Electromagnetic pollution and its health effects on the


Published on

English version of my scientific based presentation on the health effects of EMF and RF upon the biologic organism

  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Electromagnetic pollution and its health effects on the

  1. 1. Electromagnetic Pollution And Its Health Effects On The Organism Ivan Figueroa Otero MD FACS The Great New Scourge Of The 21 St Century Let’s Not Repeat The Mistakes Of Our Past
  2. 2. Purpose• To Promote awareness within the medical community and the general public, of the significant reality of the resulting sanitary effects upon the human organism, associated with exposure to RF and EMF, at present levels.• To describe in detail the documented health effects, published in the medical literature associated with EMF and RF.• To promote a continuous effort of rigorous scientific analysis of the issue by all related academic fields.• From which qualified guidelines and reccomendations will direct the regulating government agencies, to take the right preventive and corrective measures.
  3. 3. The Actual ProblemThe uncontrolled and progressive growth ofmodern communication technologiesassociated with increased industrialization,has exploded into one of the biggest crisis ofpollution the world has seen during the 20thand 21st century. Although unquestionably,necessary, for the economic progress of all societies,its not so clear if the resulting health effects justify,the impending epidemic effects that can arise fromit.
  4. 4. The RF Go Everywhere!
  5. 5. The Chronology Of The Exponential Growth•1939 military RADAR -70 years•1967 radar range (microwave oven) 40 years - •1984 cell phones & towers -30 years •2000 campus-wide Wi-Fi -10 years •2004 Wi-Max -7 years (soon national) •2008 Wi-Fi in schools -3 years •2010 Smart Meters -1 year•RF based Weapons???
  6. 6. The Danger Lies In the Progressive Exposition Of The Population1. Initially was occasional2. + Now Closer to Home 3. More Exposure Earlier inLife Image Courtesy of Dr. Magda Havas Ph.D Trent University
  7. 7. The Problem• But its the invisibility and lack of perception of these waves , that makes them so dangerous to the biologic processes. Ex. Similar to the significant but slow effect of erosion, of a drop of water in a rock.
  8. 8. We Are Riding Killer Waves!
  9. 9. The Most Frequent Culprits Are Right At Home!• TV • Electric Alarm Clocks• cable TV convertors • AC systems• Wireless Phones • Hair Dryers• Fluorescent Lights • Microwaves cooking• Home appliances • Electric Power stations• Computers, laptops • RF and Electric Power towers• Flat Screens • WiFi Systems• Home Electrical Wiring • Smart (???) Meters
  10. 10. The Scientific-Legal Paradox(They are innocent until proven guilty)• 1. Obsolete Scientific Paradigms that stubbornly resist accepting the incoming new scientific evidence. Such as: – The only damage that occurs by non ionizing radiation in biologic tissues is caused by heating. – This paradigm is based by studying the structural alteration of biologic systems without considering the functional effects upon the cell and the organism as a whole.
  11. 11. Other Problems– These are the concepts that have guided the regulating agencies like the FCC, to establish the levels of exposure limits of the RF in the USA.2. The Exponencial Growth of the sourcesradiations. The boom in all technology oriented consumerand industrial equipment has exponentiallymultiplied exposure in record time!
  12. 12. Other Problems3. The lack of clinical human, scientific,statistically validated studies, that couldconfirm decisively, the causal relationshipbetween RF’s and specific disease.4. The “drag your feet reaction” of theindustry, by minimizing the existentepidemiologic, experimental and clinicalevidence, because it fails to meet idealstandards of causal relationship, withoutpausing to consider the effects that will occurlater, when the evidence finally comes out.
  13. 13. Other Problems5. The very lax regulation of US Agency’sstandards of emissions compared to otherindustrial nations.6. Everyone agrees that we need morestudies to evidence the possible healtheffects, yet nobody, meanwhile,considers any preventive measures. Whoshall carry this burden? The Culprit or theVictim?
