulating the activity of neural circuits.”

https://news.rpi.edu/content/2014/12/15 ... etic-field

Exposure to radio-frequency electromagnetic waves alters acetylcholinesterase gene expression, exploratory and motor coordination-linked behaviour in male rats

Given the wide use of wireless technologies in everyday life, whether RF-EMF exposure affects brain development is a major concern. During brain development, any environmental stimuli that influence cholinergic neurotransmission may disturb learning and memory process. In the present study, WiFi exposure alters some neuro-behavioral function associated with neurological diseases. As presented in both Table 1, Table 2, WiFi exposure affect motor coordination and alters exploratory motor function in exposed rats when compared to control. This is in agreement with previous studies where high radiofrequency electromagnetic radiation exposure induces cognitive impairment and stress-related behaviours in rats [13], [25], [34]. This effect has been linked to the ability of radiowaves to cross the blood brain barrier (BBB) due to their selective permeability and ionization properties [31]. This is an indication that electromagnetic field exposure could result in neurodegeneration.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5897318/

Radio-Frequency Optogenetics: Neural Stimulation

Conventional electrical microstimulation systems still require tethers and head-mounted devices, which can undermine experiments by disrupting animal behavior. [3] Tethered systems significantly constrain experimental design by requiring researchers to physically restrain animals and perform incisions to insert the optical fibers into the regions of interest before behavioral testing and limiting the range of environments in which optogenetic experiments can be performed. [4] Fortunately, Kate Montgomery and Alexander Yeh from Stanford University recently reported a new method for wirelessly powering implantable devices in mice. This new method works around the mobility constraint by allowing animals to behave naturally with optogenetic manipulation of both central and peripheral targets. [3]

http://large.stanford.edu/courses/2016/ph240/adams1/

Ultraminiaturized Photovoltaic and Radio Frequency Powered Optoelectronic Systems for Wireless Optogenetics

Optogenetics is a neuromodulatory technique capable of exciting or inhibiting activity in specific populations of neurons rendered light sensitive through genetic modification. This method has already enabled important advances in the understanding of neural networks in the brain [1-4] and it has potential for widespread use in neuroscience research. A conventional optogenetics experiment requires insertion of an optical fiber into the brain tissue with attachment of the opposite end to a remotely located light source such as a laser or light emitting diode. Although this setup provides an ability to illuminate targeted regions of the brain, the fiber physically tethers the animal to the light source in a way that restricts movement and can lead to entanglement. Such limitations prohibit neuroscience studies involving social interactions, home cage manipulations, and/or especially for behaviors of small animals in complex environments. Alternative systems can provide useful options for large-animal research [5]. Recently reported advances in wireless, cellular-scale optoelectronics overcome these constraints through the use of ultra-miniaturized, high performance light emitting diodes (LEDs) that implant directly into the brain [6]. These systems mount on the head to harvest RF energy from a separate transmitter, multiply the voltages, and send the resulting current output to the implanted μ-ILEDs. This report summarizes technical advances that provide this type of functionality in devices that simultaneously achieve a six-fold reduction in size and a thirty-fold reduction in weight compared to previously reported systems [6]. Further, the addition of miniaturized, high performance photovoltaic cells significantly expands the operating range and reduces the required RF power.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4714570/

Key Points & Highlights The bill complies with the spending limits established by the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2018 and the moratorium on congressionally directed spending items.

The Department of Defense Appropriations Act, 2019, emphasizes the following priorities: Innovation, Technological Superiority, and Medical Research The bill provides $95.1 billion for research and development programs. This is an increase of $4 billion compared to the 2019 budget request, $6.8 billion compared to 2018 levels, and 32 percent compared to 2017.

Advanced military technologies -- The bill increases investments in hypersonics research (+$928 million), next-generation microelectronics (+$457 million), directed energy (+$317 million), and artificial intelligence/machine learning (+$297 million)


https://www.appropriations.senate.gov/n ... tions-bill
#14949553
EUROPAEM EMF Guideline 2015 for the prevention, diagnosis and treatment of EMF-related health problems and illnesses

"The evolutionary development of the human species took place under the presence of the natural electromagnetic spectrum (Earth’s magnetic field, Earth’s electric field, spherics, Schumann resonance). Those influences have been part of our biosphere like the oxygen content in the air or the visible light spectrum, and they have been integrated into the biological functions." [17/35]

