<a href="http://www.emfnews.org/chipcategory.html">EMF Protection Products</a>
<a href="http://www.emfnews.org/headset.html">Airtube Headsets</a>
Parents should   more...think twice before giving in to a middle-schooler's demands for a cell phone, some scientists say, because potential long-term health risks remain unclear.

Researchers have speculated for more than 10 years that the electromagnetic radiation (search) emitted from cell phones may damage DNA and cause benign brain tumors (search), said Henry Lai, a bioengineering professor at the University of Washington.

"We don't know very much about the health effects of cell phone use on kids, but there are speculations," Lai said.

In Britain, the chairman of the National Radiological Protection Board advised in January that parents should not give mobile phones to children age 8 or younger as a precaution against the potential harm of radiation from the devices.

When you use a cell phone, 70 to 80 percent of the energy emitted from the antenna is absorbed by the head, Lai said.
Several research studies have pointed to the potential impacts of long-term absorption of cell phone-emitted radiation but little of the research has focused on the children.

Lai said he was concerned about the impact on children because young skulls are thinner and the growing brain may be more susceptible to radiation.

He also said that because brain tumors usually take 30-40 years to develop, children who use cell phones from their teen years onward would have a longer period of time to see a cumulative impact.
Last week, a federal appeals court in Maryland reinstated five class-action lawsuits claiming that the cell phone industry has failed to protect consumers from unsafe levels of radiation.
<a href="http://www.emfnews.org/qlinks.html">Cell Tower Protection</a>
<a href="http://www.emfnews.org/cell-phone-radiation-book.html">Educational
Cell Phone Ebook</a>  less

<a href="http://www.emfnews.org/chipcategory.html">EMF Protection Products</a>
<a href="http://www.emfnews.org/headset.html">Airtube Headsets</a>
1. Use your   more...cell phone on speakerphone. While this is a great solution and I strongly recommend it, it's simply not practical much of the time. Especially if you are in a public place where rules of discretion and proper etiquette prevail. Another problem is that not all cell phones have speakerphones — and even those that do may have poor sound quality. I do recommend that if you are choosing a new cell phone, make sure it comes with a speakerphone option.
2. Always keep your phone as far away from your body as possible. There’s a dramatic drop-off in radiation exposure for every inch you keep your phone away from your body.
3. Get yourself a Blue Tube Headset with an airtube. In my opinion, this new design is the best headset on the market. Others may actually increase the amount of radiation emitted.
4. Limit your cell phone use to the bare minimum. Your cell phone is constantly searching for signals and emitting EMR while you’re using it.
5. Turn off your cell phone when not needed OR keep it a few feet away from your body. Even when not in use, as long as your phone is turned on, it continually emits EMR as it connects to its base station.


<a href="http://www.emfnews.org/qlinks.html">Cell Tower Protection</a>
<a href="http://www.emfnews.org/cell-phone-radiation-book.html">Educational
Cell Phone Ebook</a>  less

<a href="http://www.emfnews.org/chipcategory.html">EMF Protection Products</a> <a href="http://www.emfnews.org/headset.html">Airtube Headsets</a> Twelve million   more...Canadians use cellphones — and that number is growing by the day. So many people use cellphones that you would have thought the fears about cellphones and brain tumours had disappeared. But — quietly — a huge international agency has been gathering evidence, trying to answer the question: can cellphone use lead to cancer? A decade ago, there was a lot of buzz that the radiation from cellphones can lead to cancer. A Florida man went to court, arguing that his wife's brain cancer was the result of prolonged use of cellular phones. A number of studies had been conducted — some said there was a link, others found no connection. Health Canada decided there is no conclusive evidence of a health risk from cellphones. In the U.S., a much bigger project is underway. In 1997, scientist George Carlo headed up the Wireless Technology Research group in Washington. He had spent $28 million U.S. over six years. But because his research group was funded entirely by members of the cellphone industry, it's dismissed as a bigpublic relations job. Carlo insists there is no proof of a health risk, supporting what becomes sort of a message track from the cellphone industry — from people like Roger Porier of the cellphone lobby. "The overwhelming evidence from the scientific community — these are the top people in the world who are investigating these things— conclude time after time there are no adverse health effects in fields of this nature." But Carlo, who was once the cellphone industry's hired gun, has morphed into one of the industry's biggest critics. Carlo's afraid there is a possible health threat. He thinks we should be told. <a href="http://www.emfnews.org/qlinks.html">Cell Tower Protection</a> <a href="http://www.emfnews.org/cell-phone-radiation-book.html">Educational Cell Phone Ebook</a>  less