  14. 14. A Scientific Controversy Arises• The Interphone Study that arises from the growing number of epidemiologic studies world wide, linking brain tumors with cell phone use, forced the industry to promote a study to disprove this evidence.• This controversial and poorly designed study, didnt come out the way they wanted, and after several months of both sides claiming victory, forced the WHO to assign an international group of experts to study all the available data and recommend.
  15. 15. What The WHO Found• Please be aware that ip to that point in time no study had been done to analyze, the effects of cell phones in children, in relation to brain tumors!• In May 2011 a committee of 71 scientific experts invited by the WHO, after reviewing all the previous data, concluded that microwaves as cancerigenous as lead, chloroform and certain pesticides.• No preventive measures recommended!
  16. 16. What The WHO Found• Also concluded (From the Interphone study, the industry had concluded otherwise!) that a definitive increase in brain tumors was determined scientifically, by 40% in the same side of the brain, for cell user of at least 30 minutes/day.• We have to question if the number of 30 minutes reflects the real average time of a frequent user?• ¿What would have been the incedence of tumors in users above 30 minutes?• What would have been the incidence in exposed children at different levels?
  17. 17. The Obsolescence of Present Regulations Standards• The present law was created in 1996 when the cell phone was still in diapers, and wireless systems were not even in use. (No 3G or 4G systems yet)• The power of big company lobbying, is plainly seen under, the regulation of Communication tower zoning, when out of nowhere a sentence forbids the opposition to a placement of towers for health reasons.
  18. 18. The Obsolescence of Present Regulations Standards• Yet, ironically, you may oppose it for reasons that affect property values!• And the emissions safety standards were those that prevented thermal damages to adjacent persons, only.• Don’t you think 18 years is enough time to reconsider a law that regulates a rapidly evolving field?
  19. 19. These are The Danger Zones For Cooking Our Brains! What would tha new zones be for Biologic Effects?
  20. 20. Other Factors Other Than Distance ToConsider For Intensity Of Transmission• In view of fact that the transmission intensity is also affected by: – Call Traffic Density(active users) – # of Providers in nearby Tower – And the new 3G and 4G systems are more powerful than those at time making the 1966 law. Results then that users that live within hundreds (100’s) meters from the towers will be exposed to intensities 1,000 to 10,000,000 X higher than those farther away!
  21. 21. Influence Of The # Of Servers On The Tower And Buildings• The power intensity of transmission will be directly proportional to the # of servers on the tower or building.• Then we must realize that the safety limits established by the FCC for individual towers will be easily and “legally” surpassed!• If we add that new transmissions will be at higher levels when 3G and 4G are fully operational, then we can understand the significant increase of exposure that nearby residents will encounter!
  22. 22. Building Biology Institute, Germany, provided following guidelines for exposure:• <0.1 μW/m2 (0.00001 W μ/cm2) – no concern• 0.1 - 10 μW/m2 (0.00001 to 0.001 μW/cm2) - slight concern• 10 - 1000 μW/m2 (0.001 to 0.1 μW/cm2) - severe concern (USA)• > 1000 μW/m2 ( > 0.1 μW/cm2) - extreme concern
  23. 23. International Radiation Density Limits for GSM1800 Power Density International ExposurePower International Exposure limits (W/m2 limits adopted byDensity adopted by various countries various countries(W/m210 FCC (USA) OET-65, Public 0.095 limit in Switzerland Exposure Guidelines at 1800 MHz 0.09 ECOLOG 1998 (Germany9.2 ICNIRP and EU 0.025 Italy in sensitive recommendation 1998 – areas? Adopted in India 0.02 Russia (since 1970),3 Canada (Safety Code 6, 1997) Bulgaria, Hungary2 Australia 0.001 Austria, Salzburg City1.2 Belgium only0.5 New Zealand 0.0009 BUND 1997 (Germany)0.24 Luxembourg Precaution recommendation only0.1 Poland, China, Italy , Paris 0.00001 New South Wales,0.095 Italy with duration > 4hours Australia
  24. 24. What is The Sar?• Specific Absortion Rate- Its the thermal absorption rate of biologic tissues based on weight within a certain time frame. Its the cooking rate of human flesh, the safety rate for us is very very rare!• All that this rating assures is that our brains will not be cooked with average user rate!• The SAR has no assurance of biologic damage prevention, since the industry denies its existence!