Read more: https://www.emfanalysis.com/wp-content/ ... atment.pdf

More resources:

World Health Organization
http://www.who.int/peh-emf/publications/en/

International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP)
https://www.icnirp.org/en/home/index.html

National Toxicology Program
https://www.niehs.nih.gov/health/materi ... es_508.pdf
#14953195


Joel M. Moskowitz, Ph.D.
Director
Center for Family and Community Health
School of Public Health
University of California, Berkeley

5G Wireless Technology: Millimeter Wave Health Effects
The emergence of 5G, fifth-generation telecommunications networks, has been in the news lately because the wireless industry has been pushing controversial legislation at the state level to expedite the deployment of this technology. The legislation would block the rights of local governments and their citizens to control the installation of cellular antennas in the public “right-of-way.” Cell antennas may be installed on public utility poles every 10-20 houses in urban areas. According to the industry, as many as 50,000 new cell sites will be required in California alone.

Although many major cities and newspapers have opposed this legislation, the potential health risks from the proliferation of new cellular antenna sites have been ignored. These cell antennas will expose the population to new sources of radio frequency radiation including MMWs.

Read More: https://www.saferemr.com/2017/08/5g-wir ... -wave.html


Bay Area city blocks 5G deployments over cancer concerns

The Bay Area may be the center of the global technology industry, but that hasn’t stopped one wealthy enclave from protecting itself from the future.

The city council of Mill Valley, a small town located just a few miles north of San Francisco, voted unanimously late last week to effectively block deployments of small-cell 5G wireless towers in the city’s residential areas.

Through an urgency ordinance, which allows the city council to immediately enact regulations that affect the health and safety of the community, the restrictions and prohibitions will be put into force immediately for all future applications to site 5G telecommunications equipment in the city. Applications for commercial districts are permitted under the passed ordinance.

The ordinance was driven by community concerns over the health effects of 5G wireless antennas. According to the city, it received 145 pieces of correspondence from citizens voicing opposition to the technology, compared to just five letters in support of it — a ratio of 29 to 1. While that may not sound like much, the city’s population is roughly 14,000, indicating that about 1% of the population had voiced an opinion on the matter.

Blocks on 5G deployments are nothing new for Marin County, where other cities including San Anselmo and Ross have passed similar ordinances designed to thwart 5G expansion efforts over health concerns.

Read More: https://techcrunch.com/2018/09/10/bay-a ... -concerns/
#14965967
The mutagenic potential of Electrosmog via artificial/technological non-ionizing radiation.

"The evolutionary development of the human species took place under the presence of the natural electromagnetic spectrum (Earth’s magnetic field, Earth’s electric field, spherics, Schumann resonance). Those influences have been part of our biosphere like the oxygen content in the air or the visible light spectrum, and they have been integrated into the biological functions."

How to have a straightforward discussion about non-ionizing radiation.


Regulation of gene expression includes a wide range of mechanisms that are used by cells to increase or decrease the production of specific gene products (protein or RNA), and is informally termed gene regulation. Rutgers University scientists have discovered the three-dimensional structure of a gene-specific transcription activation complex, providing the first structural and mechanistic description of the process cells use to turn on, or activate, specific genes in response to changes in cell type, developmental state and environment.

Environmental Influences on Gene Expression
By: Ingrid Lobo, Ph.D. (Write Science Right) © 2008 Nature Education
Citation: Lobo, I. (2008) Environmental influences on gene expression. Nature Education 1(1):39

The expression of genes in an organism can be influenced by the environment, including the external world in which the organism is located or develops, as well as the organism's internal world, which includes such factors as its hormones and metabolism. One major internal environmental influence that affects gene expression is gender, as is the case with sex-influenced and sex-limited traits. Similarly, drugs, chemicals, temperature, and light are among the external environmental factors that can determine which genes are turned on and off, thereby influencing the way an organism develops and functions.
https://www.nature.com/scitable/topicpa ... ession-536


My main point: Please consider the bio-evolutionary influence a technological environment has on an organism. With an increase in background radiation levels, convergent evolution will in effect force biological systems to adapt to the technological environment. In short, natural selection is being obsolesced by artificial/intelligent selection. Evolutionary biologists neglect to include technology as mutagenic factors in morphogenesis.
#14965971
People are not going to give up their smart phones. They will ignore any evidence or simply not care we are influencing evolution. Interesting reading but no hope of it causing any change.
#14965979
One Degree wrote:People are not going to give up their smart phones.
I don't own or use a smart phone. I don't have GPS in my vehicle. I watched society change over a decade. AS an outsider looking in, it's alarming how fast a new technology can change the expression of a society. This insight led to the question of gene regulation.

