Free Subscription - The World's Most Popular Natural Health Newsletter
 
 
POSTED BY
Dr. Mercola
January 17 2008
49416 Views
ARTICLE TOOLS
Email a Friend
Print Article
Save this Article
Bookmark & Share

Online Shopping Click Here!
Share your stories here!
 « Previous Article     Next Article  »   
Why Are the Birds Disappearing?

Tens of millions of the most common birds in North America have disappeared, and their absence is signaling a silent alarm bell about the state of our ecosystem.

According to a report by the National Audubon Society, the numbers of some species of birds have plummeted by 60 percent to 80 percent.

The video above explains some of the dramatic environmental disruptions that are contributing to the decimation of the bird population, and what their disappearance means to the future of our planet.

Dr. MercolaDr. Mercola's Comments:
Like the tragedy of the disappearing honeybees, the disappearance of millions and millions of birds means that something has gone terribly wrong in our environment.

There are many likely contributing factors for this observation, everything from pesticides to urban sprawl and pollution, but there is an extremely pervasive, silent killer out there that hardly anyone is mentioning: Information-carrying radio waves.

These radio waves are coming from your cell phones and other wireless technologies, and they have increased exponentially in the past three or four years alone.

It’s already known that birds living near mobile phone base stations do not breed well. It’s also known that exposure to these frequencies causes disorientation in migratory birds.

Now, at the end of 2007 there were 4 billion cell phones on the planet. What this means is that even if you are one of the few who decides not to use a cell phone, you are being exposed to information-carrying radio waves at unprecedented levels, and so are all of the birds, bugs and wildlife that live among us.

According to Dr. George Carlo, who is clearly the world’s leading expert on cell phone safety, “The background level of information-carrying radio waves has now reached saturation point.”

In other words, they’re everywhere.

And when we talk about these radio waves you have to understand that there is no safe level of exposure. This is completely different even from electromagnetic fields (EMFs), which are well-known to cause brain cancer, tumor growth, and maybe even Alzheimer’s disease.

But according to Dr. Carlo, we have built up certain defenses against EMFs, which are actually two parts: the magnetic field and the electric field. We have been exposed to a magnetic influence simply because of gravity, while lightning and other natural sources have exposed us to some level of electric fields.

As a result, we can be exposed to low levels of EMFs and perhaps not be affected. But this is not so with radio frequencies (RF) and information-carrying radio waves.

“We do not have any controls that make the information-carrying radio wave manageable from a public health point of view,” says Dr. Carlo.

And this is a major red flag. According to Dr. Carlo:

“Here is why we have a problem … Before 1930, almost none of this exposure existed and up until about the 1980s, most of the exposure that had to do with information-carrying radio waves … only occurred high in the sky.

Like your television, your radio, the signal would go from a big antenna on top of the mountain to the antenna on top of your house and then it would be hardwired back down into your television for example. Information-carrying radio waves were not at the street, but this wonderful invention called the cell phone brought the information-carrying radio waves to the street.”

The huge explosion in cell phone use and their corresponding information-carrying radio waves is causing the following problems:
  • Damaging cell membranes
  • Decreasing intracellular communication by disrupting microtubular connections that allow biophotons to communicate between cells
  • Increasing deposits of heavy metals into your cells, which increases intracelluar production of free radicals and can radically decrease cellular production of energy thus making you incredibly fatigued
First the Honeybees, Now the Birds, Next … Humans?
 
It would be naïve to assume that the bees and the birds are the only living creatures being impacted here. Perhaps because they are smaller, or more sensitive to the radio waves and changes in frequencies, they are being tragically impacted right now.

But who, or what, will be next?

The only real solution to this major problem is to move our culture away from wireless and back to wires.

Is this going to happen? No way. The telecommunication industry has even more power than the pharmaceutical industry, and there is no way they are going to let that happen.

Well, I took some steps in my own life and when I moved I had my new home completely renovated with wired CAT-5 cables -- so I have no wireless connections at all.

For you and your family, I would suggest keeping cell phone use to a bare minimum and using a speakerphone feature when you do use it. If you must keep your conversation more private, a NON-BlueTooth headset can be used.