  25. 25. Physical Effects of RF• Because no biologic effects are accepted yet.• A cell phone transmitts 1 to 2 Watts within a frequency range of 824 - 849 MHz (CDMA), 890 - 915 MHz (GSM900) and 1710 – 1780 MHz (GSM1800) (Remember 3G and 4G are stonger!)• 3G transmitts a 2110 – 2170 MHz.
  26. 26. Physical Effects of RF• In the USA, SAR cell phone limit is 1.6W/Kg that would be reached with an exposition time of 6 minutes per day . Since the margin of safety established is between 3 to 4 times the limit, An adult’s limit should not be more than 18 to 24 minutes per day! Are you kidding me?• How about kids here? How about the additional exposure created by wireless sytems?
  27. 27. Limits Of SAR/Country -- Reference to -- Reference to SARRegion / Country SAR measurement Limit limit protocol European ICNIRP Guidelines 2.0 W/Kg in 10g of Europe Specification 1998 tissue ES 59005 (1998) (ICNIRP 1998) Australian Communications Australian Standard 1.6 W/Kg in 1g of Australia Authority (ACA) AS/NZS 2772.1 tissue Standard (ACA RS 1999) Federal Communications American Standard 1.6 W/Kg in 1g of US Commission (FCC) ANSI C95.1 (ANSI tissue Guidelines (FCC 1992) 1997)
  28. 28. Highest Sar’sRank Model SAR (digital) Updated March 9, 2012 1:35 AM PST • 12 Motorola Atrix 4G 1.471 Motorola Bravo 1.59 2 • 12ª RIM BlackBerry Curve 9360 Motorola Droid 22 Global 1.58 1.47 Sony Ericsson • 14 ZTE Score 1.453 Xperia X10 Mini 1.55 • 14ª Motorola Droid Razr 1.45 Pro • 14b Motorola Droid Razr Maxx4 Nokia Astound 1.53 1.455 Motorola Defy 1.52 • 17 RIM BlackBerry Torch 98105a Motorola Grasp 1.52 1.445b ZTE Salute 1.52 • 18 Sony Ericsson Xperia X10 1.438 RIM BlackBerry 1.5 • 18ª RIM BlackBerry Bold 9650 Curve 9350 1.439 Motorola Droid 2 1.49 • 20 RIM BlackBerry Bold 9930 1.3810 HTC Desire 1.4810a HTC Trophy 1.48
  29. 29. # of Bibliographic Scientific References By 1971 •2,300 References
  30. 30. Biologic Effects In Scientific Literature• 1. General Neurological • 11. General Cancer (2) Complaints (12) • 12. Immune Response (2)• 2. Measured Neurological Effects (41) • 13. Effects on Melatonin• 3. Measured Neurological (9) Function (16) • 14. Sperm Quality (4)• 4. Observed Whole Body Response • 15. Miscellaneous Studies (2) (24)• 5. Measured Changes to Body • 16. Epidemiological Phone Chemistry (9) Mast Studies (7)• 6. Measured Cellular Chemistry Alterations (21) • 17. Phone masts effects on animals (3)• 7. Cellular Damage and Cell Death (23)• 8. Embryo Mortality (1)• 9. Blood Brain Barrier (3)• 10. Brain Tumors (15)
  31. 31. More Biologic Effects• Gene expression and DNA • Reproductive Cells Possible R/F effects on the DNA and chromosomes of cells. Possible R/F effects on the• Cell growth, proliferation and tumours chromosomes of sperm, ovum and Studies of abnormal cell proliferation and the failure of apoptosis (programmed cell-death) therefore of fetal development. possibly leading to either benign or • Hormones, proteins and enzymes malignant cancers.• Changes in cellular functions Changes in the chemical signaling Less specific changes in cellular functions. mechanisms of the body.• Blood-Brain Barrier Permeability effects on the barrier • Brain, eye and ear functions surrounding the brain which normally blocks EEG and similar brain research the harmful intrusion of large cells from the blood-supply. measuring sensations, learning• Calcium Efflux ability, reaction times, etc. Changes in the calcium ions within or outside a cell. These are an indicator of the cell • Behaviour making changes - calcium efflux is a trigger- Changes in measurable behavior. signaling mechanism for cells.• ODC (ornithine decarboxylase) • Headaches, eye aches, and ear The release of the chemical ODC from a cell problems is usually an indicator of damage. Symptom-based research • Blood circulation and blood pressure
  32. 32. BLOOD BRAIN BARRIER• Albumin leakage in brain tissue – Damage to microcirculation affecting the blood brain barrier.• Neurons – Alteration in organization with internal structural celullar changes.
