What is currently available today to help protect us from this type of radiation?

SCREENING MATERIALS: A variety of 'Screening Materials' are now available. From Woven netting material for net curtains, bed canopies etc; shielded net knit material to Protective Wallpaper for lining walls. Equilibra has negotiated a discount for it's customers on a number of these items. Click on the above link for more details

Nutritinal Products: There are a few products which can help the body to recover from the oftentimes debilitating effects of electrostress. Frequensea with Marine Phytoplankton is one. Produced naturally by mother nature, this product provides all the nutrients, trace minerals, essential fats, vitamins, enzymes, amino acids, antioxidants etc., that a cell requires for repair and healthy regeneration. Likewise, as Nitric Oxide depletion and interference in it's biochemical reactions due to exposure to EMFs and microwave radiation has been cited in some scientific studies, then taking L-arginine, which the body uses to manufacture Nitric Oxide, may also be of great benefit too. Plus, L-arginine dilates the blood vessels too, thus increasing circulation and, therefore, delivery of vital nutrients, and importantly oxygen used for energy and detoxification, to the cells. See products for more details.

Demand Switches are an excellent product for protection against EMFs and for reducing the levels of microwave radiation we are exposed to, both during the day and at nighttime. People who have microwave detection equipment have been surprised by the high level of microwave radiation eminating from lamps, wall and ceiling lights and so forth. This is because this type of radiation is picked up by many household products through the electrical wiring system in the house. Demand Switches cut off the electricity at the fuse box when there is no demand on the circuit, so there is no electricity flowing through the wiring, thus preventing this from happening. So, for example, during the day when there are no lights on, there is no current flowing throughout the lighting circuits. Likewise, on a nighttime (when the body carries out it's repair work) when the last light is switched off the alternating electrical current is removed from the lighting circuit, thus preventing microwave radiation from reaching us in this way. Additionally, Demand Switches stop electrical radiation eminating from the household wiring too, which is also a good thing to do at night, thus helping the body to utilise it's energy stores where they are most needed - restoring and maintaining homeostasis - and preventing the body from wasting it's valuable energy stores dealing with EMF radiation. Switch a light on, for example, and electricity is immediately restored to that circuit, so there is no inconvenience to us in anyway - just peace of mind! You can also protect other electrical circuits in the home too, sockets and so forth, therefore, practically eliminating all electrical (and induced microwave) radiation from the bedroom/s etc.

Can the Elanra MKII help to counteract the dangers to health posed by microwave radiation emitted from mobile phone masts?

Having a Phone Mast around 200 metres away from our house - previously G2 until recently upgraded - and having experimented with the Elanra MKII over the last few months, I personally do believe that the Elanra MKII can help in some way. From my own experience, I felt that by carefully choosing the right frequency setting on the machine, the Elanra MKII helped to diffuse, and reduce, the adverse effects this type of radiation had upon my body. As I am very sensitive to energies I was able to 'feel' a marked difference in the effects this radiation had upon me when using the Elanra MKII.

As the Elanra MKII has 8 different frequency settings (4Hz, 7.83Hz, 8Hz, 10Hz, 16Hz, 25Hz, 32Hz and 40Hz) and 9 Intensity settings, it is my opinion, that by choosing the right frequency, such as 7.83Hz (The Earth's Schumann Resonance, which corresponds precisely with the frequency of the hippocampus in the brain of all mammals and is responsible for our memory and survival among other factors) and setting the Intensity based upon the number of Masts nearby, proximity, levels of radiation etc, that it is possible to alleviate some of the debilitating and adverse effects these Phone Mast emissions can have upon the body. Especially at nighttime when the body carries out most of its repair work.

Additionally, as well as purifying the air around us, the Elanra provides the body with ions of oxygen that can be inhaled to enter the bloodstream and produce biologically beneficial effects. As oxygen is the body's main fuel for energy and removal of toxins, this can only be a good thing for us.

The Elanra MKII may be well worth considering in conjunction with other protective, and/or beneficial, measures available.

MICROWAVE RADIATION PROTECTION:

There are a number of ways in which we can help to reduce the debilitating affects Microwave Radiation can have upon the body (emitted from Phone Masts and other sources). We can move home, which is not ideal or always possible, or we can sit tight and use certain materials available today to help to block or reduce the radiation entering our home/bedroom and/or workplace.

Firstly, before we come to what we CAN do to help, it may be prudent to offer a brief précis of why it is important to protect ourselves from this type of radiation.

