The Dark Side of Wireless Technology

[Prorootect]

The Dark Side of Wireless Technology
The Dark Side of Wireless Technology
New film explores hidden health problems linked to constant connectivity
By Conan Milner, Epoch Times
January 9, 2018 6:11 pm Last Updated: January 9, 2018 6:11 pm

Our bodies are subjected to one quintillion (1,000,000,000,000,000,000) times more electromagnetic radiation compared to just a decade ago, according to Olle Johansson, associate professor in neuroscience at the Karolinska Institute in Sweden.(jamesteohart/shutterstock)

Wireless technology is modern magic. For the price of a device and a data plan, you are granted the power to communicate and connect to the World Wide Web through a pocket-sized screen. But some evidence suggests this magic has a dark side, and we may be paying more for it than we realize.
With an estimated 4.8 billion cellphone users worldwide, it’s hard to fathom that something so commonplace could pose health problems. Besides, since the 1990s, government and industry experts have maintained that cellphones are safe, and have pointed to studies that reveal no problems associated with wireless exposure.
Yet there is compelling evidence of harm. In 2016, the National Toxicology Program released a report from its 16-year, $25 million study examining the health impacts of wireless radiation. Researchers determined that the microwave field flowing from our phones is “proven to be harmful to humans and the environment.” Effects include increased cancer risk, a rise in harmful free radicals, genetic damage, structural and functional changes to the reproductive system, learning and memory deficits, neurological disorders, and a negative impact on our general well-being.

Researchers determined that the microwave field flowing from our phones is “proven to be harmful to humans and the environment.”

This conclusion comes as no surprise in much of the developed world, where public health officials have taken evidence of harm seriously for years. In the United Kingdom, France, Belgium, Russia, and other nations, wireless users—especially children—are urged to minimize their exposure to microwave radiation.
But in the United States, public health officials have been hesitant to sound the alarm. In 2014, the Centers for Disease Control issued a public statement urging caution with cellphone use, but retracted the statement just a few weeks later.
Last month, the California Department of Public Health (CDPH) released consumer guidelines on how to lessen exposure to wireless radiation, particularly for children, citing a possible link to harmful health conditions like cancer and lower sperm count. But it almost didn’t happen. The CDPH made their recommendations several years ago, but refused to release them to the public until a lawsuit forced the agency to do so.
According to the San Francisco Chronicle, an attorney defending the CDPH’s decision to withhold the recommendations said the CDPH didn’t want to cause “unnecessary panic.”

In the United Kingdom, France, Belgium, Russia, and other nations, wireless users, especially children, are urged to minimize their exposure to microwave radiation.(Subbotina Anna/Shutterstock)

‘Generation Zapped’
Filmmaker Sabine El Gemayel believes we deserve to have a better understanding of the health impact associated with wireless technology. That’s the mission of her new documentary, “Generation Zapped.”
“I made the movie because no one would believe me,” El Gemayel told The Epoch Times. “But that’s the power of media. When it’s well done, well documented, and doesn’t go into conspiracy theories or fake news, then people listen to the information and are willing to make lifestyle changes for the health of their family.”

- Read MORE on the website....

 

[bribon77]

We're all contaminated. We are victims of Progress.

 

[shmu26]

This whole issue about cellphone radiation was hashed out 10-15 years ago. Someone is just trying to make a fast buck by sensationalizing a disproven health concern.

 

[tim one]

Like any new technology, the potentially harmful effects will be evident in the coming years.

 

[Prorootect]

It's conspiracy theory, nothing else.
If they found nothing nasty for 10-15 years that this technology exists, then in the coming years I don't see bad news coming... I don't believe in bad news at all, I think it's 100% safe, no bad influences on health neither cause of phones, nor operator towers.
I especially agree with shmu26 post #3 good sense findings.

- "since the 1990s, government and industry experts have maintained that cellphones are safe, and have pointed to studies that reveal no problems associated with wireless exposure."

... but The Epoch Times - Breaking news, independent China news is interesting world news website. Independent...

 

[ForgottenSeer 58943]

I've been involved with studying these matters in the past. We almost always found health impacts. The question isn't if there are, but what the long term impact will be (if any) that's where the debate is heading.. I addressed most of this in this thread;

New Findings On Dangerous Cell Phone Radiation

Speculation from some experts is the human body works tirelessly to adapt itself to persevere at any cost. Nature is resilient and adaptable. For example we've documented and studied trees that do what's called 'self pruning' to reduce their own exposure to non-biologically compatible energy such as from high tension power lines and such. There is evidence in the modern age that the body is adapting, you can find studies relating to that. I'm too lazy today to look them up. The industry is already proactively protecting itself from future liability by stating in cell phone owner manuals not to keep your phone close to your body and to keep it 3-4 inches from your head..