  33. 33. Effects of Cell Phone Radiofrequency Signal Exposure on Brain Glucose Metabolism JAMA. 2011;305(8):808-813. Nora D. Volkow, MD Cell On Cell Off
  34. 34. Irreversible Infertility Continuous Prolonged Exposure Experimental studies showed ↓ sperm count and structural changes ₁.• 1. Kumar,S.; Kesari,K.K.; Behari,J.• Influence of microwave exposure on fertility of male rats• Fertil.Steril., 2011, 95, 4, 1500-1502, American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc, United States Similar findings were documented in military personnel exposed to radar₂• 2. Weyandt,T.B.; Schrader,S.M.; Turner,T.W.; Simon,S.D.• Semen analysis of military personnel associated with military duty assignments• Reprod.Toxicol., 1996, 10, 6, 521-528, UNITED STATES
  35. 35. Infertilility• In vivo exposure of sperm to a laptop connected to the internet through a wireless system, diminishes motility and promotes DNA fragmentation without thermal effects₁• 1. Use of laptop computers connected to internet through Wi-Fi decreases human sperm motility and increases sperm DNA fragmentation, Conrado Avendaño, M.S., Fertil Steril. 2012 Jan;97(1):39-45.e2. Epub 2011 Nov 23
  36. 36. DNA Effects• Activates c-myc gene ↑“Bad” Heat Shock Protein (HSP)- This increase is a reflection the level of cellular stress , associated to autoimmune , degenerative diseases and to those related to Prions.₁• Activates c-myc, c-fos, c-jun genes associated with the mechanism of apoptosis of malignant cells₁• 1. Effects of mobile phone radiation on reproduction and development in Drosophila melanogaster• David Weisbrot , Hana Lin , Lin Ye , Martin Blank , Reba Goodman• Journal of Cellular Biochemistry. Volume 89, Issue 1, 2003. Pages: 48-55
  37. 37. • • •Effect on Heat Shock Proteins (HSP’s) •Over-expression of (HSPs) •Inhibit natural programmed •cell death (apoptosis) •Normal Cell •(Human/ Animal) •cel l s t hat shoul d have ‘ com mitted •sui cide’ continu tolive. e •Normal Cell •Cancer Cell•Consistent with the 2-3-fold ↑in incidence of a rare forms of cancer•
  38. 38. DNA Effects• Exposure of tissue culture of rat’s brain cells to RF of 10.715 GHz with a (SAR) 0.725 W/kG /6 hours generated significant structural and functional changes₂• 2. Karaca,E, The genotoxic effect of radiofrequency waves on mouse brain, J.Neurooncol Jan 2012, Vol. 106 P 53-58
  39. 39. •DNA Damage•Single and double strand breaks observed in•DNA from microwave exposure at levels below •Prof. Henry Lai •the current FCC exposure standard. •University of Washington •1995, Diem et al. 2005 When Damage to DNA > Rate of DNA repaired, there is the possibility of retaining mutations and initiating cancer
