Resonance, creatures of frequency
More and more people are suffering from health problems such as dizziness, headaches, cardiac arrhythmia or insomnia.
Stress is often cited as the cause.
The following documentary from 2012 shows that such symptoms are often linked to completely different, less well-known causes.
The film takes us on a journey from our origins to the 1990s, when the expansion of wireless communication technology began.
Since then, humanity has been immersed in an ocean of artificial frequencies.
To the naked eye, the planet appears to be the same, but on a cellular level, it is the
biggest change that life on Earth has undergone.
The effects should not be underestimated!
Kla.TV has translated and dubbed this movie for you in German.
Scientists, industry representatives, doctors and those affected have their say.
We hope you enjoy watching the following documentary film by James Russell: "RESONANCE - Creatures of Frequency"!
In the mid-1980s, about three percent of people in most countries used cell phones;
today, almost one hundred percent use cell phones.
If they are 19 or 20 years old, they have used the cell phone for 10 years, and we have no idea what the risk is.
We are immersed in an ocean of electromagnetic radiation. It surrounds us everywhere.
Invisible, we can't see it. But we know it's there.
Every time you use your cell phone, you know she's there.
It is extremely difficult to turn back the clock. Impossible.
But we need to be aware of these health risks so that we can take safety precautions.
Right now, the WHO statement on this is that it is a reality.
We were not the only cancer clusters around a mast, there are many cancer clusters around masts.
Most of the cancers that are coming are not here yet.
How could we possibly think we are safe when we irradiate our brains with microwaves?
We just don't quite understand what we're doing yet.
We finally have an announcement on whether cell phones cause cancer.
Resonance - creatures of frequency
Have you ever wondered why you feel so good when you go outside?
An unknown scientist is about to make a discovery that should have changed everything. His name was Winfried Otto Schumann.
From that day on, he taught his students the physics of electricity.
How a sphere can generate an electrical voltage in a sphere. And as a result: a frequency.
Schumann's class found it difficult to understand the topic.
To make it easier, the professor instructed them to imagine that the Earth was one sphere and the ionosphere was another.
He then asked them to calculate the voltage between them.
As he had no idea himself, Schumann also began to do the math.
It finally arrived at a frequency of around 10 Hertz.
As incredible as it seemed to Schumann, our planet had a pulse, a measurable frequency that surrounded life on Earth.
Although the professor was proud of his find, he said that it was not of great importance.
Especially since it was only published in a small scientific journal, limited to the back
pages with the headline "Schumann Resonance".
It would take several years, including an incredible twist of fate, before the professor would
realize the true significance of the Schumann resonance.
This twist of fate had begun 30 years earlier with another German scientist named Hans Berger.
Berger made the first recording of the electrical frequency transmitted by the human
brain using an EEG device he built himself.
Initially it was suggested that the wave be named after the man who discovered it, but Berger, who was a modest man,
chose an alphabetical name. He called it: "The Alpha Wave".
Shortly after Professor Schumann's discovery, one of Hans Berger's colleagues, a man named Ankermüller, happened to stumble
across a tattered copy of the small scientific journal; the very same small scientific journal in which Professor
Schumann's discovery had been published a few years earlier.
He read the article several times and shook his head in disbelief.
He immediately realized the extent of what lay ahead of him.
The frequency of the alpha waves recorded by Hans Berger was almost identical to the
Schumann resonance: the frequency of the earth.
Dr. Ankermüller immediately contacted Schumann to persuade him to investigate further.
Schumann agreed and, together with one of his students, developed his discoveries further.
They studied in detail how the voltage is discharged by lightning in the cavity of the ionosphere.
Finally, they came up with an exact frequency: the Earth's pulse, the Schumann resonance, was
exactly 7.83 Hertz. The discovery was astonishing.
Did the Schumann resonance merely resemble the alpha waves of the human brain? No - it was identical!
The frequency of the brain, which controls our creativity, our performance, our stress, our fears and our immune
system, had somehow tuned into the frequency of the planet.
The pulse of the earth had become the pulse of life itself.
The frequency of a wave is measured in Hertz. This refers to the number of oscillations the wave makes per second.
Frequencies range from one trillionth of an atom to the length of the universe itself.
Theoretically, frequencies are infinite, absolutely endless.
If that was a coincidence, then it was one of nature's most spectacular!
So what did all this mean? It wasn't long before someone tried to ﬁnd out.
His name was Rütger Wever, a renowned scientist at the Max Planck Institute.
In the early 1960s, the professor built an underground bunker to study the human circadian rhythm.
The circadian rhythm is the day-night rhythm that is engraved in all of life .
Over a period of thirty years, the professor conducted experiments in which student volunteers lived in the bunker for seven
weeks, completely shielded from the earth's natural resonances.
His findings provide us with some astonishing insights.
He discovered that the physical and mental health of the students suffered as soon as the
Schumann resonance was ﬁltered out of the bunker.
He brought students down there. He didn't dare do it with sick or old people.
He brought young students down there because he knew - Wever knew it would have an effect.
So obviously there is no Schumann resonance underground.
There were only transverse magnetic fields from the Earth's interior.
So by putting them underground, they started to feel sick, have headaches, their circadian rhythm was completely messed up.
The interesting thing was that when he applied the 7.83 Hertz frequency with a
magnetic pulse generator, it stopped immediately.
Wever secretly fed the 7.83 frequency into the bunker through an artificial transmitter.
Each time he did this, he found that the adverse effects suffered by the volunteers either disappeared or diminished.
Her stress, headaches and emotional strain decreased and her well-being was restored.
All through the addition of the Schumann resonance.
Wever's research has uncovered an incredible connection between human health and the natural frequency of the planet.
And in 2011, groundbreaking research suggested something even more impressive:
The Schumann resonance could be connected with the beginning of life itself.
The breakthrough was made by Luc Antoine Montagnier, the Nobel Prize-winning scientist
who was the first to discover the HI virus.
The professor carried out experiments on water memory and investigated how water can retain the memory
of substances that were previously dissolved in it.
In the process, he came across something that would call the principles of science into question.
All life comes from life. This is a fundamental principle of science that has never been violated by any experiment.
Life can only arise where there was life before.
And the mechanism for this has always been understood as a material one.
Just like egg and sperm or spores and cell division.
However, Luc Montagnier's experiments put forward a completely different hypothesis.