The New Generation (G3/3G) and Tetra Masts pulse(phase)-modulate their signals. It is this modulation, or 'burst repetition rate' that seems to have the most damaging effect upon the body because the frequencies generated are very close to the body's natural range of frequencies - which range from below 10 to over 10¹⁵ Hertz. "

In disease, which is a disturbance or interference in the ‘energy field’, the body “…is forced to produce the mirror-image counter oscillations of the interference field at the same time, by neutralising them… It succeeds in doing this with the corresponding expenditure of energy. We also refer to ‘holding work’, which it must perform, because it has to constantly expend energy in order to neutralise these constantly recurring oscillations from the interference field. If the organism is weakened…it can no longer perform the holding work and is no longer able to neutralise the pathological oscillation.” This is the onset of illness and disease as we know it biologically.

It has been established that there is a constant equilibrium between photons and the growth of a cell association, and if the EM field of the cell is disturbed its coherence (balance) is affected too and if this coherence is disturbed, all the functions, including immune defence, are blocked; but above all – and this is the most important thing – the repair capacity of the cell, the ability to restore order to genetic damage is blocked. From this point of view the concept of disease should be reconsidered: disease, before it is manifested in physical symptoms, is manifested as a disturbance in or to the electromagnetic field.

The first steps to the body healing itself are to “… restore the rhythms of the organism and synchronise and re-adapt to a normal, undisturbed control programme.” In other words, deal with and eliminate the frequencies responsible for causing imbalance. This of course cannot be achieved when one lives in close proximity to a static and immovable mobile phone mast that is constantly emitting the very chaotic frequencies or incoherent oscillations (information) which create a disturbance in Human EM fields in the first place, and which we now know can lead to illness in the human organism.

Additionally, it is worth noting that it is at nighttime that the body carries out most of its ‘healing work’ as it constantly works to restore homeostasis. As these phone Masts are fixed structures, it is, therefore, impossible for an individual to avoid these man-made chaotic energies from interfering with their energy fields and the body’s natural ability to restore homeostasis. Therefore, people are being denied their unquestionable right to have and to hold onto good health.

Thus, we can see clearly that the ability of the body and its biophysical and biological systems to communicate correctly, and in harmony, can be seriously compromised in a number of ways by this type of radiation, leading to ill health along with many symptoms of feeling unwell.

On an equally serious note, what I find particularly disturbing is that according to a number of scientists the low frequencies that characterise certain aspects of GSM/TETRA pulse-modulation are close to those frequencies that are known to influence human mood and behaviour in a number of ways. This can range from depression, docility, even to rage, depending on the kind of modulation used. It is even possible to induce sounds and even words intercranially by appropriate modulation of these microwave signals. Maybe Microwave Mind Control (MMC) is more than just a conspiracy theory. After all, it has been alleged by many that this MMC forms part of the military's (secret?) Psychotronic Warfare.

Dr Rauscher-Bise (USA) is an enthusiast: "Give me the money and three months", she boasts, "and I'll be able to affect the behaviour of 80 per cent of the people of this town without their knowing it. Make them happy - or at least they'll think they're happy. Or aggressive."!

So it becomes apparent that we should do whatever we can to protect ourselves from this type of insidious radiation, and as sinister as the Mind Control issue is, my own feelings, endorsed by many people, including some leading scientists, is that these microwave emissions from phone masts may be the biggest singular cause of human suffering (and possible premature death) in the years to come. And for why? MONEY and EGO. What a legacy to leave our children and grandchildren!

However, microwave radiation poisoning is not restricted to Phone Masts, it is also emitted by Digital Cordless Telephones (DECT) even when the phone is not in use! Plus certain wireless burglar alarms, wireless networked computers, wireless baby alarms and so forth.

Secondly, we need to know just how bad this radiation in our home or workplace really is. If we are not sensitive to this type of radiation and we are therefore not aware of its presence, then we may need a monitor to measure and detect these fields, where they are and whether they pose a threat to our health and the health of our children.

IS CELL PHONE RADIATION HARMFUL?

Several independent scientific research studies have been conducted in leading medical establishments and universities around the world studying the impact of cell phone radiation exposure on the human body. These scientific research studies have been published, reporting that cell phones emit harmful radiation and the exposure to this harmful radiation could lead to health problems such as headaches, fatigue and memory loss, to name a few. More serious are the increasing scientific research reports of brain cancers linked to cell phone radiation exposure. Scientific studies have also been published, reporting that we are exposed to harmful radiation by the use of wired and wireless appliances within our homes, such as computers, cordless phones and many other modern electronic technology devices that we use daily.

How does microwave radiation from mobile phones cause cancer?

What does the evidence say?

The largest study so far on mobile phones and cancer is a Danish study, which looked at over 420,000 people. It found no link between mobile phones and any type of cancer including brain cancers and leukaemia. Even people who had been using their phones for 10 years or more did not have increased risks.

The vast majority of other studies have also found that mobile phones do not increase the risk of cancer.