  40. 40. Neurodevelopmental Changes• In-utero exposure to rats post natally showed changes in hiperactivity and memory compared to controls , that were associated to neuronal deprograming ₁• 1. Fetal Radiofrequency Radiation Exposure From 800-1900 Mhz-Rated Cellular Telephones Affects Neurodevelopment and Behavior in Mic Tamir S. Aldad• Whole body exposure showed significant alterations in protein sets (proteomes) of the cerebellum, hypocampus and frontal lobes₂• 2. Brain proteome response following whole body exposure of mice to mobile phone or wireless DECT base radiation Electromagnetic Biology and Medicine, Adamantia F. Fragopoulou, 00(0): 1–25, 2011
  41. 41. •Neurodegenerative Diseases: •Alzheimer’s , Motor neuron, Parkinsons disease 4 times incidence of Alzheimer’s disease (Hakansson et al 2003) 3 times amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) (Savitz et al1998) Brain•Cells concerning learning, •I,Melatonin production •memory, movement damaged •(Protects from brain damage) •( Salford et al 2003) (Burch 1999a , Wood et al 1998) •Alzheimer’s , Parkinsons disease
  42. 42. Behavioral Changes In Children• After prolongued prenatal and postnatal exposure, significant behavioral problems appeared in children by 7 years of age₁• 1. Cell phone use and behavioural problems in young children. Divan HA, Kheifets L, Obel C, Olsen J. J Epidemiol Community Health. 2012 Jun;66(6):524-9.
  43. 43. Risks During Pregancy• The vulnerability of both fetus and mother are due to the fact that RF have been shown to penetrate the placental and blood brain barrier of both mother and fetus.
  44. 44. Skin Manifestations• Erythematous rashes – Associated with burning, itchiness, nodularity. Histologic structural changes have been documented..• A study implies that RF potentiate persons usual allergic reactions₁• 1. International Archives of Allergy and Immunology (2002;129:348–50)
  45. 45. Auditory Effects Tinnitus or Residual Sounds• ↑ sensitivity sounds, persistent ringing or buzzing, ↓Hearing.• Internal sounds,clics etc.- The Frey effect created by expansion of vestibular tissues₁• 1. Levy, Barry S.; Wagner, Gregory R.; Rest, Kathleen M. (2005). Preventing occupational disease and injury. American Public Health Association. p. 428. ISBN 978-0-87553-043-7
  46. 46. Alteration in the Ocular Lens Definite structural changes have been shown in the ocular lens of both humans and animals, after prolongued exposures al levels₂.• 1. Non-Thermal Electromagnetic Radiation Damage to Lens Epithelium• Elvira Bormusov1 Rappaport Faculty of MedicineThe Open Ophthalmology Journal, 2008, 2, 102-106• 2. Surv Ophthalmol. 1988 Nov-Dec;33(3):200-10.• Cataracts induced by microwave and ionizing radiation.• Lipman RM, Tripathi BJ, Tripathi RC.