The professor showed that DNA sequences, the actual building blocks of life, communicate with each other in
water by emitting low-frequency electromagnetic waves.
Even when the DNA was kept in separate test tubes, the professor still registered electromagnetic communication between them.
How sophisticated could this communication be?
Well, Luc Montagnier showed that they are able to form nucleotides - the components that make up DNA
- and assemble themselves into completely new DNA.
Scientists have combined these components countless times, but in no experiment have they ever succeeded in
reigniting the spark of life and turning nucleotides into actual DNA without DNA already being present.
After all, life can only exist where life already existed before.
However, in Luc Montagnier's experiments, the DNA was completely filtered out of the water. Nevertheless, new DNA was formed.
How was this possible? How did Luc Montagnier manage to do what no other scientist could?
And how did he create life where there was no life?
What was so different about Luc Montagnier's experiments?
There was a frequency present. A frequency that, if removed, would cause the experiment to fail.
But if it was present, it ensured that it succeeded. This frequency was 7.83 Hertz: the Schumann resonance.
The delicate connection between life and the frequency of the planet had been struck here.
An interaction between living organisms and electromagnetic frequencies. A dependency, a connection.
Evidence of this can be found by reading the scientific papers, but even more obvious
evidence can be found by simply going outside.
How else could you feel so good?
How did it all happen? Well, if you look at the history of the Earth, it seems pretty obvious.
Schumann waves have been a part of this planet from the very beginning.
Life develops, surrounded by them and inevitably attuned to them.
In fact, our sensitivity to frequency has been deeply linked to our ability to perceive another phenomenon of the planet.
Magnetic fields
Two billion years ago, magnetotactic bacteria formed a simple but fascinating relationship with the Earth's magnetic field.
The unicellular organism contained particles of magnetic material.
This enabled it to act like the needle of a compass and orient itself along the magnetic lines of the earth.
As the complexity of organisms increased, so did their dependence on the Earth's magnetic fields.
We know that bees are sensitive to magnetic fields. We know that they have particles of geomagnetite in their bodies.
And laboratory tests have shown that they are indeed sensitive to magnetic fields.
It has been shown in laboratories that the way they build their combs can be controlled by generating an
artificial magnetic field, and it seems obvious that bees use magnetic fields for orientation.
The delicate balance of life on earth is perfectly illustrated by the dependence on bees and their pollination of plants.
It is assumed that life would hardly stand a chance without bees.
Pollination by insects is necessary for pretty much everything that makes food interesting:
So, fruits, nuts, all of these require pollination by insects, and bees are the most important group of pollinators.
Around 70% of the world's food crops are pollinated by bees.
If there were no bees...
[Norman Carrick, British Beekeepers Association (BBKA): Yes, if the bees weren't there, we would have a very boring diet.
Yes, we would have a very meager existence. I think that's the point, without bees...
And of course they pollinate wild plants as well as the plants we need to eat, and in many
cases we don't even know the details of pollination.
But we can be sure that many of our wild plants would disappear without bees to pollinate them.
In 2006, the unthinkable happened: bee colonies around the world began to die out and no one could explain why.
Bee colonies around the world started collapsing and no one could explain why. As beekeepers began reporting losses of 30 to 90
percent of their hives... The Ministry is investigating honey bee colony collapse disorder Most of the world's crops depend on
pollination by bees. If pollination does not take place, humanity is doomed. ...where bees leave their hives in 25 states so far
and never return. And yet, after all these years, no cause for the bee mortality has been found. This has
spread to Europe and it has been determined that the bee population could be extinct in 10 years.
With us here is Maryann Fraizer, the Senior Extension Associate for Apiculture at Pennsylvania State University.
What are the classic criteria for bee mortality that a beekeeper can use to go out, look at the
bees and say this looks like a classic case of this?
The symptoms are that the bees are relatively healthy and vigorous and yet within a short period of time the population
of adult bees in the hive dwindles; it leaves the colony.
And what is left behind is a lot of brood, i.e. the young bees, honey and pollen.
On which continents has this bee mortality been observed?
The decline in honey bees has actually occurred worldwide.
Many other countries are reporting a decline in honeybees.
Whether it is really due to the so-called "colony collapse disorder" , for which there is a
specific set of criteria, is another question.
And that's one of the things we try to understand by communicating with other people from other parts of the world.
This current concern has existed since about 2006 and particularly in the United States, where many professional
beekeepers suddenly found that their bees, which had been healthy up to a certain point in the
year, then suffered spectacular losses in late summer.
And they seemed to be different from anything that had been seen before.
So the people came to their hives and realized that there were no bees left.
Bee mortality of this kind, also known as CCD - Colony Collapse Disorder - is affecting bee colonies around the
globe, with some countries reporting losses of up to 70%.
A variety of reasons were cited as triggers.
But none of them could conclusively explain why bees suddenly stopped returning to their hives - with one exception:
A sensational research project by Jochen Kuhn and his team.
In one experiment, the doctor worked with eight bee colonies and placed an ordinary DECT phone in four of them.
The scientists then monitored whether the presence of a DECT phone would affect whether the bees
returned to their hive. The results were astonishing.
The bees returned in normal numbers to the hives in which no DECT phones were placed.
But hardly any bees returned to the hives that contained a DECT phone.
Not a single bee returned to one of the hives containing a DECT phone.
To fully understand the implications of Dr. Kuhn's experiment, we must first understand how a DECT phone works.
The reason why you can walk around your house and make calls with your DECT phone is that the base station of your DECT phone
sends electromagnetic waves, called microwaves, to your handset.
This is exactly the same way that a cell tower communicates with a cell phone.
A DECT phone is essentially a miniature version of a mobile phone mast.
If a bee is influenced by what comes from a DECT phone, it will certainly also be
influenced by what comes from a mobile phone mast.
And with 4 billion mobile phone users worldwide, there were suddenly an alarming number of mobile phone masts.
The bee's magnetic sense of orientation enables it to orient itself using the Earth's magnetic field lines.
A capability in which it has invested millions of years of development and fine-tuning.
Is it not obvious that such a high sensitivity is influenced by even the slightest changes in the electromagnetic environment?
So what does this gigantic change that happened almost overnight mean?
Are there any other species that have this sensitivity to magnetic fields?
A sensitivity that ultimately makes them vulnerable to man-made frequencies?
Unfortunately, the discovery of a new protein called cryptochrome suggests that all life has a magnetic sense.