Techno-psychosocial side-note: I remember someone (older than myself) telling me that he watched a computer word-processor (back when computers replaced typewriters) minimize our capacity for spelling (like how typewriters diminished penmanship). Today, search engines have minimized our capacity for thought. We have thought processors, but they're called search engines. Not to mention time processors (look at collective attention spans). Hence why I rail against technocratic cybernetic systems.

All of which follow observations made by media ecologists, that technological media transform and reshape human relations. Now, it's time we recognize how technological environments influence biological evolution (it should be a no-brainer).

They will ignore any evidence or simply not care we are influencing evolution.
Yes, or resort to name calling. :lol:

Interesting read but no hope of it causing any change.
Well, not with that attitude. Together, humanity can intelligently guide evolution (and face the stars together). BUT we're too busy bickering bout tribal and cultural myths. :hmm: I guess that's what the scientific priests want.



Anyway, please return to the cultural matrix of left vs right. That's a very productive arena. :lol:
#14965983
RhetoricThug wrote:I don't own or use a smart phone. I don't have GPS in my vehicle. I watched society change over a decade. AS an outsider looking in, it's alarming how fast a new technology can change the expression of a society. This insight led me to the fundamental question of gene regulation.

Techno-psychosocial side-note: I remember someone (older than myself) telling me that he watched a computer word-processor (back when computers replaced typewriters) minimize our capacity for spelling (like how typewriters diminished penmanship). Today, search engines have minimized our capacity for thought. We have thought processors, but they're called search engines. Not to mention time processors (look at collective attention spans). Hence why I rail against technocratic cybernetic systems.

All of which follow the observation made by media ecologists, that technological media transform and reshape human relations. Now, it's time we recognize that technological environments influence biological evolution.

Yes, or resort to name calling. :lol:

Well, not with that attitude.



Anyway, please return to the cultural matrix of left vs right. That's a very productive arena. :lol:


I don’t have a smart phone either.
You are correct. There was no reason for me to criticize with arguments you already know. Cross it off to those closest to you being the worse naysayers. Part of our programming I think. :)
#14966531
Research is carried out in a cubicle-abyss and executed in an artificial laboratory. The unnatural results are then injected into reality. Technology is raised or developed in a broken/fragmented home and that's why it has problems in the real world. :eek: In other words, Pavlov's lab doesn't exist in Nature.
One Degree wrote:Cross it off to those closest to you being the worse naysayers. Part of our programming I think. :)
They're neither naysayers nor sayers (they're neutral containers of information), it's part of the dominant scientific cultural narrative or for profit scientism/technoprogressivism. I've been mulling over papers written by various evolutionary biologists, and I'm amazed by how they continue to operate under Cartesian dualism. Many of em think we are at war with Nature, and technology is the only way we can navigate around natural pitfalls; of course, there's a degree of truth in this notion, but we've lost cognitive discernment. Partly due to the commercialization of perception and the use of integrated search engines thought processors (a google bot is data mining this post, feeding it to AI :roll: ). Thought processors that are designed by Technocrats in lock step with commercial incentives/interests.

A majority of evolutionary anthropologists seem completely ignorant of how we're in a feedback loop with our technology. The mind influences the body when we wrap a technological environment around ourselves. It's a choice, and it's not always out of necessity. Today, we've produced a cybernetic society based on the manipulation of biochemical signals, and these signals are used by a global economy psychotic paradigm to perpetuate a pyramidal hierarchy that's designed to divide and conquer consciousness .

We are no longer adapting to natural environments. Natural selection doesn't exist anymore. All species on planet Earth must cope with anthropocentric technological environments. One may argue that the technologies we deploy are in-fact an aspect or extension of a natural evolutionary model. Nonetheless, I think humans are intentionally and unintentionally engaged in a pan-artificial-selection process. The emerging technocratic biophysical information system is a planetary genewashing program piggybacked on the global economy.

Organisms that find themselves unable to adapt to our anthropocentric techno-environment will die off. This ties into accelerated climate change and human activity. On one hand, reductionist-materialism has produced a schizoid consumption driven socioeconomic civilization via scientific compartmentalization and the development of terraforming technology. On the other hand, materialists deny the power of the mind and perpetuate a myth called competition. All of which is dialectical sport based upon resource scarcity.