<a href="http://www.emfnews.org/chipcategory.html">EMF Protection Products</a> <a href="http://www.emfnews.org/headset.html">Airtube Headsets</a>Look in your   more...pocket or in your bag or on the table next to you. In one of those three places it is probable that you saw a device that could cause your injury or death at some point in the future. What is it you ask? What is it that I carry with me everywhere? What is this object that you say could hurt or kill me or possibly those close to me that I care about? It is your cell phone. The make and model are irrelevant; they all produce unnaturally high amounts of EMFs or electromagnetic fields.If it was just a threat to ourselves there might not be such awareness, but it's the fact that people near us that could be adversely affected as well. Those little bundles of joy that are the centre of your life are affected more than anyone else. The question you need to ask is: What can I do about all this? I don't have the power to get EMF emitting cell phones banned or anything like that. There is something you can do though, to minimize the risk of harmful radiation effects to yourself and those close to you.There are many radiation protection devices available today to help you get rid of this threat that is hanging over your head every time you pick up that phone. There are wide selections of products to suit any need you might have, in many shapes, at a range of prices that will allow anyone to afford this absolutely necessary protection.There are hands-free devices that will protect you from this potentially lethal threat as well as helping you comply with current regulations. These regulations can actually be encouraging us to use non-radiation protective ear pieces that are increasing the amount of radiation directed into our heads. So, to ensure you are protected you need to ensure that the ear piece or hands-free kit you use is one of those specially designed to protect you and others in your vicinity.  less

<a href="http://www.emfnews.org/chipcategory.html">EMF Protection Products</a>
<a href="http://www.emfnews.org/headset.html">Airtube Headsets</a>
<a href="http://www.emfnews.org/qlinks.html">Cell   more...Tower Protection</a>
http://www.emfnews.org/qlinks.html "Is Your Wireless Frying Your Brain?"
The question concerning the health risks associated with EMR (electromagnetic radiation), RF (Radio Frequency) radiation and EMF (Electromagnetic field) and your wireless phone is once again being questioned. It was just a few short years ago that cell phone companies and governmental watchdogs were advising everyone to go "hands free" to offer some reduction of risk from EMR. Many of them have now flip-flopped and suggest the wired and wireless headset are serving as a conduit and is delivering the radiation right to your brain through your ear.

Accredited laboratory tests indicate that using an Air-tube Headset reduces EMR exposure by 98%.

The big question is how do you mitigate the risk, when your brain is mostly likely already fried on work, the significant other, and the age old question, "what am I having for dinner tonight?" The answer is simple and believe it or not, affordable! Consider the use of Air tube headsets while driving. The Air tube keeps radiation away from the brain by using a hollow tube to convey sound from a speaker located at a distance from the head. The design is the same principal as the headsets the Air Lines issue you and the tube and earpiece contain no metallic conductors.
http://www.emfnews.org
Some times simplicity is the best answer. Consider investing in an air-tube headset that delivers crystal clear sound through an air-filled tube, and very little EMR.