Cryptochrome
They were discovered in plants in the 1990s. Their function is to absorb blue light, which is needed to regulate growth.
Since then, they have been found in insects, animals, mammals, humans and birds.
Cryptochromes are biological molecules called proteins.
They are produced by some of our genes, called CRY genes.
And the cryptochrome molecule actually regulates our circadian rhythm, including melatonin production.
Some of the cryptochromes appear to have the function of absorbing light, as a detector for the circadian clock.
They are therefore an input for the day-night rhythm that many species seem to have; plants as well as animals.
But in 2000, Thorsten Ritz revealed an even more astonishing role of the cryptochrome.
In a series of experiments with robins, he proved that their sense of direction is not just based on magnetism, but
comes directly from cryptochrome cells located behind the eye.
I think that Ritz's publications are one of those milestones in science.
Because it suggests that this cryptochrome molecule - remember, it's responsible for influencing and controlling
circadian rhythms - and this very molecule is responsible for what gives birds a compass, a magnetic compass.
Birds literally see the Earth's magnetic fields, perhaps like a bright or dark spot superimposed on their field of vision.
And when they move their head or body, the spot or spotlight moves - much like a fighter pilot's head-up display.
They have this thing that they see, that allows them to orient themselves as they fly.
The way he tested this was to expose birds to radio frequency fields to see if this would
actually interfere with their magnetic compass.
It turned out that not only did the high-frequency field actually interfere with the robins' migration, but
that this was the case even at very low field strengths.
This is really important and really interesting that even very weak radiofrequency fields affected the robins' compass.
Ritz's experiments clearly showed that the chryptochrome cell used in navigation is seriously affected by
man-made frequencies - even frequencies far below those considered safe by the regulatory body ICNIRP.
All studies on animal navigation, cockroaches, zebra finches, chickens, robins - all found that their magnetic
compass was disturbed by radiofrequency fields far below the values specified as limits by the ICNIRP.
I work on birds, particularly birds and insects.
I have shown that they are sensitive to fields that are far below the ICNIRP levels that are claimed to be safe for us humans.
If you look at these levels, where research shows that the animals are sensitive - there is a very good literature that
shows that these levels are significantly lower than the levels that we may be exposed to and
therefore the animals are exposed to in the environment.
There are sound scientific reasons to believe that magnetic fields, artificial magnetic fields,
will destroy the habitat of a number of species.
Over the past 25 years (note: as of 2011), various species that use the Earth's magnetic
fields for navigation have mysteriously declined:
Dramatic decline of 109 species of Arctic migratory birds]
5 butterfly species extinct in Great Britain
36 species of Australian shorebirds declined by 75%
10% of the world's butterfly species threatened with extinction
45% of common European bird species have declined
50 % decline in European meadow butterflies
Half of all known British butterflies threatened with extinction
Bees: up to 70 % decline
62 % of migratory waterbirds in Asia declining or extinct
Australian wading birds: decline of 80%
Half of British bee species: decline of up to 70%
4 American bee species: decline in numbers of up to 98 %
Farmland birds by up to 79 %
1 in 8 of the world's bird species are threatened
190 bird species acutely threatened with extinction
How much has our environment changed as a result of electromagnetic fields?
Over the last 25 years it has been a change beyond recognition...
It is millions of times higher in terms of electromagnetic energy.
The former National Radiation Protection Agency said in one of its documents that it estimates that the radiation environment
- if you want to call it that - has increased many millions of times from what it was 50 years ago - many millions of times.
It's a huge environmental change on Earth and it's completely swamping all these natural signals
including the Schumann waves that we've evolved with.
"Measuring the Schumann resonance in or around a city has become absolutely impossible.
Electromagnetic pollution from cell phones has forced us to take our measurements at
sea." Quote from Dr. Wolfgang Ludwig, physicist
One of the reasons why cryptochromes are very interesting, particularly in terms of the fact that humans detect magnetic
fields, is that there is a recent study by Dr. Foley and colleagues that shows that if you put human chryptochromes
into the fruit fly, the fruit fly is magnetically sensitive because of the presence of those human chryptochromes.
This actually shows that human chryptochromes are magnetically sensitive, that they recognize magnetic fields.
The discovery of the cryptochrome cell has awakened a new interest in man's magnetic sense, a sense
that Robin Baker had already predicted 40 years ago.
This is not a scientific blind flight. It's an experiment to find out whether children have a sense of direction.
Blindfolded and wearing earmuffs, the test subject is turned on a special chair until
they no longer know which way it is pointing.
The chair stops and the test person guesses whether they are looking east, west, north or south.
The guess is recorded in a small computer.
If children had no sense of direction, their guesses would be random. But they are not.
Children aged ten or eleven are pretty good at guessing.
It seems like they have a real sense of direction. And it seems to be a magnetic sense.
When the scientists strap a magnet to the test subjects' heads, this considerably disturbs their sense of direction.
It's a huge step forward in terms of understanding.
And it raises all kinds of questions, of course, like can humans actually navigate the Earth's magnetic field, and in the case
that they don't today, maybe they did thousands of years ago?
Of course, it also raises the question of whether it may be a process by which magnetic fields are actually detected in the
human body that leads to this disruption of circadian rhythms.
Which would explain all the negative health effects we see so much of in the
epidemiological studies on health and magnetic fields.
If mankind has the ability to perceive magnetic fields, if they have the same ability as bees, birds and
butterflies - does that mean that we are just as susceptible to man-made frequencies as they are?
Will changes in our environment affect us in the same way that they affect them?
How do you describe electrosensitivity?
Electrosensitivity is when people start to react, their body starts to react to electromagnetic fields.
Generally speaking, the electromagnetic fields to which they react are wireless.
So it's wireless communication, it's WLAN, it's cordless phones, DECT phones, cell phones, cell towers.
They all send out signals that our body has never experienced before.
And when it starts to affect people - when it started to affect me - it's usually the head
first - you start to feel pain in your head.
I hate to say a headache, because it's a pain in your head unlike any headache you've ever had.
Most people complain of symptoms such as cardiac arrhythmia, insomnia, headaches, visual disturbances,
dizziness, various types of paresthesia or neurosis.
They describe experiencing unusual sensations in their bodies.
In fact, it can also affect the hormonal system, the thyroid function. The list is really endless.