  47. 47. Melatonin Reduction in Rats₁ This reduction has been associated with significant effects on stress, antioxidative mechanisms, in apoptosis of malignant cells and in alterations of the Circadian rhythms.• 1. maida,K.; Taki,M.; Watanabe,S.; Kamimura,Y.; Ito,T.; Yamaguchi,T.; Ito,N.; Shirai,T.• The 1.5 GHz electromagnetic near-field used for cellular phones does not promote rat liver carcinogenesis in a medium-term liver bioassay, Jpn.J.Cancer Res. 1998
  48. 48. • •Melatonin Reduction•Powerful antioxidant, antidepressant and immune•system enhancer that regulates circadian rhythm.• • •Prolonged RF • •exposure from ↑Melatonin production •cell phones/ cell Tower Sites ( Burch 1997, 2002, Graham C 2000 ) •arthritis •cancer •miscarriage •increased eye stress •renal impairment •I DNA damage •chronic fatigue, depression •I childhood leukemia •sleep disturbance •cardiac, reproductive and neurological diseases
  49. 49. Prof. Lennart Hardell Dept. of Oncology •Increase in Cancer risk University Hospital• • Orebro, Sweden •↑ Mobile phone use >10 years doubles •risk of brain cancer. Risk is highest for •ipsilateral (on the same side of the head •where the instrument is held) exposure •↑Cell phone use also increases risk of glioma, acoustic neuroma, •salivary gland tumors , uveal melanoma, facial nerve tumors, skin, •blood, testicular and breast cancer Children and teenagers before age of 20 - , Five times more likely to get brain cancer if they use cell phones.
  50. 50. Reported Short Term Effects Of EMF• Headaches • Memory deficits• Insomnia • Behavior, mood• Hormonal Imbalance alterations• Learning Disability • Dizziness• Concentration • Nausea Dysfunction • Irritability• ADHD • Loss of Appetite• Depression
  51. 51. School WIFI Zones A Time Bomb With A Very Short Fuse• Children are a very high risk group for brain tumors because:• A rapidly developing nervous system associated with a fast multiplying population of immature cells.• And a thin skull protection, allowing deeper penetration of RF waves into the brain.• Continuous exposure to RF’s during the school class schedule.
  52. 52. School WIFI Zones A Time Bomb With A Very Short Fuse• Which will expose them to an average of 6 hours/day for 12 years.• And since the 10 year increase rate of brain cancer in adults increased by 40% after a 10 year exposure for 30 minutes/day, we have acknowledge higher risks in them.• That is why statistical studies project a 5X increse in Brain Cancer risk in children!₁ 1. Aydin et al. Mobile Phone Use and Brain Tumors in Children andAdolescents: A Multicenter Case–Control Study. Journal of the National CancerInstitute. 2011;103:1–13.
  53. 53. Degree Of Penetration Of Microwaves At Different Ages₁ Source: Computerized Brain graphics courtesy of Professor Om P. Gandhi, Univ. of Utah
  54. 54. If we dont want the antennas close to our schools? Image Courtesy of Dr. Magda Havas Ph.D Trent University
  55. 55. Why do we bring them in to our school rooms? Image Courtesy of Dr. Magda Havas Ph.D Trent University
  56. 56. Its The Same BS With Different Names•Similarities •Similarities•frequency 2.45 GHz •frequency 2.45 GHz•Wave length 12 cm •Wave length 12 cm Differences Differences•Sealed •Open• Continuous waves •Pulsatile waves•Intensity higher •Intensity lower but always on Image Courtesy of Dr. Magda Havas Ph.D Trent University
  57. 57. The Wi-Fi Waves Are Pulsatile And Are MoreHarmful Because The Average Emission Fails To Reflect The Real Exposure Effect Máximum Level Average Level Average = Maximum Image Courtesy of Dr. Magda Havas Ph.D Trent University
  58. 58. This Prolonged Exposure Creates The Question,What will be the long term effects on Children? 6 hrs/d x 5 d/wk x 40 weeks = 1,200 hrs/yr. 12,000 hrs 10 years Image Courtesy of Dr. Magda Havas Ph.D Trent University
  59. 59. If These Data Came from The InterPhone Study in2011, What Hould Have Been The Impact On Childrens Brain’s During Those 10 years? After 10 Years ↑40 % Gliomas ?????????????? Adults 1,640 hrs 12,000 hrs Image Courtesy of Dr. Magda Havas Ph.D Trent University
  60. 60. Weakest Part Of Link in Children
  61. 61. Distribución WIFI en PR
  62. 62. The Incidence Of Electrosensitivity (EMF Allergy) Will Exponentially Increase With Degree Of Exposure Electro Sensitive Level of Exposure Image Courtesy of Dr. Magda Havas Ph.D Trent University
  63. 63. Symptoms Associated with Electromagnetic Hypersensitivity₁Sensation of heat, burning de ardor in Frequent Headachesthe adjacent region to phone osource.Dryness of mouth, throat and eyes. Nausea persistenteCongestionof all upper airway Dental and jaw hypersensitivitychannels.Alteration of normal mental Muscle and joint painsprocesses, dizzy spellsFatigue and general malaise Increased heart beat and irregularity 1. Although the literature differs in the findings the consensus and the WHO, fail to accept its relationship to EMF.