A few studies have found that people with brain cancer are more likely to develop the disease on the side of the head that they hold their phone to. But they also had lower risks of developing the disease on the opposite side of their head.

This strange result is most likely to be down to chance or inaccuracies. The problem is that these studies ask people with cancer to remember how they used their phones, often many years ago. Their memories may be biased if they had previously heard about a connection between phones and cancer in the media.

Research in this field is still ongoing and Cancer Research UK will continue to look for any new evidence.

Mobile phones and cancer incidence
The use of mobile phones has skyrocketed since the 1980s. But studies in the USA and New Zealand have found that during this time, the numbers of people with brain cancer has not changed very much.

Is the radiation from mobile phones dangerous?
Mobile phones transmit and receive microwave radiation. The energy from microwave radiation is millions of times lower than that the energy from an X-ray.

This radiation does not have enough energy to damage DNA, and cannot directly cause cancer.

Mobile phones also produce small amounts of heat in the brain, but again, not enough to pose a health risk.

In 2000, the UK signed up to a set of international safety standards, which set a limit on the amount of radiation given off by phones. These limits are designed to have a very large safety margin to protect people who may be more sensitive to phone radiation, such as children.

Recently, a study found that mobile phone radiation caused laboratory cells to produce proteins called ERK1 and ERK2. These are involved in cell division and they are found at high levels in some cancers.

But we don’t know whether this could affect the risk of cancer. In this study, the two proteins were only produced for a short period of time. In actual tumours, ERK1 and 2 are activated strongly and for a long time. We also don’t know if these effects in isolated cells would happen in our actual bodies, where many other things affect the levels of these proteins.

Mobile phone chip to counter radiation unveiled

Belgian health products distributor Omega Pharma will launch a chip it claims can counter potentially damaging radiation from mobile phones and has high hopes for its sales.

The company, which sells non-prescription products such as wart treatments, pregnancy tests and sun tan lotions to pharmacists, unveiled the E-waves phone chip on Tuesday, a day before its launch in Belgium.

Testing of the chip, which offsets the electromagnetic radiation from the phone, showed it lessened symptoms such as headaches and loss of concentration that might be associated with mobile phone use, Omega said.

It also neutralized the heating effect within the body produced by electromagnetic signals.

Testing of consumers appetite for the product, costing 38.95 euros ($50.1), will start on Wednesday.

The company will only have 30,000 of the chips available on day one, but believes it can ramp up production easily for foreign expansion.

"If we need 10 million, then we'll go for that," Chief Executive Marc Coucke told Reuters on the sidelines of the launch, although he said that was not a forecast.

Coucke and the scientists who have developed the chip argue there is a growing body of evidence showing a link between mobile phone use and the growth of tumors.

"It's like smoking. Eventually we reached a point where the health impact is widely acknowledged," Coucke said.

However, scientists worldwide remain split between those that believe there is a risk and others who believe there is insufficient evidence to show mobile phones are unsafe.

Omega, which has exclusive international distribution rights, will begin selling the product in other countries from early 2009. It will also launch three similar devices designed for use in the car, linked to a computer and in the home.

Omega competes with the over-the-counter arms of pharma giants such as Johnson & Johnson and Bayer and of consumer products groups such as Procter & Gamble.

Omega, the only sizeable stand-alone OTC company, ranks itself 11th in the world in that market. It is mainly active in western Europe, but is also pushing into eastern Europe.

Mobile phone radiation causes changes in gene and protein

We have examined in vitro cell response to mobile phone radiation (900 MHz GSM signal) using two variants of human endothelial cell line: EA.hy926 and EA.hy926v1. Gene expression changes were examined in three experiments using cDNA Expression Arrays and protein expression changes were examined in ten experiments using 2-DE and PDQuest software. Obtained results show that gene and protein expression were altered, in both examined cell lines, in response to one hour mobile phone radiation exposure at an average specific absorption rate of 2.8 W/kg. However, the same genes and proteins were differently affected by the exposure in each of the cell lines. This suggests that the cell response to mobile phone radiation might be genome- and proteome-dependent. Therefore, it is likely that different types of cells and from different species might respond differently to mobile phone radiation or might have different sensitivity to this weak stimulus. Our findings might also explain, at least in part, the origin of discrepancies in replication studies between different laboratories.

How does WiFi affect people health

Some fears and concerns have arisen in people's heads whether WI-FI is safe or not when is used in connection for a human being's health. Also these thoughts are stirred up by a recent BBC programme Panorama. At the same time some scientists have declared that they could not find any evidence proving that WI-FI causes any harm or damage to health. Well, we can now investigate this tricky topic in order to find out these proven and those unproven arguments. Some experiments were undertaken to clear up this situation. Experiment with pupils` reading was performed in one of British schools.