And please, whatever you do, do not allow your children to use cell phones, as their skulls are far less dense than yours, and their brains are far more susceptible to damage from information-carrying radio waves.

I believe that one day it will be shown that using cell phones is far more dangerous than smoking cigarettes ever was, and I will reveal the details of why this is so in my next book, coming in 2009.
 « Previous Article     Next Article  »   
Did you find this article interesting?  Interesting Not Useful
Community Comments ( 83 )
 Comment on this Article
  
  
Katie_Beth
 [ Joined on 08/07 ] [ Posted on January 3, 2008 ]
24 Points        
   
 
This user is BELOW novice level and all their comments need to be reviewed with great caution.
This post was deleted because it violated our Terms Of Use :
Abuse, harass, humiliate, deceive, threaten, impersonate, intimidate or engage in any other abusive behaviors with those who comment on Mercola.com.
 [ Reply ]
Mercola
  
BeyondOrganic
 		[ Joined on 06/06 ]  [ Posted on January 5, 2008]
14 Points        
   
Savvy User
  Mercola
LOL!!!  Thanks Jonny, your comment made me laugh!

(I don't know who thumbed Katie Beth down, but I'm going to thumb her up because I don't think her comment deserves negatives!  The whole point system here is rather ridiculous period, especially since people thumb people down for no legitimate reasons much of the time and it's all not very fair if you ask me and only makes people who care feel bad.)   
Mercola
  
BeyondOrganic
 		[ Joined on 06/06 ]  [ Posted on January 6, 2008]
9 Points        
   
Savvy User
  Mercola
I also feel safer having my cell phone on me Katie.  Mace, an axe and a gun would be a good addition as well.  Although my kids may kill each other or me first.
Mercola
  
BeyondOrganic
 		[ Joined on 06/06 ]  [ Posted on January 6, 2008]
-1 Points        
   
Savvy User
  Mercola
I was kidding Jonny..... but since you mentioned it, I do believe guns can be very dangerous around kids.  I have two very young and wild boys, and I have no doubt that if a loaded gun got into one of their hands, it is very possible someone could get killed.  By the way, we know a couple who's son is now dead today from his daddy's weapon.  He was 7.   
Mercola
  
Gray Stroke
 		[ Joined on 01/07 ]  [ Posted on January 17, 2008]
1 Points        
   
Apprentice User
  Mercola

I'd like to help you out w/your self defense/protection concerns. First there are about 3 good books from Amazon.com on CHL's concealed hand gun license and the responsibility that goes with it. There are legal procedures and point of consideration that one should be mentally armed with for a sound personal court room defense and selecting and attorney. Now the pistol I would recommend for a lady is called the 'judge'.

Here is a link that gives good reason for consideration according to one's personal choice and life style/dwelling/values.. www.gunsandammomag.com/.../blog071807

Also the vendor's web site.. www.taurususa.com/.../taurus-theJudge-video.cfm

I will be getting one for my wife she is not an enthusiast shooter as myself and I prefer a FN57 or Ruger 9mm w/ hydra-shock rounds. So I share this with you because it has many pluses... it's not costly, it can alternate between 410 and 45 cal. rounds, revolvers fire all the time versus semi's potential for hang ups, the firing report will or should be a cause for the perpetrator to consider another line of work or another home to break into.

Also I would recommend joining a local gun club (if one is near by) for one year in order to have access to practice and get very familiar with the weapon. Then the confidence level will be very high.

Hope this helps you and many more out there. Please I do not want to get into a philosophical discussion about guns. This only applies to those that may consider this for personal protection if you have an aversion for such direction then please look for your solutions that are accommodating to your style.

Mercola
  
zoarian
 		[ Joined on 06/06 ]  [ Posted on January 17, 2008]
8 Points        
   
Novice User
  Mercola

I had a cell several years ago when i was in outside sales, i got rid of it when i left there, but for a minute or two i went into fear, thinking i might need it for emergencies, then i realized thats exactly what 'they' want me to do is go into fear, i did just fine w/out it before. I got rid of it anyway and have never needed it and the times i did get stranded was brief; someone always was always there to help me. I also dont have health insurance, i dont buy into that fear either; i just dont buy what they're selling period. I have risen above the fear factor and when you do all is well; I employ radical trust and  thats how i live my life..But i am not criticizing anyone for having one, but yes they need to limit their use of it to emergencies and stop all this constant chatter on it, i mean i cant go anywhere and relax like in a coffee shop etc, w/out someone chattin' it up...

