Dr. Mercola February 16 2008 44,072 views
A study suggests that using a cell phone before going to bed could cause insomnia, headaches and confusion. It can also cut your amount of deep sleep, interfering with your body‘s ability to refresh itself.
35 men and 36 women were exposed either to radiation equivalent to that received when using a cell phone, or given "sham" exposure as an experimental control. The ones who were actually exposed to radiation took longer to enter the deeper stages of sleep, and spent less time in the deepest one.
Researcher Professor Bengt Arnetz said that, "The study strongly suggests that mobile phone use is associated with specific changes in the areas of the brain responsible for activating and coordinating the stress system."
The radiation may also disrupt production of the hormone melatonin, which controls your body‘s internal rhythms.
I’ve written more about this subject lately as I believe the cellular phone industry’s fervent denial of the hazards of information-carrying radio waves -- emitted by cell phones, base stations and Wi-Fi -- is the mirror image of where Big Tobacco was in the 1920’s. And, we all know how that story ended. If you try to claim smoking is harmless today, people will laugh you out of the building.
I am also currently finishing my next book on this very topic and it should be published in spring or summer of 2009.
What I have learned is that just as the ill effects of smoking, it may take a decade before the visible effects of your cell phone use becomes apparent. By then it will be too late for many of our young people who were given cell phones at an early age, and have been bombarded by information-carrying radio waves for most of their lives.
It may help, however, if you begin to take notice of some of the earlier effects, rather than wait for brain cancer to appear before you begin taking precautions to limit your exposure.
For example, these common illnesses and ailments have all been scientifically linked to cell phone information carrying radio waves:
Why Can Your Cell Phone Ruin Your Sleep?
It’s important to understand that the danger from most land-based portable phones, cell phones and WiFi routers is NOT from the magnetic radiation or the microwave carrier wave, for which typical SAR ratings are given on phones.
This SAR rating indicates the thermal effect emitted by your phone, which is totally insignificant, unless you have massive exposures like you might expect in a microwave oven. This is why the discussion about lowering the allowable SAR is pointless, as it will NOT make cell phones safer.
Instead, nearly all your biological damage comes from the modulated signals that are carried ON the carrier microwave.
These modulated information-carrying radio waves resonate (vibrate) in the same frequencies as many of your cellular receptors; frequencies of a few to a few hundred cycles per second. These are biological frequencies and, unlike ionizing radiation (X-rays), which you can tolerate in small doses, there is NO dose of these radio waves that are safe. The cause damage at ANY dose, not matter how low.
It is an interesting concept but it is called zero threshold and that is precisely what we have with cell phones, most portable phones, and WiFi routers.
These information carrying radio waves can stimulate, or confuse your cellular receptors causing a whole cascade of pathological consequences that can culminate in fatigue, sleeplessness, anxiety, neurological decline, and ultimately cancers.
An Example of Serious Non-Thermal RF Damage
Last year, an AT&T worker in Alaska spent two hours working on a cellular phone base station, which was accidentally left on. Once he got home a whole range of symptoms developed, from insomnia, to blood in his stool, to excruciating joint pain.
To make a long story short, the man has set a precedent by winning a Workers’ Compensation claim for 100 percent disability due to his exposure. Granted, getting within 100 feet of a base station antenna will submit you to a much greater exposure of these information-carrying radio waves than what you experience talking on your cell phone. However, the point is that this was still a non-thermal radio wave exposure, which is claimed to be safe.
How You Can Put Safety First
The best way to protect yourself would be to simply not use a cell phone and revert back to a corded phone. At the very least I would urge you to not let your kids use them or severely limit their use. Their developing nervous systems and thinner skulls are simply too vulnerable to cell phone damage.
Obviously a corded phone is not at all practical if you are in your car or out of your home so other things you can do to increase your level of safety include:
You had the "aha!" reaction, too! I remember my aha, about ten years ago. I thank my lucky stars I had it then. (I sleep wonderfully.) Thank you for writing! Dr. Mercola's ear piece will be a good start, ;-)
good lord... are people still that ignorant?
Bless your heart, Mary!
Uncle Russ, you are ignoring the masses of texters who aim it at the non-user.
Pat
Ok, I got to tell you. I am a computer engineer who develops systems for cell phone infrastructure. It would be nice if the good Dr. put in some sources on his comments. A few posts I have read now are far from factual or accurate. It puts his general credibility in question.
There is a huge factual error in his description and the crux of his argument. Here is the text in question:
"These modulated information-carrying radio waves resonate (vibrate) in the same frequencies as many of your cellular receptors; frequencies of a few to a few hundred cycles per second. These are biological frequencies and, unlike ionizing radiation (X-rays), which you can tolerate in small doses, there is NO dose of these radio waves that are safe. The cause damage at ANY dose, not matter how low."
The modulated signals do NOT 'resonate' at a few to a few hundred cycle per second. Let me put that in terms some are familiar with. A few cycles per second is 5Hz. A few hundred is 500Hz. A few hundred Hertz is about the frequency of your home stereo sub woofer. It is audible and WAY WAY to slow to carry any sort of voice data. 5 Hz is even slower and deeper. He might as well have said that listening to music or watching a movie at home is NOT safe, at any dose!
If the good Dr. is going to give some advice and make a statement for readers who trust the accuracy, it may be best if he actually knew what he was talking about. My advice...stay away from the technical advice.
Wonder how long this post will last...
David, good observation and thanks for sharing.
I too have noticed that many good folk, in the midst of making some very good cases for/against certain things, completely lose their standing with people by making technically inaccurate statements. Or perhaps some inconsistency in their reasoning or a gap between what they say and what they actually do.
It's true that most of the general public will not notice these things... but those who do (esp if they are looking for a way to avoid what is being presented) are often only too happy to use such things to argue that because the speaker made one mistake then all they say is not credible, trustworthy, thorough and ought not to be heeded.
For them to take such a position is of course completely illogical. But we are so well trained into such thinking by our culture that to presume readers and listeners will ignore such faulty logic would be foolish. So it would seem wiser to avoid technicalities where we can... and where we can't to make sure we've at least had them reviewed by someone in the know.
And speaking of getting technical... see my post about the use of the word 'resonate'...