I'd recommend casting a suspicious eye to anything coming out from industry, industry funded studies and the military industrial complex. We know how they've handled public health matters in the past...

 

[tim one]

It's conspiracy theory, nothing else.
If they found nothing nasty for 10-15 years that this technology exists, then in the coming years I don't see bad news coming... I don't believe in bad news at all, I think it's 100% safe, no bad influences on health neither cause of phones, nor operator towers.
I especially agree with shmu26 post #3 good sense findings.

- "since the 1990s, government and industry experts have maintained that cellphones are safe, and have pointed to studies that reveal no problems associated with wireless exposure."

... but The Epoch Times - Breaking news, independent China news is interesting world news website. Independent...

The medical science needs time to investigate and understand if certain electromagnetic devices may affect human health. It is well known that the medical statistics need time to be able to say with certainty what is evil and what is not.

25/30 years ago there were no mobile devices that require a 3G connection, Wi-Fi or Bluetooth. Everything that was used by man in everyday life was linked to radio and television.

Today if you walk down the street you can realize how many of the devices that propagate the electromagnetic waves are active.

Certainly, the emission power is crucial, but I don't know if a constant exposure can be harmful or not.

 

[Prorootect]

@ ForgottenSeer 58943 , tim one,
See that you want to be an ardent supporter of conspiracy theories......
And what's more about the topic of working conditions de tech that repaired TV sets, when cathodic tubes sowed 17 thousand volts. You'll say that they all died because of it.... that they have made something worse for their health because of it?
Want you to be invulnerable to electrical attacks, so look at this website: zapatopi.net: Zapato Productions intradimensional - and this post how to protect yourself from the electrical attacks: ZPi | Russian Aluminum Foil Second Skin - as it's demonstrated in this video:
Today I will show you how to become invulnerable to electricity -
КАК СТАТЬ НЕУЯЗВИМЫМ К ЭЛЕКТРИЧЕСТВУ полностью обмотался фольгой


- and Twitter account of Lyle Zapato: Lyle Zapato (@LyleZapato) | Twitter

 

[ForgottenSeer 58943]

@ ForgottenSeer 58943 , tim one,
See that you want to be an ardent supporter of conspiracy theories......

I have around 12 years of solid research, scientific study and clinical activity related specifically to biological emf exposure fields. It's nothing to do with conspiracy theories or random speculation. It's all based on provable, careful, deliberate and repeatable studies on the subject with some of the finest experts in the world - science at it's finest.

Prove it to yourself.. Go buy a Darkfield Lab Siedentopf Trinocular Microscope and start examining your live blood samples before and after EMF exposure. You'll find what everyone that has studied this has found, platelet rouleaux aggregation quantitative to the strength and duration of exposure. Understand that this platelet aggregation is also present in many chronic illnesses, including chronic inflammation and cancer. What is even more interesting is aggregation in non-human biological matter has been measured such as the chloroform expression in Spathiphyllum cochlearispathum.

The full extent of HUMAN health impacts of that are what haven't been fully quantified (or at least revealed to the public other than a slow dribble) but the causal link has been established. The only unknown variable here is the actual impact beyond causal link of measurable biological changes. That impact is what can often take decades to properly quantify beyond a casual link and that is what is often subverted by corporate interests and governments. "Yes, we know it changes things, but we don't know if that change really matters or is the cause of medical conditions". That's where we are with this right now. When the casual link was established for cigarettes it was another 30 years before the public was made aware of that casual link expanded into quantified biological damage. and/or medical conditions.

Until you get a decade or two of studying, measuring and clinical observation of this then what you are doing amounts to random speculation or simple opinion, which is fine, I'll give you that, everyone is entitled to those freedoms.. I will acknowledge though, many people studying this field come under attack/harassment from govt. and industry, so someone may be hiding something and getting anxious when people start poking around in this field.

 

[Prorootect]

There are microvolts only (70 µV maybe?...).. not milivolts, not volts, ...and not thousands of volts from Electro-Magnetic Fields, waves.
Microvolts is nothing.
I think that I'm safe from mobile's radiation, cause I phone for 30 seconds a day on average.

Anti-microvolts website: Toxic Energy Field Info: on basicstowellness.com: Toxic Energy Field Info/Mitigation – Basics To Wellness

But: have you been seen someone collapsed IMMEDIATELY cause these microvolts?
"If you have ever witnessed an individual lose their electrolytes as they are called, you will notice one startling event, they collapse IMMEDIATELY" - have you been seen this event?

An from your link you posted too in December'2017:
"Here’s the conundrum: according to the document in question, there are no legal regulations for what is considered safe or unsafe when it comes to proximity and amount of exposure. But at the same time, the Federal Communications Commission also requires mobile device manufacturers to ensure that their products meet safe use standards. Unfortunately, as the powerhouse behind this issue has discovered, the fault seems to be in the regulatory agencies who also overlooked the matter, thinking it had been put to bed.