The BBC programme Panorama maintains that readings were 600 times below the government's safety limits due to WI-FI radiation. Also the BBC declares that a wireless networks radiation is three times higher than that of a mobile one. From the other side, authorities from scientific society say that the radiation from the laptops is very small. However, better not to encourage children use laptops in their laps when they go online for a long period of time. There is a hot scientific debate with arguments. But, as you know right though thrives on conflict. Now we see that though there is a small radiation from laptops. Then the investigation goes further and Panorama visited one school in Norwich.

The experimentation conducted in that school revealed the difference between the WI-FI and mobile radiation. That means that WI-FI signal is three times higher than the beam of mobile radiation. Let us identify what WI-FI actually means. WI-FI is such a system that uses radio waves of a very low intensity. In comparison with the just common microwave oven that every family has in their houses, the WI-FI radiation intensity is 100,000 times less than that of an oven. Furthermore, if you sit in front of your lap top and receive network by wireless connection for a year then you will have received the same amount of radio waves as that of talking on mobile phone for 20 minutes. So, there is no any evidence what type of radiation has more influence over people's health and life. But, we understand that the radiation does exist and we are curious to discover the way to calculate it. This is rather a new area for scientists` investigation. That is why research in this particular direction is still proceeding. Taking into account that radio waves or WI-FI have been part of our lives for more than a century then we should already have found some notes or records with regard to any cases of harm, damage or any other negative effects that WI - FI can provoke. Here are some examples that have been represented to the public.

The first person who suggested that low-level radiation has an effect on chromosomes or genetic material was a Professor Olle Johansson from the Karolinska Institute in Sweden. However, Professor Will J Stewart from the Royal Academy of Engineering added that science explored that mobile phones` influence over health was negligible and thus assured that people should be calm. Regarding WI-FI, they work on another radio frequencies but the power is very low. In conclusion, UK Telecom can suggest that opinions are divided into two opposite sides. One side is pro, another is contra. The truth is somewhere in the middle. But, alongside with this delicate issue there are many advantages of using WiMAX connection. This of course is another story and will need to be discussed some other time.

Wi-Fi radiation: Is it dangerous to your child?

Children are thought to be more vulnerable to radio-frequency radiation emissions than adults because their skulls are still growing and are thinner, which is why parents have protested against the erection of mobile phone masts near schools. However, it looks like parents may have been missing a greater evil in their midst. In the UK a BBC Panorama investigation has discovered that Wi-Fi networks in schools can give off three times more signal radiation than mobile phone masts.

Researchers for the BBC’s Panorama program visited a comprehensive school in Norwich and measured the strength of a radiation signal from a classroom Wi-Fi laptop. They found that the maximum signal strength was three times higher than that of a typical mobile phone mast.

Norwich North MP Dr Ian Gibson, who was interviewed for the program, said: “There needs to be an inquiry into whether there are dangers from Wi-Fi in schools.”

“It has been introduced without any investigation into its effects on people’s health. If it’s safe, people ought to provide data to prove it.”

He added that an independent assessment needed to be carried out.

The program contacted nearly 50 of these schools and claimed only one had been alerted that there might be possible health risks, some had been told there was no risk.

While the readings were 600 times below the government’s radiation safety limits, the program is expected to fuel the debate over potential risks of Wi-Fi – particularly among young children who could be under greater risk.

Following the BBC investigation, the Chairman of the Health Protection Agency, Sir William Stewart publicly called for a review of the health effects of Wi-Fi, which centers heavily on the adoption of wireless in schools.

Seventy per cent of secondary schools in the UK already have Wi-Fi and nearly 50 per cent of all primary schools do. He said: “I believe that there is a need for a review of the Wi-Fi and other areas. I think it’s timely for it to be done now.”

Current Government advice – from a report published by Sir William in 2000 – recommends that phone masts are not sited near schools, without consultation with parents and the school, because children are thought to be more vulnerable to radio frequency radiation emissions than adults. Health Protection Agency guidelines also state that masts should not be sited near schools because of a possible cancer link and other health risks.

Recent research has linked radiation from mobiles to cancer and brain damage, and children are thought to be more vulnerable than adults.

While the health risks associated with mobile phones and masts remain unproven, new concerns were raised last month after a study of seven sites reported higher cases of cancer, brain hemorrhages and other serious illnesses within 400 meters of the towers.

Philip Parkin, general secretary of the Professional Association of Teachers, reiterates his concerns about the use of the technology in schools.

Mr Parkin said: “I think schools and parents will be very worried about it . . . I am asking for schools to consider very seriously whether they should be installing Wi-Fi networks now and this will make them think twice or three times before they do it.”

The UK Government states there is no health risk from Wi-Fi and cites the World Health Organization’s view that there are `no adverse health effects from low level, long-term exposure’.