Mercola
  
banEMR
 		[ Joined on 10/07 ]  [ Posted on January 17, 2008]
3 Points        
   
Novice User
  Mercola

Katie_Beth,

This is the same excuse heard all the time.  But this will NOT solve the problem of cell towers that are being installed everywhere.  

Why not have "satellite phones" that have a single feature -- a 911 call that consists of a single instantaneous signal from the phone to the satellite that indicates a car breakdown or other problem and the nearest highway patrol office is notified so they can send a cruiser to determine what the problem may be?  

In that way you have your "safety" valve for those rare "emergencies" without endangering the health of every living thing while allowing the infrastructure to be built by those who wish to "microchip" and monitor the population 24/7.  

If you have a cell phone, you are STILL a part of the problem, even if you say you only have one for an "emergency".  You're "funding" not only your own demise but that of other humans, animals, plants, birds, insects, etc.

Go do your homework to get a glimpse at what you are supporting by giving your money to the cellular companies:

Major Electromagnetic Mind Control Projects

Leading Edge International Research Group

www.surfingtheapocalypse.com/intelligence2.html

educate-yourself.org/.../mctotalcontrol12jul02.shtml

Microchip Implants, Mind Control, and Cybernetics

By Rauni-Leena Luukanen-Kilde, M.D.

Former Chief Medical Officer of Finland

educate-yourself.org/.../implantsmcandcybernetics06dec00.shtml

Total Population Control

By Nicholas Jones

educate-yourself.org/.../mctotalcontrol12jul02.shtml

Mercola
  
Knobby
 		[ Joined on 11/07 ]  [ Posted on January 20, 2008]
       
   
This user is BELOW novice level and all their comments need to be reviewed with great caution.
  Mercola

I agree, we should probably use cell phones only for emergencies. In this way they may save our life or the life of someone else.

Mercola
  
Pat Ormsby
 		[ Joined on 06/06 ]  [ Posted on January 25, 2008]
       
   
Savvy User
  Mercola

Dear Katie,

I did not get to see you post before it was deleted, but it is obvious you struck a chord among many here.  From the comments, it sounds like you fear having your "life line" taken away.  I don't think you need to worry about that for the foreseeable future.  "Reduce your use" is the real message.  If that upsets you, you should take a good long look at your addiction.  Addiction to cell phones has a biological basis in addition to the clear psychological ones (Kositsky et al., 2001).

We are facing very hard times.  You want to face these times in as rational a manner as possible.  (BeyondOrganic's suggestion of mace, and axe and a gun made me smile.)  If you have not tried EFT, I suggest it.  Please open your heart as well to the victims of this technology.  I think there should be places with cell phone service and other places without it, with respect for the needs of people who do not want to be irradiated, and knowledge that most areas of the world should not be irradiated so as to protect our environment.  To do otherwise is to turn up the heat under the frying pan.

Just my opinion.

  
  
Paul Doyon
 [ Joined on 11/06 ] [ Posted on January 4, 2008 ]
10 Points        
   
 
Apprentice User
Dear Frans,

 I said "it could very well be the microwaves (and when you combine chemtrails, well) that are killing the birds." Sometimes though, we do indeed need to jump to conclusions. It is called the Precautionary Principle, my friend, and if this principle was used more prudently, we would and could indeed save a lot of people (and wildlife) from unnecessary suffering.

 When I first realized what was indeed making me sick, I found a place up in the mountains of Japan which did not have any cell phone (or television) reception. One thing we immediately noticed were the number of frogs around our cabin. Interestingly, we could not find frogs in most other places in Japan - areas with mid to high levels of electrosmog. And we did search!!!

 After I healed to a certain degree and realized I couldn't live in Japan anymore, I traveled to a number of places looking for a place to live. One of those places was in Auroville, India. Auroville will not allow cell phone towers on their land, and the level of microwave radiation was the lowest I have found anywhere.