http://www.emfnews.org/headset.html  less

<a href="http://www.emfnews.org/chipcategory.html">EMF Protection Products</a>
<a href="http://www.emfnews.org/headset.html">Airtube Headsets</a>
<a href="http://www.emfnews.org/qlinks.html">Cell   more...Tower Protection</a>
Where are subtle energies converted from? Where are they conducted to?
Dr. William Tiller hypothesizes that subtle energies may be a type of energy or energies within the vacuum state. Dr. Tiller hypothesizes that their energy is possibly converted through the magnetic vector potentials identified in quantum physics. These potentials are the parent field for all electromagnetic phenomena. This conversion process is taking place all the time, though in a raw, relatively chaotic state. Other scientists postulate that subtle energies are part of quantum fields (Dr. Glen Rein). Subtle energies may play a role in string theory. The string theory interpretation implies that subtle energies are part of dimensional structures that underlay the phenomena of both matter and energy wave packets.
If a technology could be engineered that more systematically clarified, converted and conducted subtle energies from the vacuum state into the realm of currently measurable energies, such as classical electromagnetics - that is, into the realm of common forces and matter and thus into any physical, chemical or biological system - the implications would be enormous.
If a technological process could be successfully developed, then, in general, the following would be expected:
1. electron and photon flows would be more efficient
2. electromagnetic interactions would be more efficient
3. valence shell bonding process would happen faster and would be more energy efficient (ionic bonding processes would be more energy efficient giving rise to more stable bonds)
In theory, the technological ability to convert raw subtle energies into condensed specific vector energies implies that any system would become more refined, more stabilized and energy efficient - i.e. more clarified.
<a href="http://www.emfnews.org/chipcategory.html">EMF Protection Products</a>
<a href="http://www.emfnews.org/headset.html">Airtube Headsets</a>
<a href="http://www.emfnews.org/qlinks.html">Cell Tower Protection</a>  less

<a href="http://www.emfnews.org/chipcategory.html">EMF Protection Products</a>
<a href="http://www.emfnews.org/headset.html">Airtube Headsets</a>
<a href="http://www.emfnews.org/qlinks.html">Cell   more...Tower Protection</a>
Reduces Stress and Improves Performance!An MSA Meridian Stress Assessment test at the September, 2000 PGA International Show of over 200 participants was done by Steve McGregor of BioMeridian International, Inc. McGregor stated, "I've conducted thousands of tests using the BioMeridian system in every industry and I've never seen anything like the QLink results. Whether the QLink was worn for two minutes or two days, every subject exhibited a dramatic increase in measurable energy, a strengthened resistance to the effects of stress, and a shift to their ideal performance state."
The same MSA test was repeated on the practice tee of the SBC Senior Classic in LA in October, 2000 using 60% of the field of professionals. Every player tested showed an improvement with the QLink, and the vast majority showed a huge improvement. With the QLink, players were nearly five times more likely to reach the ideal target zone, than without it, when measured on the FDA approved BioMeridian system.
http://www.emfnews.org/productinfo.html

The QLink helps regulate homeostasis and boosts resistance to the effects of stress. Studies conducted at the University of California at Irvine, Imperial College at London, University of Vienna's Institute of Cancer, University of Vienna's Institute of Environmental Health, and independent clinics have persuaded researchers of the QLink's benefits.
Blood Quality Improves with QLink!
Stress can deteriorate the condition of blood. Two different studies by microbiologist Robert Young stronglly suggest that as the QLink increases resistance to stress, blood quality improves. http://www.emfnews.org/chipcategory.html
The conclusions of this remarkable study support the experiences of QLink users who consistently report enhanced abilities to cope with physical, mental, emotional and environmental stress. This increased stress resistance strongly correlates to improved focus and performance.
<a href="http://www.emfnews.org/chipcategory.html">EMF Protection Products</a>
<a href="http://www.emfnews.org/headset.html">Airtube Headsets</a>
<a href="http://www.emfnews.org/qlinks.html">Cell Tower Protection</a>  less