However, Sir William believes they are wrong to provide this advice. In 2000 he was commissioned to produce a report to examine mobile phones, masts and health.

Speaking about the findings of that report, in relation to mobile phones, masts and health, he said: “… there may be changes, for example in cognitive function… there were some indications that there may be cancer inductions… there was some molecular biology changes within the cell and these were issues that we had to bear in mind.”

The Government relies on the data supplied by ICNIRP, an international group of scientists, for radiation safety limits.

But Panorama states ICNIRP does not take into account the biological effects of radio frequency radiation and bases exposure limits on a thermal effect.

Professor Henry Lai, a biologist from Washington University, reviewed all the experiments on mobile phones. He found health effects at similar levels of radiation to Wi-Fi in some of the studies. He said: “I think it’s about 50-50; 50% found an effect and 50% did not find an effect at all”

“I think it’s irresponsible to just set standards using a thermal standard.”

“If you set it just based on a thermal effect you are neglecting a large amount of data.”

On the other hand, some scientists have savaged a BBC TV investigation into the dangers of wireless internet networks, calling the program’s claims “grossly unscientific” and a “scare story”.

They said the claim is based on a spectacularly disingenuous presentation of the facts. And the irresponsible way in which the program was promoted will have needlessly raised fears among parents across the country.

The researchers apparently measured radiation strength 100 meters away from the base station and one meter away from the laptop.

One thing scientists know very well about electromagnetic waves is that as they move away from a source they weaken rapidly. At two meters away they will be four times weaker; at three meters away they will be nine times weaker, and so on. So making a comparison of two sources at such radically different distances is meaningless.

Panorama’s defense is that a child would never be one meter away from a base station, so the legitimate comparison is between the likely point where radiation from a base station would hit the ground and the place where she would use a laptop – right next to it.

Scientists generally believe that Wi-Fi ought to be safer than mobile phone radiation because Wi-Fi devices transmit over shorter distances and so can operate at lower power. The Health Protection Agency says a person sitting within a Wi-Fi hotspot for a year receives the same dose of radio waves as a person using a mobile phone for 20 minutes.

WiFi Radiation

Is WiFi Technology Bad For Your Health?:
The technological benefits of Wireless Fidelity technology versus the wireless hazards is a hot debate in many different countries. In the United States, a class action lawsuit has been brought against a school board who use the technology in their classrooms. In Britain, it has been removed from some classrooms altogether. Are these precautionary measures necessary, or simply the reaction of a public frightened by a technology they do not fully understand?

What is WiFi?
It is possible to form a somewhat informed opinion on the safety or potential risks of this new technology without actually being a physicist yourself.

Quite simply, Wi-Fi or WiFi is the wireless technology most commonly used to connect people to the internet in schools, coffee shops, hotels and other network locations, or to connect cell phone users to one another. Wi-Fi is certainly convenient for travellers and students, but is it dangerous? Many believe that the low-level electromagentic waves that radiate from the wireless internet source to each individual user can be harmful to your health, even causing cellular changes and possibly cancer.

The area covered by a Wi-Fi internet connection is known as a "hotspot"; this is the area in which the waves radiate to give users access to the internet. It can span several kilometers, although the waves cannot pass through treed areas. While in the hotspot, a laptop user can simply connect to the network, access the internet, and check their email or do their other business on the run.

A wireless network uses radio waves to send communications across a two-way network. A computer's wireless adapter translates the internet connection data into a radio wave and sends it to the wireless router - the one in your laptop. This process works in reverse as well, sending a radio signal back to the host computer

Hotspots a Hot Topic:
Some report an unusual sensitivity to the waves emitted in these hotspots. Officially, the levels of WiFi electromagnetic radiation emitted into the environment in a hotspot are well below recommended levels and there is no evidence of any risk to humans. Yet some people blame Wi-Fi exposure for everything from sleep disturbances, headaches and blurred vision, to heart and breathing problems.

Because no study has ever shown a conclusive risk to human health from exposure to these low-frequency radio transmissions, many simply shrug off the complaints of these people, choosing to believe their symptoms are coincidental or caused by another source.

So just how high are the levels of radiation in a hotspot? According to Dr. Michael Clark of the HPA, the published research on mobile phones and wireless networks does not indicate a risk to human health. "All the expert reviews done here and abroad indicate that there is unlikely to be a health risk from wireless networks," he says. "The few studies on mobile phone masts that have appeared in peer-reviewed journals claiming to observe health effects are not at all conclusive. The real problem is deciding what level of precaution is appropriate.