In my particular case, and this is not everyone's case, if I don't get out of the environment then, I start
to get quite severe pain in my stomach - and that means it's too late, I get internal bleeding.
I think the symptoms are so varied and the associations that people have are very hard to accept if you don't have
knowledge about the subject, which most doctors don't have.
And that is not their fault. We are not trained to recognize this condition.
It is very novel, and our understanding is still completely immature at this stage - with the very first
steps to unraveling and fully understanding this condition.
Brian, like many people who suffer from electrosensitivity, has been forced to make radical changes to his home.
These two rooms were completely shielded with metal foil.
So this room and the bedroom are Faraday cages.
And if you actually check the electromagnetic fields or the microwaves - and this device simply converts microwaves into
sound signals - then you find out that the mast over there, which is about half a mile away, doesn't give me any problems.
When shielding the room, I installed metalized window glass - so I can eliminate most of the electromagnetic fields.
The aspects of an organism that allow it to detect and respond to electromagnetic fields - you
could say these words are used in different contexts.
And if you break it down into "electrosensitive" - you could say that this is actually a response to life itself.
For example, when we examine an organism to determine whether life is present, we are actually looking for the presence
of electricity - for example, with the electrocardiogram, the ECG and the electroencephalogram, the EEG.
What we are investigating is the presence of electricity from these target organs, the brain and the heart.
And when we see this, it is a sign that life is present.
In a sense, electromagnetic fields are part of life itself at the cellular level. You
could say that all life is electrosensitive.
Desperate to convince people that electrosensitivity actually exists, Brian and a number of other sufferers
signed up for a groundbreaking experiment at Essex University.
The experiment conducted under Elaine Fox was, sadly, the definitive work on the subject.
You have to go into a shielded room.
You go in there for a relatively short time and the mast is on for 10 minutes and off for 10 minutes and on again for 10
minutes - and you can then see whether you notice it or not.
And I went into the room and I had told them that I wouldn't be able to tell if the mast was on or off.
Why is that? Because their understanding of how to react to it is wrong.
Because for most people, it's not the case that you switch on the mast and they say: Oh, I notice that.
And then they put the mast down and the person says: Ah, now I'm fine again. That's not how it works.
I suffer from hay fever and when I come into a pollen field like this, it takes a while before I feel the effects.
But it takes a long time until I no longer feel it, until I am no longer affected by it.
I can be taken away from the hayfield, but I will still feel something after 24 hours.
For most people, electromagnetic hypersensitivity plays out something like this.
The way the team had set up the experiment meant that it would be almost impossible for Brian and the other volunteers
to prove that they were suffering from electrosensitivity.
It didn't seem to matter, because the team had inexplicably decided to refuse any kind of scrutiny.
On the one hand, it seems that people are sensitive to different things.
I am sensitive to 3G cell phones, for example GSM cell phones. There are differences in how the modulation works.
I have no idea if they're right about being sensitive, but if you have a case, it makes sense that you expose the people you
have in your study to the exact signal they say they respond to.
For example, if you have someone who is always sensitive to Wi-Fi but not to cell phones - if there is such a
person - then you better make sure that what they are exposed to is Wi-Fi and not cell phones.
After all, you want to prove that they react to what they say.
And none of this kind of distinction was made here.
The reality was that if you claimed to be electrosensitive to something - you were there.
One reason I thought it was very important was because I was helping people who were electrosensitive.
And a few months earlier I was actually with a lady - she thought she was electrosensitive - and I was there simply
to try and help her; to explain what electrosensitivity is and what might be causing her problem.
To cut a long story short, it became clear that this woman had a problem, but she was not
electrosensitive. She was clearly not electrosensitive.
But during the conversation I realized that she had signed up for the Essex studies to find out if she was electrosensitive.
My heart almost stopped. Here is someone who is not electrosensitive, and this person has enrolled at Essex Uni.
And Essex tells me they don't have a testing procedure!
What they actually found out - and this is based on the text of the paper itself - I'll put it in my own words.
They say they would need about 132 participants in their study to demonstrate a statistically
significant effect at the level of response they expect.
So many people in the population, so much data would they need for their study research to make a statement
that this group is clearly more sensitive than that group.
They got 44 people. This meant that right from the start they only had a third of the data they had
expected to be able to find out anything at all.
The result was that they came up with a statistically significant risk that was obvious from the statistics anyway.
For all people who said they were sensitive, it also showed up with a significance of around 90%.
So, the threshold for a scientific paper to recognize something as statistically significant is 95%.
If you don't reach that level of certainty, it's not considered a statistical event. It could be chance, luck or something else.
They had a 90% certainty of an increase in risk and of course it falls short of the magic mark where
it is considered a statistically significant event.
And so it was dismissed with the words "This shows that people are not sensitive". But that wasn't the statement at all.
The constant exposure to the mast left its mark on a number of the test subjects.
Some became so ill that they had to drop out of the experiment.
Brian felt the consequences of the experiment long after he had left Essex.
I had my first colonoscopy seven years ago, my second four years ago and my third about a year ago.
There's nothing wrong with me. There's nothing wrong with me. That's right, you guessed it: I have bowel cancer.
So, from the time I bled for the first time to the time my bowel was removed was exactly seven years.
When I asked the doctor how long this cancer takes to develop, he replied: "Seven years".
So you can trace virtually the whole time I was in Essex, and there was one occasion before that where I
had a bleed, that bleed where the bowel cancer started.
How could such a botched experiment be held up as such "authoritative research"?
Why would such an experienced team make such basic and obvious mistakes in their work?
Could it have something to do with those who provided the funding?
The Essex experiment is one of a series of experiments funded by the MTHR.
This company is operated and financed by the mobile communications industry itself.
Can you tell me what the MTHR is and how the MTHR is financed?
Yes, the MTHR program is jointly funded by the UK government and the mobile phone industry to investigate the potential
adverse health effects associated with mobile phone technology.
Our issue of who funds scientific research is a sensitive one.
I know many scientists like myself who, when they read a new study, the first thing they do
is open the back cover to see who funded it.
Do you think there could be a conflict of interest with regard to funding from the mobile
phone industry for research into the damage?
Well, of course there are potential conflicts of interest, and so a research program of
this nature needs to be carefully managed.
I have worked a lot with the telecommunications industry because I organize the communications work as a representative
here, so I have been talking to these people for a long time.