<a href="http://www.emfnews.org/chipcategory.html">EMF Protection Products</a>
<a href="http://www.emfnews.org/headset.html">Airtube Headsets</a>
<a href="http://www.emfnews.org/qlinks.html">Cell   more...Tower Protection</a>
"Find out why over 300 Tour Professionals
depend on this amazing device for increased focus, reduced stress and anxiety, and lower scores..."
http://www.emfnews.org/headset.html
A two month study of players on the regular PGA Tour in 1999 was conducted to determine if use of the QLink would result in lower golf scores. Known users of the QLink were identified, confirmed, and a statistical analysis of their cuts made was conducted. The percentage of cuts made by each player in the five months prior to wearing the QLink was calculated for each player, and then again for the two month period wearing the QLink. An astounding 77% of known QLink users made a higher percentage of cuts with the QLink!
http://www.emfnews.org/chipcategory.html
The October, 2000 testing of the QLink at the SBC Senior Tour Classic resulted in 11 of the top 15 tournament contestants having taken part in our study, including the top three finishers. This group of 11 represented 14% of the field, yet they took home 53% of the prize money.
In referring first to the SBC Classic, and then the Senior Tour Championship, The Golf Channel reported that "For the record, new QLink wearers finished 1st, 2nd, 3rd, and one tied for 5th, and two ties for 7th in Los Angeles. And the next week at the tour championship in Myrtle Beach, QLink wearers finished 2nd, with three more QLink wearers finished tied for 3rd place. As reporters, we don't of course endorse products, we only report facts. And the facts here, are what we report."
http://www.emfnews.org/productinfo.html

There's no question about it. If you want to:
• Reduce first tee jitters
• Reduce anxiety
• Reduce stress
• Reduce bad shots
• Control emotions
• and lower your scores...
Then you owe it to yourself to try the Q-Link® Pendant. Still want more proof? Look at the following studies that show how effective this amazing device really is...
<a href="http://www.emfnews.org/chipcategory.html">EMF Protection Products</a>
<a href="http://www.emfnews.org/headset.html">Airtube Headsets</a>
<a href="http://www.emfnews.org/qlinks.html">Cell Tower Protection</a>  less

<a href="http://www.emfnews.org/chipcategory.html">EMF Protection Products</a>
<a href="http://www.emfnews.org/headset.html">Airtube Headsets</a>
<a href="http://www.emfnews.org/qlinks.html">Cell   more...Tower Protection</a>
<a href="http://www.emfnews.org/cell-phone-radiation-book.html">Educational
Cell Phone Ebook</a>
In December, 2006, an epidemiological study on cell phone dangers published in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute sent the media into a frenzy.10 Newspaper headlines blared: Danish Study Shows Cell Phone Use is Safe, while TV newscasters proclaimed, Go ahead and talk all you wantits safe! The news seemed to be a holiday gift for cell phone users. But unfortunately, its a flawed study, funded by the cell phone industry and designed to bring a positive result. The industrys public relations machine is working in overdrive to assure that the study get top-billing in the media worldwide.
According to Dr. George Carlo, the study, by its design, could not identify even a very large risk. Therefore, any claim that it proves theres no risk from cell phones is a blatant misrepresentation of the data that will give consumers a very dangerous false sense of security.
Epidemiological studies are targets for fixing the outcome because theyre observational in nature instead of experimental, Dr. Carlo explains. Its possible to design studies with pre-determined outcomesthat still fall within the range of acceptable science. Thus, even highly flawed epidemiological studies can be published in peer-reviewed journals because theyre judged against a pragmatic set of standards that assume the highest integrity among the investigators.
Key problems with the study are:
1. There are few discernable differences between who was defined as cell phone users and who wasnt. Thus, people defined as exposed to radiation were pretty much the same as those defined as not exposed to radiation. With few differences, its nearly impossible to find a risk.
2. Users were defined as anyone who made at least one phone call per week for six months between 1982 and 1995. So any person who made 26 calls was a cell phone user and therefore considered exposed to radiation. Those with less than 26 calls were non-users. In reality, the radiation exposure between users and non-users defined in this manner is not discernable.
3. The exposed people used ancient cell phone technology bearing little resemblance to cell phones used today. The results, even if reliable, have no relevance to the 2 billion cell phone users today.
4. From 1982 to 1995, cell phone minutes cost much more than today and people used their phones much less. Thus there was very little radiation exposure.
5. During the studys time frame, people likely to use their cell phones the most were commercial subscribers. Yet this highest exposed group, in whom risk would most easily be identified, was specifically excluded from the study.
6. There were no biological hypotheses tested in the study. It was therefore only a numbers game. Ignored were mechanisms of disease found in other studies of cell phone radiation effects, including genetic damage, blood-brain barrier leakage, and disrupted intercellular communication. The study did not discuss any research supporting the notion that cell phones could cause problems in users.
7. The study itself was inconsistent with cancer statistics published worldwide addressing the Danish population. This study showed a low risk of cancer overall, when in fact Denmark has some of the highest cancer rates in the world. This inconsistency suggested that something in the data does not add up.
The cell phone industry constantly guards its financial interests, but unfortunately, an unwitting public can be harmed in the process, says Dr. Carlo. Industry-funded studies in many cases now produce industry-desired outcomes. By tampering with the integrity of scientists, scientific systems and public information steps over the lines of propriety that   less