"When we have conducted measurements in schools, typical exposures from wi-fi are around 20 millionths of the international guideline levels of exposure to radiation. As a comparison, a child on a mobile phone receives up to 50 per cent of guideline levels. So a year sitting in a classroom near a wireless network is roughly equivalent to 20 minutes on a mobile. If wi-fi should be taken out of schools, then the mobile phone network should be shut down, too - and FM radio and TV, as the strength of their signals is similar to that from wi-fi in classrooms."

The Future of Wi-Fi:
While the debate rages on, most simply choose to use the technology until a conclusive study tells them that it is unsafe. Experts are paying attention to the concerns of those who claim to be affected by WiFi radiation; in September, 30 scientists from all over the world signed a resolution calling for a "full and independent review of the scientific evidence that points to hazards from current electromagnetic field exposure conditions worldwide."

Cell Phone Radiation, Cell Tower Masts, Wireless Radiation.

10 years ago a friend of mine had the left side of his head around his ear swell out the side of his head more than an inch. He had ringing in his ear, loss of balance and became confused and disoriented.

We all wondered what was wrong with him. He went to the doctor who eventually diagnosed him with acoustic neuroma (benign tumor of the inner ear drum) this tumor can cause deafness. It is usually not deadly but very unpleasant.

We racked our brains trying to figure out what could have caused this. The doctors were of no help, giving us tons of "gray", "iffy" possibilities, ranging from his diet to the water he drank. It was not until we came across several similar stories and some highly technical, yet obscure research papers that it all started to become suddenly clear: It had to be his CELLPHONE!!!


This was the LAST thing I would have guessed when this happened, but it also triggered the beginning of my in depth research into the dangers of Electro-Magnetic Field Radiation from cell phones and wireless technology. This research has brought me into contact with literally hundreds of people suffering from some sort of Electromagnetic Poisoning, and made me realize there must be several thousands if not hundreds of thousands more victims out there suffering from these dire effects and not even realizing it!!!

Susan and her children were being exposed to cell phone and wireless radiation without even knowing it while they were driving in their car? We will tell you about Susan and what happened to her children a little later. First...

Mobile phone radiation

What is radiation?

Radiation is energy travelling through space in the form of waves or particles. It occurs naturally and has always been around, we've evolved with it and we're bombarded with it in one form or another every day of our lives - from the earth, from space and even within our own bodies. Some experts suggest a little radiation is a good thing and we all know of its uses in medical science to combat and diagnose some illnesses.

There are various types of radiation but we won't get into the physics of atoms, neutrons and protons (there are plenty of websites that explain it if you want the scientific stuff) - but we will tell you why radiation is in mobile phones and whether or not you need to worry about it.

Radiation and your mobile

The type of radiation emitted from mobile phones is electromagnetic radiation. It's present in mobiles because they use radio frequency (RF) waves to make and receive calls. The doses are considered to be very small as the emissions are low power (short range). Nevertheless, there are ways in which you can reduce exposure to these waves.

The health risks
Despite extensive research on the subject, there has been no conclusive evidence that using a mobile phone causes long term harmful effects in humans.

The pace of mobile phone technology is advancing at a far quicker pace than the research required into the potential harm they can cause; much more research is needed (and is being undertaken) before we can know for certain the effects they have on human health. Nevertheless, mobiles do emit low doses of radiation so common sense dictates precaution should be taken when using them.

Studies have shown that exposure to the RF waves emitted from mobiles can cause:

slightly raised blood pressure at the time of use, pressure returning to normal when use is stopped (to put this into perspective, our blood pressure changes regularly throughout the day and is even affected by tasks such as speaking)
direct brain warming after prolonged use, which disperses as soon as you stop using your phone and causes no harm
mild fatigue after prolonged use
a recent study in Sweden suggested that acoustic neuromas (benign tumours of the acoustic nerve) are twice as common in mobile phone users than in those who do not use mobiles.
There is no evidence that using a mobile phone causes:

tumours
memory impairment
cancer
brain damage
foetal damage
The health risk is considered to be very, very small, although some individuals may be more susceptible to radiation than others. Whilst it's true that excessive exposure to RF waves causes heating, the spoof claims you may have heard about being able to cook an egg using a mobile phone are entirely false.