I think they would like to be objective, but they are driven by profit especially in a market where they are fighting
each other for market share and so they may fund research, but they are very similar to the pharmaceutical industry.
You realize that they hire people who are already on their side.
Scientists are not pop stars; they don't make a lot of money.
They have houses to finance, they have families to look after.
Who could blame them if they come up with the wrong results.
They can't find another job - at least not there.
There are psychological pressures, even without real pressure, which may or may not be present in individual cases.
But psychological pressure to conform and please the organization that funds them definitely plays a role.
Do you feel obliged?
Yes, you feel obliged. You feel obliged.
There are some really solid statistics that show that where it comes to the effects of electromagnetic fields, it shows that
studies that are funded by the utility companies, so by the electricity industry or the wireless
industry or the cell phone industry, are funded by them.
These studies tend to be significantly negative.
Independently funded studies within universities and so on, on the other hand, tend not to.
It's a challenging area of research.
It is not easy to conduct studies of this type, and due to the limitations of research on human
subjects, there will be no perfect research environment.
There will always be restrictions.
Is this a real condition? Yes, absolutely, it is.
Currently, the WHO says that this is real and the symptoms can be severe and debilitating.
The figures for electrohypersensitivity are around 2-3%.
These are people whose lives are extremely affected by this condition.
But as I have already mentioned, 100% of people react to it on a cellular level.
This means that if this is not taken seriously enough or not recognized, the consequences
for the healthcare system are potentially huge.
And the number of people who have mild or moderate electrosensitivity is probably
much higher than we previously assumed.
Although the WHO recognizes electrosensitivity, Sweden is the only country that helps those affected.
Currently 2.5 - 3 % of the population are treated there.
What does that mean for us?
It means a cassette recording of an experimental connection between a normal telephone and a unique handset.
A dial tone - and that's quite an achievement!
Because it is one thing to transmit a conversation, but quite another to transmit accurate digital information.
Now comes an extension to the research institute in Chelmsford , which has perfected this technique.
Liz Charnock should be at the other end.
With the introduction of the cell phone in the 1980s, a network of antennas was needed.
Since then, telecommunications companies have erected over 5 million masts around the world.
Proud to fill all the air with microwave frequencies, they haven't done a single study to make sure
it wouldn't have any long-term damage to health.
They were built without first ensuring that they were safe.
Thank you for your help.
Very unpleasant, isn't it?
Yeah, and it's there all the time as well, something that's noticeable is that it doesn't stop.
It is constantly radiating - it comes from the masts - if you can see the mast, you are exposed to it.
Honestly, even if you're not, you're exposed to it at that distance because it's going through concrete walls and
stuff, it's muffled a little bit, but only a little bit.
200 - 300 meters from the mast there, you are constantly exposed to it.
If you can hear it, it changes everything. Yes. How about if you could see it.
It would be like seeing smog every day.
With a smog of man-made frequencies constantly surrounding us and without checking their safety, is it any
wonder that the human body is starting to react to them?
It was about 10 years ago. I was in my 30s.
No breast cancer in my family so far. I had a very healthy lifestyle.
I lived next to a telephone pole for many years, seven years at the time.
It was 100 meters away from my house.
For years I had symptoms that were not associated with the mast, because at that time I didn't know about electrosensitivity.
I had dizziness, sleep problems, headaches, stabbing pains in my head, and I went to the doctor frequently.
I was told it was stress or a virus. And then, out of the blue, I was diagnosed with breast
cancer. It was the biggest shock of my life.
At first I thought, I'm just unlucky, it's just me. Then the treatment began.
And I met some neighbors there in the hospital - I lived in a very small village.
And I also met these neighbors, young women - I was the youngest, in my thirties, the
others were in their forties or early fifties.
Five of us were there, all at the same time within six months with the same diagnosis of breast cancer.
There were only 18 houses in our village around the cell tower.
So Eileen decided to start a survey to see if others were also suffering from sudden illness.
The result made us shudder. Many people reported the same symptoms that I had been suffering
from for years. The headaches, the dizziness.
But there were also other young women in the village who had fertility problems and precursors of
cervical cancer - or a woman who had breast cancer nodules.
And there were other types of cancer in the area.
A neighbor, who was only 51 years old, developed motor neuron disease and
unfortunately died from it. To be honest: a huge evil.
It affected 77 people from these houses.
Yes, estimated about 70% who experienced biological effects over the years - sleep problems, skin rashes, breast lumps or cancer.
Yes, it had a big impact on the people in this village.
I think it's a massive problem worldwide.
We have since found out that we are not the only cluster of cancer cases around a cell phone tower.
There are many clusters of crabs near pylons.
We worked with a scientist on site, where we examined other masts that had been standing for a long time in other areas.
And we carried out other surveys and also came across a higher incidence of cancer.
With so many cell phones and towers and a cell phone industry that is worth billions, one would hope that by now a strict
government agency would be in place, an agency that ensures that the telecommunications industry is broadcasting on the safe side.
Someone who sets strict limits that protect the population - someone who ensures that
what we are exposed to is absolutely safe.
Unfortunately, there is none of this. What we do have is ICNIRP.
ICNIRP was set up in Europe about 20 years ago to study non-ionizing radiation.
It is the International Committee on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection, and its job is to look at all the
literature that is published and basically summarize it:
That is what science definitely says.
You can't be elected into it. You are invited to join if you are one of the preferred people.
So, it is always determined by the industry, because that is where the roots lie.
Right. So, we have a benchmark that they've set, which has been adopted by most European countries, and it's
something that's recommended by the European Commission itself, the expert panel included.
But these guide values are based on construction methods that we know have their cause and effect in high-frequency radiation.
The only scenario that exists now in terms of the energy that surrounds us at the same frequency as the radiation from cell
phones, cell phone towers and cordless phones - all the different communication devices that we use
every day - is the same as we know from microwave ovens.
If we use enough energy and concentrate it on a small enough area, then you heat the tissue, then you heat
everything that has a certain amount of water in it.
None of the current guidance values have anything to do with chronic health damage or cancer. None of them, not a single one.
They're all geared towards heat effects or immediate effects like skin tingling or eyebrow twitching or something.
No one can detect long-term damage to health.
So you mean, under 40 it's insignificant, it's meaningless...
It's meaningless. There is no intention to protect against long-term health damage.
ICNIRP is ... well, ICNIRP is completely meaningless.