What will permanently damage the planet first, a cultural myth called China, a myth called USA, a myth called Russia? Stay tuned! AS post-modernity reinforces its mutual destruction policy. Now, before I go off on a tangent, allow me to reel this in... I've gone fishing, and I can catch more fish with a rod-n'-reel. See, technology impacts communicative ecology. When all other channels of dialogue have been exhausted, extinction is the final step in the communication process.

TLDR: Natural selection is no longer justified by competition because artificial selection has obsolesced natural selection. It's imperative that we collaborate and intelligently guide our evolutionary development.
#14966835
Cell Phone Radio Frequency Radiation

Cell phones are currently used by 95% of American adults. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) nominated radio frequency radiation (RFR) used by cell phones for an NTP study because of widespread public use of cell phones and limited knowledge about potential health effects from long-term exposure.

The NTP studies found that high exposure to RFR used by cell phones was associated with:

Clear evidence of tumors in the hearts of male rats. The tumors were malignant schwannomas.

Some evidence of tumors in the brains of male rats. The tumors were malignant gliomas.

Some evidence of tumors in the adrenal glands of male rats. The tumors were benign, malignant, or complex combined pheochromocytoma.


https://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/results/areas/cellphones/


Optogenetics drives structure changes in tissues

In optogenetics, researchers use light to control protein activity. This technique allows them to alter the shape of embryonic tissue and to inhibit the development of abnormalities. Now, scientists in EMBL's De Renzis group have enhanced the technique to stop organ-shaping processes in fruit fly embryos. Their results, published in the EMBO Journal, allow control over a crucial step in embryonic development.

Read more at: https://phys.org/news/2018-11-optogenet ... s.html#jCp


Exposure to Cold Temperatures Can Change Our Gene Expression and Fat Cells

Long-term exposure to cold temperatures could actually affect our gene expression and influence our fat cells, a recent study suggests. Research published in Nature Communications offers more evidence on how lifestyle choices and exposure to our environment can dictate the way our genes express themselves, an overarching theme of epigenetics.

https://www.whatisepigenetics.com/expos ... fat-cells/
#14972073
Derrick Broze visits Houston City Council to inform the City of Houston about the dangers of the 5g roll out.
#14972088
A brave young man. The councillor who said he had a point, also. The black man sitting behind Broze, either he or his handler need to wipe the smirks of their faces.
#14973123
More professional activism
#14973136
I think everybody has to take things like this reasonably seriously, but also with a measure of caution or skepticism. I suppose for as long as humankind has existed, there is a tendency to equate correlation with causation. Sometimes there is such equation. But more often than not, there is no equation.

I grew up in an era where there were no cell phones, no home computers, precious few televisions, and fast food didn't exist in most places in the world. We were eating proteins produced from free range critters devoid of antibiotics and growth hormones, eating produce organically grown in our gardens, and our days included a lot of hard physical work, kids running, jumping, climbing outdoors from pretty much breakfast to dusk and even into the evening.

But there were still cancers--a number of my family died from it--and all sorts of maladies in the world and everybody in my family needed and wore glasses (that were a heck of a lot more low tech affordable than now and seemed to work just as effectively.)

I am not knocking the healthy lifestyle as I think it far more beneficial than the societal norms these days.

But before we ditch the smart phones, unplug the computers and television sets yet., I think it important to know for sure that these things are harmful to us in any other way than affecting human interaction.
#14973196

Foxfyre wrote:I think everybody has to take things like this reasonably seriously, but also with a measure of caution or skepticism. I suppose for as long as humankind has existed, there is a tendency to equate correlation with causation. Sometimes there is such equation. But more often than not, there is no equation.
I'm pretty sure The National Toxicology Program understands the difference between scientific correlation & causation. Did you read all of the material provided by this thread?

I grew up in an era where there were no cell phones, no home computers, precious few televisions, and fast food didn't exist in most places in the world. We were eating proteins produced from free range critters devoid of antibiotics and growth hormones, eating produce organically grown in our gardens, and our days included a lot of hard physical work, kids running, jumping, climbing outdoors from pretty much breakfast to dusk and even into the evening.
Curious (although your bit is an anecdotal narrative), where did you grow up?