Reduce exposure
Whilst there's no evidence that mobiles produce sufficient levels of radiation to cause any lasting ill effects, there's no harm in taking simple precautions to reduce the levels of radiation you absorb from using your phone:

moving your phone 20cm away from your head reduces radiation doses by about 98%
hands free headsets dramatically reduce radiation emissions into the brain
try not to chat for hours on end or, if you must, get a hands free kit
there are a few devices on the market that you can fit to your phone that reduce the emissions of radiation or allow the body to neutralise the effects, but beware of over-hyped promotions by these manufacturers using scare tactics to market their products.
it's always sensible to take precautions where children are concerned as their developing brains and bodies are far more susceptible to radiation effects than adults, absorbing radiation at three times an adult's rate.
Mobile phone antennas and base stations
There's been a lot of controversy about radio antennas, mobile phone antennas and their emissions causing leukemia and other diseases. (Note it is the actual antenna itself that emits radio waves, not the structure that supports it.) The truth is, there is no conclusive evidence one way or the other, but here are few facts about levels of radiation transmission from mobile phone antennas:

to get a dose of radiation considered dangerous from a mobile phone transmission antenna, you'd have to be almost touching it
the antennas don't beam directly down so don't 'blow' radiation directly onto us below
the towers that support the antennas don't emit radiation
radiation dramatically and rapidly decreases as you move away from the mast - 10 metres away, the dose is 0.1% of what it was at 1 metre away; 0.0125% at 20 metres away and so on.
Save money with uSwitch.com
You still need a mobile and now you've been educated on radiation, why not see how much money uSwitch.com can save you by switching network operators? We'll do a comprehensive search through all the available network operators to find you a great deal.

20 highest-radiation cell phones (United States)

Manufacturer and model SAR level(digital)
1 Motorola V195s 1.6
2 Motorola Zine ZN5 1.59
2a Motorola Rival 1.59
4 Kyocera Jax S1300 1.55
4a Motorola VU204 1.55
6 RIM BlackBerry Curve 8330 (Sprint) 1.54
6a RIM BlackBerry Curve 8330 (U.S. Cellular) 1.54
6b RIM BlackBerry Curve 8330 (Verizon Wireless) 1.54
9 Nokia E71x 1.53
10 Pantech Matrix 1.52
11 LG Rumor 2 1.51
11a RIM BlackBerry Bold 1.51
13 HTC SMT5800 1.49
14 Sony Ericsson W350a 1.48
15 T-Mobile Dash 3G 1.47
16 Samsung Instinct 1.46
16a Samsung Spex SCH-R210 1.46
18 Kyocera X-tc 1.45
18a Motorola i576 1.45
18b Motorola Adventure V750 1.45

Cell phone radiation levels

What it all means
According to the Cellular Telecommunications Industry Association, specific absorption rate, or SAR, is "a way of measuring the quantity of radio frequency (RF) energy that is absorbed by the body." For a phone to pass FCC certification and be sold in the United States, its maximum SAR level must be less than 1.6 watts per kilogram. In Europe, the level is capped at 2 watts per kilogram while Canada allows a maximum of 1.6 watts per kilogram. The SAR level listed in our charts represents the highest SAR level measured with the phone next to the ear as tested by the FCC. Keep in mind that it is possible for the SAR level to vary between different transmission bands (the same phone can use multiple bands during a call), and that different testing bodies can obtain different results. Also, it's possible for results to vary between different models of the same phone--such as a handset that's offered by multiple carriers. CNET lists the exposure for voice calls only; the SAR for data use can differ.

It's important to note that in publishing this list, we are in no way implying that cell phone use is harmful to your health. Research abounds, but much of the literature is contradictory. While some researchers have said there is cause to be "concerned," others disagree and say it is still too early too early to be alarmed. Similarly, though some tests have suggested a link between long-term (10 years or longer) cell phone use and cancer, there still is not conclusive or demonstrated evidence that cell phones cause or don't cause adverse health effects in humans. In short, the jury is still out. Research into the matter will continue, and we will continue to monitor its results.

If you're concerned about limiting your SAR exposure, you can take a few easy steps beyond purchasing a handset with a low SAR. You can text instead placing a voice call, use a wired headset or speakerphone whenever possible, and carry your phone at least one inch from your body. Some researchers also caution against using your phone in areas with poor coverage since phones emit more radiation when searching for a signal. Children, which have smaller and thinner skulls, should limit cell phone use, and all users, children and adults, should not sleep with an active phone next to their bedside or under their pillow.

If your phone isn't listed here (U.S. customers) and you've purchased it within the last few years, consult your user manual. Alternatively, you can request the SAR information from the FCC, the manufacturer, or your carrier. You'll need the model number and FCC ID number, which is usually--but not always--listed in the owner's manual or under the phone's battery (you must pop the battery out). We'll continue to update the list as new phones are announced. To be the first to know when we've added more phones, subscribe to the CNET Mobile Weekly newsletter. For more information, consult the Food and Drug Administration or the Environmental Working Group.

Radiation

What many cell phone users may not know is that cell phones send electromagnetic waves into users' brains. In fact, every cell phone model sold in the United States has a specific measurement of how much microwave energy from the phone can penetrate the brain. Depending on how close the cell phone antenna is to the head, as much as 60 percent of the microwave radiation is absorbed by and actually penetrates the area around the head, some reaching an inch to an inch-and-a-half into the brain.