 One thing that was very evident from the first day I stayed in Auroville was the fact that when I went to sleep at night I could hear the sounds of insects and when I woke up in the morning I could hear the songs of birds. I also slept so well when I was there. When I rode a bicycle around the grounds I could see beautiful butterflies everywhere. Nowhere else in India did I experience this!

 (I was back in Japan this summer, and another thing I noticed was that the usually summer sound of cicadas was mysteriously and eerily absent this year. Hmm! I wonder why!)

 I certainly do believe that microwaves are indeed playing a role in the disappearance of bees, frogs, and of course, birds, and there is lots of scientific evidence to back all this up - though, of course, I don't discount the other factors either
 [ Reply ]
Mercola
  
Paul Doyon
 		[ Joined on 11/06 ]  [ Posted on January 4, 2008]
8 Points        
   
Apprentice User
  Mercola
(though the not-mentioned Chemtrails and GM food is most certainly also probably playing a role). Canada has pretty lax laws when it comes to the legal level of ambient EMR - I think 10 times more lax than the USA, which are also pretty lax (according to the BioInitiative anyway). Come on, even the WHO states that we are now being exposed to thousands of times the amount of EMR we would get from the Sun or the Earth. It is completely unnatural and it has been shown - in numerous scientific studies - to be causing all kinds of illnesses in human beings -  so it doesn't take much imagination to think what it is doing to wildlife!

 We are the Canaries in the Coal Mine - just because others don't feel it, doesn't mean that it isn't dangerous and they are not being affected!

 Regards,

 paul

Mercola
  
Reverend Alan
 		[ Joined on 12/07 ]  [ Posted on January 17, 2008]
3 Points        
   
Novice User
  Mercola

Beyond Organic wrote: I do believe guns can be very dangerous around kids.  I have two very young and wild boys, and I have no doubt that if a loaded gun got into one of their hands, it is very possible someone could get killed.

ALAN: When a gun changes from a devise of protection and defense into a weapon of murder or killing, it is people who change the gun from one thing into the other. The problem is not the gun, but the "wild boys". And should they get hold of a gun and kill someone it would not be the fault of the gun. I believe that courts are prosecuting parents today who do not secure their guns when they children play with them and cause harm. What else, put the gun in prison?  

  
  
Paul Doyon
 [ Joined on 11/06 ] [ Posted on January 4, 2008 ]
6 Points        
   
 
Apprentice User
Dear Paul

'Jumping to conclusions' is a complete misreading of the Precautionary Principle.

The Precautionary Principle assumes the development of normal scientific evidence-based conclusions using scientific methods.  

It merely says: "When the outcome of some change is potentially catastrophic, then we should tend on the side of caution -- and take action to prevent the possible catastrophe, even if all the science is not in, and the accumulated evidence is not yet totally conclusive."

It doesn't suggest we abandon the scientific method - nor does is promote the idea that there is an alternative, or intuitive path to understanding.

With the Precautionary Principle, there is no 'jumping' to anything -- just normal evolutionary evidence-based scientific analysis  -- with the suggestion that precautionary actions should be taken earlier than we normally would, if the outcome was not potentially catastrophic.

As far as I can see, the bird/frog/bee/cicada-loss theories have no evidence-based links to microwaves.  These disappearances could equally be linked to the use of plastics -- or viruses -- or changes in habitat -- or the higher levels of CO2 in the atmosphere -- or to gasoline-based air-pollution.  Maybe GM is involved, and maybe it isn't.  

We can't decide such matters on intuitive guesses.  There may be a connection between birds and microwaves, but I have yet to see any evidence of this.  

The importance of not coming to premature conclusions is a  problem well-known in discussions of scientific method.  When you come to your conclusion first, and then begin to look for evidence, you will always find what you are looking for.  And you will always be misled, because you will also miss the true causal relationships.

If people like you are convinced that microwaves are killing birds/frogs/whatever then the scientific solution is easy, and will only
 [ Reply ]
Mercola
  
Paul Doyon
 		[ Joined on 11/06 ]  [ Posted on January 4, 2008]
5 Points        
   
Apprentice User