For example: If you want to make sure that no one exceeds the speed limit at the school, set
the speed limit to 10,000 kilometers per hour.
So everyone will stick to it, no one will drive too fast.
You can drive past the school at 999 km/h and the "limit value" is adhered to.
The Advisory Panel is not set up to examine the evidence with a view to protecting the public.
So ICNIRP really only exists to ensure what is 100% fact, and anything that is not 100% fact is none of their business.
That's right. They'll talk about it, they'll summarize what's there, what's not there and what still needs to be found out.
And that was it. They leave it at that. No recommendations - nothing, because they don't see themselves as responsible.
Almost every country sets its public limits for radio technology on the basis of ICNIRP guidelines.
ICNIRP's guidelines have nothing to do with long-term health damage caused by exposure to wireless technology.
Come on, I'll try to make a phone call.
When you try to call someone, it's almost constant when the radio frequency transmission starts in both directions.
Okay, let's try it out. Oh, wow!
As soon as it connects; that's the call mode, that's what the phone does.
These are waves that go from my cell phone to the base station and are transmitted from there?
That's basically what your phone does all the time when you have reception and are using your phone.
Terrible.
And that's actually what your phone is sending into your head all the time when you're
dialing the base station and using your phone.
Mobile phones
It's hard to imagine a piece of technology that has penetrated our lives as quickly as the cell phone.
Twenty-five years ago, it was considered little more than a gimmick.
Today, 4 billion of us own one.
On average, children have their first cell phone by the age of 8.
Cell phones work by sending and receiving microwave frequencies from the base station.
When you hold a cell phone to your ear, your brain is inevitably exposed to these waves.
Does the brain react to this effect?
A new American study shows that this is definitely the case.
Dr. Nora Volkow conducted this study.
Dr. Volkow and her team examined 47 healthy people for a whole year.
The participants had cell phones on their right and left ears.
One of them was in operation but switched to mute, the other was switched off.
Dr. Volkow used brain imaging equipment to find out how much glucose the brain would use during exposure.
It's a very sensitive marker to indicate whether there are changes in brain activity that can be
caused by a stimulant - in this case, the cell phone.
When the brain is stimulated, it consumes glucose, just like a car consumes fuel.
Exposure to a cell phone for 15 minutes is associated with an increase in glucose consumption in the brain, indicating that the
brain has been activated by the cell phone's radio frequencies.
The right side of the brain, which was very close to the antenna, shows the greatest increase in
metabolic activity compared to when the cell phone was off.
Although the radio frequencies emitted by current cell phone technologies are very weak, they are
able to activate the human brain to have an effect.
When using a muted cell phone, Dr. Volkow's experiment showed that the human brain shows a
metabolic response to microwaves from a cell phone.
A metabolic reaction at levels far below the legal limit.
Something that many claim is impossible.
And the reaction recorded by Dr. Volkow is second only to a larger concern:
The way in which this microwave radiation is actually absorbed by the brain. This became known as the SAR value.
SAR stands for specific absorption.
And that is the measurement of how much radio waves are absorbed by the human body in a certain volume in a certain time.
It is the measurement of the heating effect that a radio transmitter has on the human body.
SAR is measured in the following way. An artificial head is used.
It is filled with a glucose mixture that is supposed to represent the human brain.
The test device measures the amount of microwave radiation that penetrates the model's skull.
The SAR value is then calculated based on how much energy is absorbed.
For the EU, the limit is 2 watts per kilogram for a 10g average of tissue.
For the USA it is 1.6 W/kg over 1 g average of tissue.
The USA has a stricter upper limit than the EU, but other countries such as Australia and New Zealand use the EU limits.
Some of the most popular cell phones on the market emit so much microwave radiation that
their SAR value is just at the extreme limit.
Every millimeter of the skull helps to protect the brain from microwave radiation and
thus reduces the SAR value of the cell phone.
On average, children get their first cell phone at the age of 8.
An 8-year-old skull is significantly thinner than that of an adult.
One would hope that the cell phones are tested with a skull thickness equivalent to that of a child.
The SAM head is an average shaped and sized human skull.
The average of 10,000 human head measurements was taken, and this SAM phantom head was
created to represent an average human skull...
Of course, the average person's head is much bigger than that of an eight-year-old child.
But when we asked the company that makes the SAM phantom head, we found out that the truth is even worse.
The SAM test model is not simply the average of 10,000 people, but the average of 10,000 US Army soldiers.
And US Army personnel certainly have bigger and thicker heads than the average eight-year-old.
It is therefore quite likely that if the cell phones were tested on the skull of an eight-year-old, most of them would fail.
Who sets the guidelines?
These are people from the committee called ICNIRP.
The people who work on cell phones are bioengineers.
They have no idea what goes on inside a living cell, but they talk pompously about it.
They assume that the only thing that can affect the well-being of a living organism is
whether it is strong enough to heat the tissue.
But that's like saying: "We know that if we boil an egg, it will be hard."
What they don't know is that if they don't boil the egg, it will turn into a chicken.
They haven't the slightest idea how this happens. But they still talk as if they know.
In 2011, the World Health Organization changed the hazard classification of cell phones and reclassified them as possibly
carcinogenic to humans - due to an increased risk of developing glioma, the type of brain tumor associated with cell phone use.
What triggered this abrupt change in status?
There have been countless studies on the possible health effects of cell phones.
Some show an effect. Some show none.
But the most conclusive study came from Lennart Hardell.
He has led the largest and most insightful research ever conducted.
He combined his own work with that of others from all over the world.
Since the early 1990s, they have studied the telephone habits of more than 2000 people around the world.
People with tumors such as astrocytoma and acoustic neuroma, the brain tumors most associated
with cell phone use due to their proximity to air.
The results are shocking. They came to the conclusion that the use of cell phones actually increases the risk of a brain tumor.
And they also discovered why earlier studies showed no effects.
I think there's more evidence that it's carcinogenic than just possibly carcinogenic.
But I think I understand it in a way because most of the cancers that are coming are not there yet.
People haven't been using cell phones long enough for the true effect to become apparent.
As with other carcinogens, it takes at least ten years to see an effect from exposure.
Since the cell phone explosion didn't start until the late 1990s, it's not surprising that we're just
beginning to see the effects. And it's happening right now.
So what is the telecommunications industry doing to protect its users from a brain tumor?