But there were still cancers--a number of my family died from it--and all sorts of maladies in the world and everybody in my family needed and wore glasses (that were a heck of a lot more low tech affordable than now and seemed to work just as effectively.)
Many things cause cancer. Many diseases exist. People die. What's your point? How does any of it relate specifically to the bio-physiological effects of non-ionizing radiation?

But before we ditch the smart phones, unplug the computers and television sets yet., I think it important to know for sure that these things are harmful to us in any other way than affecting human interaction.
This thread isn't an "all or nothing" approach, and the question of non-ionizing radiation is not limited to human interaction (not sure what you mean, it's such a generalization).

More professional activism




#14988920
‘A global catastrophe’: Radiation activist warns that 5G networks are ‘massive health experiment’

A leading activist on the issue of electromagnetic radiation and its negative impacts on public health has described the rollout of 5G as a “massive health experiment” which could “become a global catastrophe.”

Arthur Robert Firstenberg is a well-known advocate for curtailing the development of 5G networks both in the US and internationally, claiming that super fast broadband could cause cancer in humans and wildlife, as well as exacerbating the symptoms of electromagnetic hypersensitivity.

In a bid to stall the rollout of the networks Firstenberg is petitioning the World Health Organization, the UN and the EU to “urgently halt the development of 5G.” The petition had garnered over 40,000 signatures at time of writing.

“The deployment of 5G constitutes an experiment on humanity and the environment that is defined as a crime under international law,” the petition states. The US rollout of the new network has already begun in cities like Houston, Indianapolis, Los Angeles, and Sacramento.

“This could become a global catastrophe. When the first satellites were launched in the late 1990s for mobile phones, on the day they were launched people sensitive to these things got very sick. The mortality rate rose in the US by 5-10% too and there were reports that birds were not flying,” Firstenberg told the Daily Star.

Firstenberg also claims that, in areas of the world where rollout of 5G antennas has already begun, the local population, including insects and other wildlife, are already getting sick. He claims to have a condition known as electromagnetic hypersensitivity, which induces symptoms like dizziness, nausea, amnesia, insomnia, tremors, heart arrhythmia, acute and chronic pain, among others though it is not scientifically or medically recognized.

In addition, Firstenberg filed a lawsuit seeking $1.43 million in damages from his neighbor for damaging his health by using her iPhone and WiFi connection.

Much like cell phones before it in the 1980s and 90s, 5G has encountered strong pushback from the general public since it was first announced. In September 2018, Mill Valley city council, in California, voted to block development of 5G towers and small cells in residential areas citing “serious adverse health and environmental impacts caused by the microwave radiation emitted from these 4G and 5G Small Cell Towers,” Motherboard reports.

However, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), “There is no scientific evidence that provides a definite answer to that question… More research is needed before we know if using cell phones causes health effects.”

Despite a number of broad-ranging studies into the potential effects of cell phone radiation showing no solid evidence of any significant health risks to humans (let alone insects), many within the scientific community remain skeptical that the benefits of 5G technology outweigh the potential harm to humans.

Tworecent studies also showed elevated risk of cancerous tumors developing in male rats (though not female) who were exposed to electromagnetic fields (EMFs) for nine hours a day over two years. However, the claims didn’t stand up in follow-up double-blind tests.

215 scientists from 40 different countries have allegedly signed an appeal calling for international protection from non-ionizing electromagnetic field exposure, the effects of which include, but are not limited to, “increased cancer risk, cellular stress, increase in harmful free radicals, genetic damages, structural and functional changes of the reproductive system, learning and memory deficits, neurological disorders, and negative impacts on general well-being.”

In a letter, Dr Martin Pall, a biochemistry professor at the Washington State University, claimed there were severe biological and health effects, including increased risk of cancer via DNA mutations, due to exposure to 5G networks, while also claiming that the FCC is a “captured agency” that is subject to the will of the very industry it is supposed to regulate.

5G would provide broadband speeds over 100 times faster than current data speeds. But to facilitate its rollout 300,000 new antennas would be required in the US alone. That’s roughly equal to three decades-worth of cell phone tower development.

The networks require a more dense array of “small cell” sites because their high frequency waves provide faster speeds but don’t travel as far.

https://www.rt.com/news/450775-massive- ... 5g-cancer/


The history of Israel & Zionism

The Muslims accept Jesus (Yahshua) only as being […]

It is precisely about you & me . Try going […]

Attack in Lebanon

There's no actual evidence of an attack so far.

All cultures are class conscious. People are als[…]