Without further information, there’s no final say-so on whether or not prolonged proximity to the radiation emitted from a mobile device is harmful or not, or whether it is connected to the growth of tumors. All that is certain is that the FCC and manufacturers think you should keep your distance, although they won’t definitively say why."

- Tech that repaired ancient TV sets is well alive.
TV set salesmen in shops are still all alive.

 

[Prorootect]

Some links to learn about electromagnetic radiation:

Does AC current produce EM waves?: on physics.stackexchange.com: Does AC current produce EM waves?
How Electronics Create Electromagnetic Radiation (EMF): on defendershield.com: How Electronics Create Electromagnetic Radiation (EMF) - DefenderShield
How Cell-phone Radiation Works: on electronics.howstuffworks.com: How Cell-phone Radiation Works

 

[Prorootect]

High cell-phone radiation causes tumors in rats, but humans should be safe: Researchers
washingtontimes.com: High cell-phone radiation causes tumors in rats, but humans should be safe: Researchers
By Laura Kelly - The Washington Times - Friday, February 2, 2018

"Scientists studying the effects of radiation from cell phone frequency emissions say there’s evidence that the technology can cause cancerous tumors in the heart, but that the needed levels of radiation are much higher than what people are currently and frequently exposed to.
National Toxicology Program senior scientist Dr. John Boucher spoke with reporters in a media call Friday ahead of the public release of draft study of his agency’s 10-year, $25 million study of the effects of cellphone radiation emission on rats and mice.

The two reports are available for view and public comment on the NTP website. In March, external experts will review both reports to determine if they agree with the conclusions of the scientists.

One of the most surprising findings, Dr. Boucher said, was the growth of malignant schwannoma, a cancerous tumor in the tissue of the heart that occurred particularly in male rats.

Yet he cautioned that the level of radiation was much higher than the typical cell phone emits and a person would receive.

“The typical cell phone call has Radio Frequency Radiation Emission that are very, very, much lower than what we studied,” he said.

“Typical cell phone use is not going to be directly related to the kind of exposure that we used in these studies.”

The type of radiation the test rodent were exposed to was likened to the maximum amount of radiation a person could experience during a call in a poor connection situation — with the cell phone achieving higher radiation emission as it struggles to connect to signal towers.

The researches evaluated this radiation level on the rodents over nine hours a day for over two years, Dr. Boucher said.

“So this is a situation obviously that people are not going to be encountering,” but it does provide scientists with evidence of a link between certain levels of this type of radiation and biological changes, he said."...

---------------------------------

- so all is good, better to forget this cell phone radiation "problem", I think...

 

[Prorootect]

Of Science, Certainty, and the Safety of Cell Phone Radiation
undark.org: Of Science, Certainty, and the Safety of Cell Phone Radiation
Does electromagnetic radiation from cell phones pose a public health risk? To some people, the question seems paranoid. To others, convinced that their devices are proven hazards, the question seems dangerously naïve. And therein lies a vexing challenge for science journalists: How do you cover an issue when the stakes for human health seem so high, scientific questions still linger, and passions run so deep?
For reporters who raise advocates’ ire, the backlash can be swift and robust.

At issue here is the low-energy radiation emitted by cell phones and other personal electronics. These kinds of electromagnetic fields don’t directly damage bonds in DNA, and the Federal Communications Commission, the Food and Drug Administration, and other government agencies generally consider them safe at the levels associated with cell phones. “The majority of studies published have failed to show an association between exposure to radiofrequency from a cell phone and health problems,” the FDA states unequivocally on its website.

It’s true, of course, that some individual studies have suggested potential links between this sort of radiation and a range of health problems. And in the next few weeks, the U.S. National Toxicology Program, part of the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, is expected to release the final results of a $25 million study of the effects of cell phone radiofrequency radiation on rats. Preliminary results from the study, released in May of 2016, suggested a link between cell phone radiation and tumor formation.

At the same time, it’s possible to find data suggesting low-level risks from many things, ranging from fluoride to vaccines, even though there is little aggregate evidence of a public health crisis. And it’s worth noting that the NTP study also inspired skepticism from some scientists.

Still, as more people — and more and more children — spend time with cell phones, the murky margins of scientific evidence and lingering uncertainty are very likely to stir more concern and debate. And for reporters who step into this conversation and raise advocates’ ire, the backlash can be swift and robust. That response was on display last month, after the California Department of Public Health released new guidelines for “individuals and families who want to decrease their exposure to the radio frequency energy emitted from cell phones.”...

...Much of the most-cited research in this field has been performed on rats or tissue cultures, not human beings. Large epidemiological studies can suggest correlations, but they struggle to establish clear lines of causation. And perhaps most tellingly, nearly two decades after the widespread introduction of cell phones in industrialized countries, brain cancer rates have not spiked.