<a href="http://www.emfnews.org/chipcategory.html">EMF Protection Products</a>
<a href="http://www.emfnews.org/headset.html">Airtube Headsets</a>
<a href="http://www.emfnews.org/qlinks.html">Cell   more...Tower Protection</a>
<a href="http://www.emfnews.org/cell-phone-radiation-book.html">Educational
Cell Phone Ebook</a>
To repair damage and build the bodys defenses against the onslaught of EMR, supplementsalong with dietary changes, stress reduction, weight control and exercisemake you stronger, more balanced, and better able to face the assaults of EMR. Antioxidant supplements that fight free radicals are especially desirable.
Says Dr. Carlo: You as a human being are put under siege by the electromagnetic soup were swimming in, and this isnt hyperbole, its true. When you answer your cell phone, radio signals are around you. Just because you cant see it doesnt mean its not there. Our general ability to compensate for those insults is becoming compromised by the ever-increasing background of EMR.
Taking as many precautions as you can goes a long way to reducing the risks. However, Dr. Carlo cautions that there is no silver bullet solution. Its a complicated problem, and while we tend to look for a quick fix, there is none here. Over the next decade, I hope we figure out how to change the way signals are transmitted. A thousand years from now we will have evolved, but thats not helping us now. This will take time, but consumers have to be empowered to help themselves in the interim.
European Research Confirms Cell Phone Dangers
The industry took its tricks elsewhereto Europe, which had picked up the ball and began funding independent research to corroborate or confirm the work of Dr. Carlo and his team. The work was completed in mid-2004 and when it was released,12 it not only provided independent scientific corroboration of the work done by Dr. Carlos group, but also took the work a step further and showed how the problems were occurring mechanistically. This information formed a biologically plausible hypothesis for how cell phone radiation could be related to so many diseases.
Dr. Carlo noted, The industry exerted pressure on the scientists who conducted the work, including renowned German scientist Dr. Franz Adlkofer. It first tried to change the conclusions of the work, then to delay its public release. Then Dr. Adlkofer, the lead scientist, was attacked in the media and threatened privately with no more research money, a ruined reputationsimilar to what we experienced in the WTR. But this situation attracted the attention of a German documentary filmmaker, who decided to do a film on the cell phone issue.
It was enough to bring Dr. Carlo into view again, as he was asked to participate. The film, The Boiling Frog Principle, by Klaus Scheidsteger, builds on information from his first film, The Cell Phone War, and will be released in 2007. Its intent is to integrate the latest political and scientific evidence from around the world, and bring forth to consumers important information on cell phone dangers that was previously withheld. To learn more go to http://www.CellphoneLies.com http://www.emfnews.org  less