  64. 64. The School Rooms Become RF Showers By The Constant Emissions Of Routers Over Them Plus The Emissions of the Computers( Wi Fi =WhyFrys!) Image Courtesy of Dr. Magda Havas Ph.D Trent University
  65. 65. Lets Be Aware That When The # of Units and Density of Pupils, Connected To The RouterIncrease, The Intensity of the Signal Increases Image Courtesy of Dr. Magda Havas Ph.D Trent University
  66. 66. Symptoms Reported In Children Exposed to School WIFI₁ • * ADHD• * Headaches * Transient skin rashes (disappearat recess) * Nausea - Vértigo (disappears after school.) * School Anxiety ( recent origin) * Visual and Auditory * Night sweats Distortions (localizing, volume * Insomnia(microwaves alter and tonality) melatonin levels ) * Increased heart rate and Report symptoms irregularity (Tachycardia) to: info@safeschool.ca * Memory loss (Recent origin) 1. http://www.safeschool.ca/
  67. 67. Can We Then Conclude That School WiFi Systems Are safe?• Most of the European Community doesnt, and have postponed their establishment until further evidence show they are safe.• Why not give the same opportunity to our children?• Why not use wired systems if they are the most efficient of the two?• Are we not repeating the same mistakes of the past we did with nicotine and cancer and lead and nerve damage?• Shouldn’t we be studying more in detail the emerging evidence of the epidemiology of brain tumors in children as the exposure years increase?
  68. 68. ¿What Are WiMAX?• These are new wireless system technology that promise to increase the geographic extension of.• So far they have shown effectivity up to 4-5 miles, but they are trying to extend its range by increasing the strenght of the signals to 4G and the tower density.
  69. 69. What Are WiMAX?• These is an Executive branch project of the USA, that plans to establish a nationwide broadband system to insure national security.• Although no one can argue with that intention, we must then ask, What is wrong in doing it by fiber optic based networks?• Arent wireless systems more prone to security risks and privacy issues?
  70. 70. Questions That Arise From This Review• If the Wimax is just a more powerful WiFI, with a wider range, considering the risks previously discussed here. Will not then its effects be more significative, being the fact that a larger population sample will be exposed for a longer period of time? (Are we not talking here about a massive population experiment, since no previous data has determined the safety of?)
  71. 71. Let’s No Monkey Around!
  72. 72. Let’s Act In Solidarity
  73. 73. Conclusions• 1. Although the present scientific data fails to clinch the final link between EMF and disease patterns, the growing ,emerging experimental and clinical evidence has a tendency to favor this connection.• 2. It’s from these evidence that the need to take mitiganting and preventive measures arises, before the final verdict comes trough.• 3. For these actions to arise from our government, we need the support of all individuals, professional and community based organizations to lobby towards this effort. This effort will be kindled by massive educational efforts at all levels.• 4. We must specially focus our efforts in the highest risk populations, which are pregnant women, children , and the elderly.
  74. 74. Reccomendations• Establish an inmediate moratorium on school WiFi Systems and WiMax for extensive populations.• Review and update the 1966 FCC Communications law in accordance of present evidence. Specially the criteria for Tower locations and levels of emissions.• Create a biologic tissue risk emission rate simialr to the SARS (BSARS=Biologic Specific Absorption Rate)• Promote the use of Fiber Optics for the development of the national broadband effort.