To see the radiation emitted by your phone see our Cell phone radiation chart

"This is the first generation that has put relatively high-powered transmitters against the head, day after day," says Dr. Ross Adey, who has worked for industry and government for decades studying microwave radiation, and is one of the most respected scientists in the field. Tests conducted by the ABC show 20/20 have found that some of the country's most popular cell phones can - depending on how they're held - exceed the radiation limit. 20/20 reported that government-testing guidelines are so vague that a phone can pass the Federal Communications Commission's requirements when tested in one position and exceed those maximum levels when held in another position.

Experts say it's particularly hard to predict the long-term impact of a product that's just two decades old, especially since most of the 95 million Americans who now have cell phones began using them in the past five years.

Radiation scare from mobile Phone

2.5 times risk of brain tumours from phone radiation in humans? Early Alzheimers disease from destroyed brain cells? Reports showing no health risk at all? Each month we see more reports about mobile phone radiation effects - but what does it actually mean for you and me? Is there really a health risk? Here is a common-sense personal view from a physician and parent of four children who is also a major user of wireless devices of all kinds.



New reports continue to be published several times a year, suggesting that there might be health risks from mobile phones electromagnetic radiation. Yet other studies show little or no health impact.

There can be no doubt any longer that mobile phone radiation affects living cells. For example research shows that nematode worms exposed to mobile phone radiation produce more eggs, release stress hormones and grow larger.

But what is the effect of mobile phone radiation on people? Could we see a mass court action in twenty years time against telecom companies by people claiming compensation for health damage caused by radiation? It's a possibility, even though at present the clear evidence suggests that if there is any effect on human health at all from use of a mobile phone, the electromagnetic radiation risk is very, very low for the individual user.

However some studies have caused concern in the media. For example, in October 2004, scientists at the Karolinska Institute in Stockholm gave a new warning about mobile phone radiation and brain tumours - accoustic neuromas (published in the journal Epidemiology). They found that long term users of mobile phones were four times as likely to develop growths on the side they held the phone, and twice as likely as non-users to develop these benign non-cancerous growths. They saw no increased risk from mobile phone radiation in those who had used mobile phones for less than 10 years. The study was of 150 mobile phone users, compared to 60 in a control group.

March 2003 another study in the International Journal of Oncology suggested that mobile phone users had a 30% increased risk of brain tumours - mainly accoustic neuromas - which occurred close to the ear used for mobile phone listening. Previous studies had shown that growth of leukaemia cells could be increased dramatically after exposure to mobile phone radiation. Although accoustic neuromas do not metastasise (jump to invade other parts of the body) they can create serious problems if intreated. The early symptoms can be hearing loss, loss of balance or noises in one ear - but all these are very common for many other reasons. Advanced growths can invade other nearby areas, causing pressure on the brain.

What makes these studies difficult to evaluate is that a number of other research studies into mobile phone radiation have not shown the same findings. And the effects may be very different depending on the type of electromagnetic radiation. GSM and GPRS (2.5G) phones use what is known as pulsed radiation. The levels rise and fall very rapidly. 3G phones on the other hand use continuous levels. Some research suggests that pulsed radiation may have a greater effect on cells than constant exposure, which is important because different studies have used different types of radiation - perhaps an explanation for some of the more confusing results.

Mobile phone radiation and health

Mobile phone radiation and health concerns have been raised, especially following the enormous increase in the use of wireless mobile telephony throughout the world (as of August 2005, there were more than 2 billion users worldwide). Mobile phones use electromagneti radiation in the microwave range, and some researchers believe this may be harmful to human health. These concerns have induced a large body of research (both epidemiological and experimental, in non-human animals and in humans). Concerns about effects on health have also been raised regarding other digital wireless systems, such as data communication networks.^[update]

The World Health Organization, based upon the consensus view of the scientific and medical communities, states that cancer is unlikely to be caused by cellular phones or their base stations and that reviews have found no convincing evidence for other health effects. The WHO expects to make recommendations about mobile phones before the end of 2009. Some national radiation advisory authorities have recommended measures to minimize exposure to their citizens.

Radiation

In physics, radiation describes any process in which energy emitted by one body travels through a medium or through space, ultimately to be absorbed by another body.

Non-physicists often associate the word with ionizing radiation (e.g., as occurring in nuclear weapons, nuclear reactors, and radioactive substances), but it can also refer to electromagnetic radiation (i.e., radio waves, infrared light, visible light, ultraviolet light, and X-rays) which can also be ionizing radiation, to acoustic radiation, or to other more obscure processes. What makes it radiation is that the energy radiates (i.e., it travels outward in straight lines in all directions) from the source. This geometry naturally leads to a system of measurements and physical units that are equally applicable to all types of radiation.