<a href="http://www.emfnews.org/chipcategory.html">EMF Protection Products</a>
<a href="http://www.emfnews.org/headset.html">Airtube Headsets</a>
<a href="http://www.emfnews.org/qlinks.html">Cell   more...Tower Protection</a>
<a href="http://www.emfnews.org/cell-phone-radiation-book.html">Educational
Cell Phone Ebook</a>
Following the loss of his home, Dr. Carlo collaborated with Washington columnist Martin Schramwho in the course of the work did his own research to corroborate Dr. Carlos view on thingsto write Cell Phones: Invisible Hazards in the Wireless Age (Carroll & Graf, 2001). He wrote his book as what he thought would be a last volley at the cell phone industry.
I needed to tell the whole story in one place. I didnt have the resources or the manpower to match what the cell phone industry was doing to try to discredit the work, says Dr. Carlo. Based on the book, a number of lawsuits were brought against the industry, and insurance carriers began excluding cell phone-related health risks in their coverage. It created a very difficult situation in the industry and for myself. I was worn out fighting that battle. In 2002, after Id done my book tour, I just decided to take a break for a couple of years.
Instead of taking a break, however, Dr. Carlo ended up working behind the scenes, setting up an organization and a registry for the benefit of consumers. It was a creative solution as part of the settlement of a lawsuit brought by a Illinois citizen against the cell phone industry, WTR, and Dr. Carlo personally. The lawsuit alleged that the cell phone industry, WTR, and Dr. Carlo were conspiring to hide the dangers of cell phones. Dr. Carlo was offered a way out of the suit because his book had made it clear he wasnt on the same page as the industry.I wanted to make sure the litigation brought at least some value to consumers. We created the Safe Wireless Initiative (www.safewireless.org) for disseminating information on the dangers and on prevention, and the Mobile Telephone Health Concerns Registry (www.health-concerns.org) to track information voluntarily provided by cell phone users, particularly those who believe theyre experiencing health effects. Post-market surveillance hadnt been done before, and the registry does that. It will help direct future research of potential health effects related to cell phone use. In the end, we did the best we could to get some benefit for consumers.
To learn more go to http://www.CellphoneLies.com http://www.emfnews.org  less

<a href="http://www.emfnews.org/chipcategory.html">EMF Protection Products</a>
<a href="http://www.emfnews.org/headset.html">Airtube Headsets</a>
<a href="http://www.emfnews.org/qlinks.html">Cell   more...Tower Protection</a>
<a href="http://www.emfnews.org/cell-phone-radiation-book.html">Educational
Cell Phone Ebook</a>
Every day, were swimming in a sea of electromagnetic radiation (EMR) produced by electrical appliances, power lines, wiring in buildings, and a slew of other technologies that are part of modern life. From the dishwasher and microwave oven in the kitchen and the clock radio next to your bed, to the cellular phone you hold to your earsometimes for hours each dayexposure to EMR is growing and becoming a serious health threat.
But theres a huge public health crisis looming from one particular threat: EMR from cellular phonesboth the radiation from the handsets and from the tower-based antennas carrying the signalswhich studies have linked to development of brain tumors, genetic damage, and other exposure-related conditions.1-9 Yet the government and a well-funded cell phone industry media machine continue to mislead the unwary public about the dangers of a product used by billions of people. Most recently, a Danish epidemiological study announced to great fanfare the inaccurate conclusion that cell phone use is completely safe.10
George Carlo, PhD, JD, is an epidemiologist and medical scientist who, from 1993 to 1999, headed the first telecommunications industry-backed studies into the dangers of cell phone use. That program remains the largest in the history of the issue. But he ran afoul of the very industry that hired him when his work revealed preventable health hazards associated with cell phone use.
In this article, we look at why cell phones are dangerous; Dr. Carlos years-long battle to bring the truth about cell phone dangers to the public; the industrys campaign to discredit him and other scientists in the field; and what you can do to protect yourself now. To learn more go to http://www.CellphoneLies.com http://www.emfnews.org  less

