Search:

pop music pop music lyrics m pop music amazing pop music hit music all music video amazing video favorite video videos video clips videoclips

Skull Penetration of Cell Phone Radiation in Children

Amazing Video Site
Amazing Video Site Amazing Video Site
Amazing Video Site

http://www.emfnews.org/cell-ph... Proof Cell Phone Radiation Penetrates a Child's Skull 75% through the Brain Tissue. http://www.emfnews.org/headset... A cellular phone is basically a radio that sends signals on waves to a base station. The carrier signal generates two types of radiation fields: a near-field plume and a far-field plume. Living organisms, too, generate electromagnetic fields at the cellular, tissue, organ, and organism level; this is called the biofield. Both the near-field and far-field plumes from cell phones and in the environment can wreak havoc with the human biofield, and when the biofield is compromised in any way, says Dr. Carlo, so is metabolism and physiology."The near field plume is the one we're most concerned with. This plume that's generated within five or six inches of the center of a cell phone's antenna is determined by the amount of power necessary to carry the signal to the base station," he explains. "The more power there is, the farther the plume radiates the dangerous information-carrying radio waves."A carrier wave oscillates at 1900 megahertz (MHz) in most phones, which is mostly invisible to our biological tissue and doesn't do damage. The information-carrying secondary wave necessary to interpret voice or data is the problem, says Dr. Carlo. That wave cycles in a hertz (Hz) range familiar to the body. Your heart, for example, beats at two cycles per second, or two Hz. Our bodies recognize the information-carrying wave as an "invader," setting in place protective biochemical reactions that alter physiology and cause biological problems that include intracellular free-radical buildup, leakage in the blood-brain barrier, genetic damage, disruption of intercellular communication, and an increase in the risk of tumors. The health dangers of recognizing the signal, therefore, aren't from direct damage, but rather are due to the biochemical responses in the cell.Here's what happens:Cellular energy is now used for protection rather than metabolism. Cell membranes harden, keeping nutrients out and waste products in.Waste accumulating inside the cells creates a higher concentration of free radicals, leading to both disruption of DNA repair (micronuclei) and cellular dysfunction.Unwanted cell death occurs, releasing the micronuclei from the disrupted DNA repair into the fluid between cells (interstitial fluid), where they are free to replicate and proliferate. This, says Dr. Carlo, is the most likely mechanism that contributes to cancer.Damage occurs to proteins on the cell membrane, resulting in disruption of intercellular communication. When cells can't communicate with each other, the result is impaired tissue, organ, and organism function. In the blood-brain barrier, for example, cells can't keep dangerous chemicals from reaching the brain tissue, which results in damage. http://www.danger911.com http://www.emfnews.org/qlinks....

Channel: Education
Uploaded: November 12, 2006 at 9:35 am
Author: breatheasy7000

Length: 02:40
Rating: 4.36
Views: 17851

Tags: cancer  celebrities  cell  emf  health  microwaves  mobile  phone  radiation  science  sensitivity  sexy  spiderman  superman  

Video Url:


Embed Code:

Video Comments

hikingzone (August 20, 2008 at 12:31 am)
Radiation from cell phones, this is worth watching.
boxa888 (August 11, 2008 at 10:36 pm)
better yet start looking up nikola teslas wireless powersystem, it would have given a total world energy system at faster than light speeds and at the same time be safer than radio waves because they are even a lower frequency! absolutly no collateral damage, i put up information on this its an incredible system please reseach nikola teslas wireless work.
arjunus (July 30, 2008 at 6:50 pm)
Do you no that 80% of population don't no this.Please look at my collection off video's for what i mend.All the people that now using this things are paying the price later. For me it is already to late. Lost my job, can't work anymore normally. And having health problems from devices ho emits microwaves.No doctor can help us.It's something at cell level.Search George Carlo to see about that.Greetings Holland
TAZ427COBRA (July 28, 2008 at 7:44 pm)
Source of this is? 1975-1985 the average was 24/100K from 1986-1995 it went to 30/100K in children 15 and younger.Recent sources showing increases refer to 2000 vs 2005 of going from 27.6 to 30.0/100K and claim a 2.7% per year growth rate w/ little real data to back it up. The reality is 6 of the 10 years 1986-1995 had rates higher than the 30.0/100K in children.It just goes to show that limited data can be manipulated to show what you want to see. People use this as scare tactics.
ckilr01 (July 28, 2008 at 6:24 pm)
Reducing the power output does reduce the damage done but keep in mind that The rate of damage is consistent with the power output, distance from the transmitter and duration of exposure. so if it is close to your body it will cause more cellular damage. Also wireless headsets are transmitters, they just use less power. A cell phone will do damage to any part of the body especially the kidney and liver. Keeping it on your belt at the front, right side should reduce exposure to sensitive areas.
ckilr01 (July 28, 2008 at 6:16 pm)
I used to work on transmitters in the 1970's-1980's and all transmitters cook your organs, The rate of damage is consistent with the power output, distance from the transmitter and duration of exposure. While the power is small (compared to military transmitters which can cook your kidneys and liver in a few minutes) it's still very risky. The organic damage it does is similar in both radio and microwave transmitters and it is caused by the carrier wave and not the signal itself.
feedthefitness (July 25, 2008 at 7:28 am)
Actually it has. Brain cancer now causes more deaths than any other cancers in children. It has also taken over leucemia in the amount of deaths every year. In children, there has been a 21% increase in brain tumors over the past few years.Not sure what the statistics are in adults, but i would presume that because adults use cellphones more than children, there would definatly be an increase in the number of brain tumors occuring.
TAZ427COBRA (July 24, 2008 at 3:32 pm)
Another thing to point out, was that typical Analog phones had about a 1.5W/Kg of radiation when put to the head (1.6W/Kg is FCC requirement)Today's digital cell phones average around 0.25W/Kg. The penetration into the childs head on the picture at that level would be much less than the image shown of the adult. And please note that those images are taken with a cellphone placed against the head.One question for everyone to ponder.Why in the last 20yrs has brain cancer not increased?
TAZ427COBRA (July 24, 2008 at 3:26 pm)
I notice this was on a study in a book from '97. I can assume that the study was done in '97 or earlier. Q: What cell phone was used?If it was Analog & Digital were the test done with the phone in Analog mode? All phones were Analog or A&D at that time in the US.The radiation level of the signals from Digital Cell phones is significantly lower than that of Analog phones. That's part of the reason when we still used Digital/Analog phones they consumed the battery at 4x the rate.
dikensteign (July 15, 2008 at 7:00 am)
i cant say this is serious as some make it out to be but I would also quickly admit i could be wrong. I just have to wonder whenever I see some mothers hand there child a cell phone for them to put there mouth on or just play with. That cant be a good thing.

Amazing Video Site © 2007 All Rights Reserved.