A glance at the safety manuals suggests that they are more concerned about their own protection.
This wireless device model meets the legal requirements regarding exposure to radio waves. When used as described
in this section, it complies with the legal guidelines.
Keep the BlackBerry device at least 2.5 cm away from your body, including the abdomen of
pregnant women and teenagers! Reduce the call times!
On the back of almost every cell phone are instructions on how far you should hold it away from your body.
Instructions that are completely impractical in most cases.
And what happens when the telecommunications industry funds research into the damage it causes?
And this research concludes that cell phone use has an impact on the development of cancer.
But they tend to keep this research to themselves.
We just don't know what we're storing with EMFs because the effects are largely long-term,
and we have, as you say, this blanket exposure.
And comprehensive reliance on these exposures.
We just don't quite understand what we're doing yet.
Although epidemiology clearly shows that using a cell phone increases the risk of developing a brain tumor.
What the ICNIRP people need to see is a clear cause and effect; how it happens, what the
mechanism is and exactly how the cancer is caused.
It may seem obvious that a creature so attuned to the Earth's frequencies and so sensitive to its magnetic field
would naturally have a reaction to man-made microwaves.
But for years, the telecommunications industry has defended its actions by asking the same question.
How does a cell phone cause cancer?
As it turned out, they asked the wrong question.
How does a cell phone prevent the human body from curing cancer?
The answer is: melatonin.
You know, melatonin is a hormone, and believe it or not, it's produced in the brain.
It is formed in the pineal gland of the brain and has a very strong antioxidant character compared to vitamins, for example:
Melatonin is five times as strong as vitamin C and twice as strong as vitamin E.
And it is only released at night.
And it's at night when we need it, because that's when we go to sleep and our brain repairs the cells of our body.
And that's when the melatonin goes to work.
Every day, our body loses around half a billion cells.
And what happens at night is that our body replaces these cells through a process called cell mitosis, the division of cells.
What it does: It catches the so-called free radicals.
These free radicals are actually the excess electrons left over from the energy production
process that we need to regenerate ourselves.
Every night, when our body regenerates itself, millions of free radical cells are created as a by-product of cell mitosis.
These free radical cells attack healthy cells.
It is generally recognized that the free radical cell is the main cause or factor in most cancers.
Our body's most important defense against these free radicals is its most powerful antioxidant: melatonin.
It enters the bloodstream and its job is to act as a natural antioxidant, a natural anti-cancer agent.
Melatonin is a very, very powerful anti-cancer agent.
It acts as a so-called oncostatic agent that protects you from cancer.
And it controls the sleep-wake rhythm so that you get a good night's sleep and the right dose of melatonin.
It is an anti-ageing molecule. In other words, it scavenges free radicals and simply makes your skin look younger.
Melatonin is the body's miracle drug that scavenges cancer-causing free radicals.
We have 12,000 studies in our lab that we've collected over the years and that's more studies than have ever been published
on acetaminophen, which is a commonly used headache medication.
There is considerably more scientific interest in melatonin than in paracetamol.
What are the consequences of reduced melatonin secretion?
Yes, so if you have a reduced amount of melatonin, then your immune system goes down.
In the beginning you tend to have trouble sleeping, i.e. you can't fall asleep or if you do, you can't fall asleep again.
You may have heart problems because melatonin also protects your heart.
And you are much more susceptible to illness because your immune system is not working optimally.
These are some things that happen when you have decreased melatonin levels.
And for example, the average woman with breast cancer has only a tenth of the melatonin of a normal woman of her age.
And in people with prostate cancer, they have less than half the melatonin they should have.
Autistic children have less than half the melatonin level they should have.
Reduced melatonin in night shift workers because they work at night and are exposed to light.
They do not produce melatonin at night and are known to increase the risk of breast cancer by 50%.
And the International Agency for Research on Cancer IARC has gradually classified night shift work as
possibly carcinogenic because of this melatonin reduction.
There are now many studies that show that people who work night shifts or people who are blind have
different cancer rates than the average population.
And most of these studies support the view that a lack of or reduced melatonin level has a negative impact on health.
Since the body only regenerates at night, melatonin is only produced when the pineal gland senses that there is no light.
And what happens; the pineal gland is sensitive to light.
It is located exactly where your brain receives signals from your eyes and crosses at the point in the middle.
It is called the suprachiasmatic nucleus.
And the connections from there go directly to the pineal gland to tell it whether light is present or not.
When light is present, there is simultaneous interference with the signals that the
brain wants to send to our cells to repair them.
So it doesn't make sense that the brain sends these signals to our cells to tell them to repair themselves when
there is so much interference that they wouldn't hear it.
So it waits, the brain waits until it is dark.
What research has shown that there is an effect on melatonin production by electric fields, magnetic fields or radio waves?
Yes, well, the Battelle Institute in America has been doing a lot of work on this subject since the late 1970s.
And his scientists, Barry Wilson, Dick Stevens and these people started thinking about it because we know that the
brain stops producing melatonin when you turn on the light.
So they thought, well, maybe our brains can't distinguish between electrical fields that we artificially generate ourselves
and the natural light that we all know is present during the day, because we just don't produce melatonin during the day.
There are very good biological reasons for this.
So they thought that these electric fields would suppress the synthesis of melatonin, which in turn would lead to cancer,
especially breast cancer in women, because they would no longer have the immunological protection that they usually have.
So the brain interprets radio waves as light waves?
Yes, we can't tell them apart.
Visible light also has a frequency.
In any case, the hypothesis that the pineal gland cannot distinguish between light frequencies and man-made
frequencies has been proven by a wealth of research.
Direct suppressive effects of weak magnetic fields (50 Hz and 16 2/3 Hz) on melatonin synthesis in the
pineal gland of Djungarian hamsters (Phodopus sungorus)
The results of the present study show that low-frequency magnetic fields are able to reduce
melantonin production in isolated hamster pineal glands.
... reduce melantonin production ...
... Effects of electromagnetic fields on photophasic circulating melatonin levels in American kestrels ...
In conclusion, EMF affected plasma melatonin in male American kestrels, ...
EMFs can influence their migrations ...
... Absence of a chronic effect of exposure to shortwave broadcast signals on salivary melatonin concentrations in dairy cows.
Thus, a delayed acute effect of EMF on melatonin concentration ...
A 0.5 G, 60 Hz magnetic field suppresses melatonin production in pinealocytes.