Some logic on Cell Phone Radiation

What is my cell phone doing to me?

http://www.emfnews.org/home_protection.html<a href="http://www.emfnews.org/headset.html">Airtube Headset</a> Ever growing scientific research corroborates the suspicion that   more...radiation transmitted by cell phones and other wireless devices can:* Cause brain tumors* Harm blood cells and cause cellular changes* Damage your DNA* Cause nerve-cell damage* Accelerate and contribute to onset of autism and trigger Alzheimer’s disease* Damage your eyes* Cause sleep disruptions<a href="http://www.emfnews.org/qlinks.html">Qlink Pendants</a>  less

http://www.emfnews.org/home_protection.html<a href="http://www.emfnews.org/headset.html">Airtube Headset</a> cell phone radiation brain tumor,acoustic neuroma brain tumor,malignant   more...brain tumor,gliomas brain tumors,brain tumor risks,meningiomas ,brain tumors,cellular phones brain tumors,glioblastoma brain tumor<a href="http://www.emfnews.org/qlinks.html">Qlink Pendants</a>  less

http://www.emfnews.org/home_protection.html<a href="http://www.emfnews.org/headset.html">Airtube Headset</a> Cell phone cancer wiki cell phone cancer bluetooth,cell phone   more...brain cancer,cell phone cancer cnn, cell phone radiation,cordless phone cancer,cell phone tumor, bluetooth cancer<a href="http://www.emfnews.org/qlinks.html">Qlink Pendants</a>  less

http://www.emfnews.org/home_protection.html<a href="http://www.emfnews.org/headset.html">Airtube Headset</a> "If you have trouble sleeping, you should think about not   more...talking on a mobile phone right before you go to bed. The study strongly suggests that mobile phone use is associated with specific changes in the areas of the brain responsible for activating and coordinating the stress system," he added.<a href="http://www.emfnews.org/qlinks.html">Qlink Pendants</a>  less

http://www.emfnews.org/home_protection.html<a href="http://www.emfnews.org/headset.html">Airtube Headset</a> biopro emf harmonizer, dr george carlo bioprobiopro cell chip, biopro   more...smart card, qlink emf protection, biopro emf protection, emf radiation , protection, cordless phone .<a href="http://www.emfnews.org/qlinks.html">Qlink Pendants</a>  less

http://www.emfnews.org/home_protection.html<a href="http://www.emfnews.org/headset.html">Airtube Headset</a> Dr. [George Carlo] was head of the Wireless Technology Research   more...group and stunned his industry sponsors by saying radiation from cell phones "poses a real cancer and health risk."<a href="http://www.emfnews.org/qlinks.html">Qlink Pendants</a>  less

http://www.emfnews.org/home_protection.html<a href="http://www.emfnews.org/headset.html">Airtube Headset</a> Dr. [George Carlo] was head of the Wireless Technology Research   more...group and stunned his industry sponsors by saying radiation from cell phones "poses a real cancer and health risk."<a href="http://www.emfnews.org/qlinks.html">Qlink Pendants</a>  less

http://www.emfnews.org/home_protection.html<a href="http://www.emfnews.org/headset.html">Airtube Headset</a> George Carlo and Martin Schram. In 1993, a man from Tampa, Fla.,   more...went on "Larry King Live" and told the nation that a cell phone killed ... They hired a public health scientist named George Carlo to coordinate it, and in retrospect, they're probably wishing they hadn't done that.<a href="http://www.emfnews.org/qlinks.html">Qlink Pendants</a>  less

http://www.emfnews.org/home_protection.html<a href="http://www.emfnews.org/headset.html">Airtube Headset</a> A well-recognised scientist, Dr George Carlo, was invited by the   more...CTIA to head the WTR's research program. However, in February of 1999, George Carlo, who had previously maintained the Industry line that mobile phones were safe, stunned the industry<a href="http://www.emfnews.org/qlinks.html">Qlink Pendants</a>  less

A Rant about cell phones