... an average 46% reduction in noradrenaline-induced production of melatonin in pinealocytes. The results support the
hypothesis that EM exposure can produce melatonin suppression in the pineal gland by affecting individual cells.
exposure a melatonin suppression
in the pineal gland,
by influencing individual cells.
EMF/EMR reduces melatonin in animals and humans Dr. Neil Cherry September 2, 2002 Seventeen studies show that ELF and
RF/MW exposure reduces melatonin. Sixteen studies have observed significant EMR-associated melatonin reduction in humans.
Do you think it is conclusive that electric fields, magnetic fields and radio waves influence the production of melatonin?
This research, which shows that the melatonin levels of kestrels decrease with exposure; that wild storks nesting on buildings
near radio masts have fewer offspring compared to stork nests far from radio masts; studies on ants, on bees and
on birds of various species and studies on marine mammals, all point in the same direction.
But then there are laboratory studies of cells in the pineal gland that actually synthesize melatonin.
I am looking at the effect of magnetic fields on these cells.
And at every stage in the inventory of melatonin, magnetic fields have been shown to interfere with the production of melatonin.
So, the evidence is clear in all aspects of melatonin production, the inhibition of melatonin production by magnetic fields.
The research really covers every aspect of this path.
Would you say that it is conclusive enough?
Yes, I would say that is conclusive.
The ingenious thing about our body is its ability to counteract the production of free radicals by producing melatonin.
We have created a precise balance within ourselves, a perfect defense system.
It has taken our body millions of years to perfect this technique.
A technique created on the basis of the environment in which we have evolved.
But hasn't our environment changed exponentially in recent decades?
To the naked eye the world appears to be the same, but at the cellular level it is the biggest
environmental change that has ever happened to our lives.
It is obvious that such a gigantic change would inevitably upset such a delicate balance.
And the consequences of our body not producing the right amount of melatonin could be fatal.
Scientists around the world now believe that free radicals could be the cause of or a
factor in every known disease. Not just cancer.
At the beginning of the 20th century, childhood leukemia was a medical rarity.
Since then, we have only seen an increase in leukemia in children.
It increases by around two percent every year.
And this also applies to many other diseases: Autism, brain tumors, cancer.
Cancer rates in the 1910s were probably only half as high as they are today.
And many other diseases are linked by studies, by scientific research on exposure to electromagnetic fields and radiation;
not only power lines, but also to radio and microwave fields.
Over the last 50 years, we have been immersed in an ocean of electromagnetic radiation. It surrounds us everywhere.
Invisible, we can't see it. But we know it is there.
Every time you use your cell phone, you know she's there.
It is extremely difficult to turn back the clock. Impossible.
But we need to be aware of these health impacts so that we have a choice to take safety precautions.
If we want that, we have to.
What worries me are the things that are actually happening now (note: put on YouTube in 2013).
We may not have been paying enough attention.
One of the things that's happening now is autism, or let's call it by its proper name: Autism Spectrum Health Disorder.
Do you think we've reached a point in science where we have almost no control group left to test these things because
almost everyone has a cell phone, almost everyone has Wi-Fi and almost everyone is exposed to electromagnetic fields?
Yes, we're all reaching a point where so many people are exposed to electromagnetic fields from cell phones and Wi-Fi that we no
longer have a control group to see the difference between the health of people who are exposed to it
versus the health of people who are not exposed to it.
If I can draw an analogy:
We found that smoking can cause lung cancer.
This was because some people did not smoke, and they represented the control group.
If everyone smoked, we would never have found out that smoking can cause lung cancer.
And everyone would have died of lung cancer, and it would have been recognized as a national
disease without being associated with smoking.
What happens with cell phone interference is we lose all these segments of the population that are not exposed to it.
Even the few who don't have a cell phone are surrounded by radiation from cell phones;
when they shop, on the train, wherever they go!
It's not just the "canary in the coal mine", like myself. .
Finally, if you simply increase the electromagnetic fields in the atmosphere, which we are actually doing, and we now
have a million times more electromagnetic fields, microwaves in the environment than we had 30 years ago.
At some point it will start to affect YOU too!
It is very difficult to say where we will be in 15 years' time.
But I would say that in just the last few years we have realized how much these harmful effects are costing the population.
And then we will wake up and look at the causes. And we will have to do something about the causes.
We are an ingenious and yet complex organism.
The way our body works is neither random nor something that happened overnight.
Like every other living being on this planet, we have adapted to the environment in which we live.
An environment that has had a delicate balance of fields and resonances since the beginning of time.
These phenomena not only surround us, they make us who we are.
The cells of our body communicate with each other by using light frequencies; just as our DNA uses
electromagnetic frequencies to reproduce itself.
At the core of all this are protons and electrons, positive and negative polarity, which makes all life magnetic.
Like all life, we are equipped with cryptochrome cells, which enables us to perceive
these fields in a way that we barely understand.
We are beings of frequency, electricity, light and magnetism.
And to become that, it took millions of years; a process that began with the very first cell.
Although we have embraced wireless technology and incorporated it into our daily lives, our
bodies have not followed suit on a cellular level.
The frequencies that surround us now are as alien to our cells as they would be to our eyes if we could only see them.
Our children are born into a world that their bodies simply cannot understand.
Where will all this lead?
As this film is being made, 4G technology is being expanded around the world. To make this possible, the limits are being raised.
WLAN is available in almost every single house, school and store and is all around us all the time.
DECT telephone technology can be found in almost every household.
At a time when the industry is responsible and should be exercising caution, it is showing
a reckless disregard for our long-term health.
Money rules the world.
And they are about as likely to develop a conscience about it as the tobacco industry did.
So if there is going to be a change, it will not come from them.
It has to come from us!
We simply have to open our eyes and recognize the problem.
Do you intend to use the MTHR to fund research into the effect of radio waves on melatonin?
Considering that this is the mechanism that people seem to be pointing to, that cell
phones interfere with the production of melatonin.
Melatonin is an antioxidant, a vacuum cleaner for free radicals, if you will.
When we issue a research proposal, which we are doing right now, while emphasizing areas that are of particular
interest, we invite applications, proposals across the spectrum.
But these have to be prioritized together with the other applications we receive. We have a limited amount of money.
But we are not currently planning research around melatonin. It is not a priority at the moment.
MTHR has yet to invest in research that examines how cell phones affect melatonin.