• From a 2010 study in the journal Neuro-Oncology. The top chart shows cell phone subscribers in the U.S. The bottom shows age-adjusted incidence of brain cancer.

“There’s nothing much happening with brain cancer. It’s just flat. The same rates per 100,000 people are getting brain cancer today as they were before cell phones,” said Simon Chapman, an emeritus professor at the University of Sydney School of Public Health and the lead author of a 2016 study of the relationship between cell phone adoption and brain cancer rates in Australia. “I’m not seeing any major international or national cancer bodies who can gather together the best evidence, the best experts, and publish consensus statements saying that this is something the public should be worried about,” Chapman told Undark.
“The only groups waving the red flag and saying ‘stop’ are fringe groups, people like Devra Davis and her group of cohorts,” he added....
... read MORE at the website...

Comment:
Tom Whitney
02.03.2018 @4:50 PM
Ellie, Theodora, Devra and others commenting on this issue may be struggling to understand the real meaning of the NTP rodent studies with respect to their conclusions on the levels of evidence found. The adjective most used to describe the findings is EQUIVOCAL. This word is not commonly used in daily conversations so it might be useful to know some of the synonyms which are more common. The top ten in my thesaurus are: doubtful, uncertain, ambiguous, ambivalent, dubious, evasive, muddled, puzzling, unclear and vague.
So, in this 10-year, 25 million dollar study – exposing rats to intensities of RF between 1,875% and 7,500% higher than FCC maximum permissible exposure for humans, which found than the level of evidence of adverse health effects was EQUIVOCAL – know that it means that it is UNCERTAIN, DUBIOUS, MUDDLED, UNCLEAR or VAGUE. Or, in other words – the jury is in – the exposures are safe – and it’s time to put away the fear-mongering and conspiracy theories and get on with your life.

 

[Prorootect]

BUT but but...

World’s Largest Animal Study On Cell Tower Radiation Confirms Cancer Link
govtslaves.info: World’s Largest Animal Study On Cell Tower Radiation Confirms Cancer Link – GOVTSLAVES.INFO
March 24, 2018 Author GOV'T SLAVES

EHTRUST–Researchers with the renowned Ramazzini Institute (RI) in Italy announce that a large-scale lifetime study of lab animals exposed to environmental levels of cell tower radiation developed cancer. A $25 million study of much higher levels of cell phone radiofrequency (RF) radiation, from the US National Toxicology Program (NTP), has also reported finding the same unusual cancer called Schwannoma of the heart in male rats treated at the highest dose. In addition, the RI study of cell tower radiation also found increases in malignant brain (glial) tumors in female rats and precancerous conditions including Schwann cells hyperplasia in both male and female rats.

“Our findings of cancerous tumors in rats exposed to environmental levels of RF are consistent with and reinforce the results of the US NTP studies on cell phone radiation, as both reported increases in the same types of tumors of the brain and heart in Sprague-Dawley rats. Together, these studies provide sufficient evidence to call for the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) to re-evaluate and re-classify their conclusions regarding the carcinogenic potential of RFR in humans,” said Fiorella Belpoggi PhD, study author and RI Director of Research.

The Ramazzini study exposed 2448 Sprague-Dawley rats from prenatal life until their natural death to “environmental” cell tower radiation for 19 hours per day (1.8 GHz GSM radiofrequency radiation (RFR) of 5, 25 and 50 V/m). RI exposures mimicked base station emissions like those from cell tower antennas, and exposure levels were far less than those used in the NTP studies of cell phone radiation.

“All of the exposures used in the Ramazzini study were below the US FCC limits. These are permissible exposures according the FCC. In other words, a person can legally be exposed to this level of radiation. Yet cancers occurred in these animals at these legally permitted levels. The Ramazzini findings are consistent with the NTP study demonstrating these effects are a reproducible finding,” explained Ronald Melnick PhD, formerly the Senior NIH toxicologist who led the design of the NTP study on cell phone radiation now a Senior Science Advisor to Environmental Health Trust (EHT). “Governments need to strengthen regulations to protect the public from these harmful non-thermal exposures.”

“This important article from one of the most acclaimed institutions of its kind in the world provides a major new addition to the technical literature indicating strong reasons for concern about electromagnetic radiation from base stations or cell towers,” stated Editor in Chief of Environmental Research Jose Domingo PhD, Professor of Toxicology, School of Medicine at Reus University, Catalonia, Spain.

“The US NTP results combined now with the Ramazzini study, reinforce human studies from our team and others providing clear evidence that RF radiation causes acoustic neuromaa (vestibular schwannoma) and gliomas, and should be classified carcinogenic to humans,” stated Lennart Hardell MD, PhD, physician-epidemiologist with the Department of Oncology, University Hospital, Örebro, Sweden, who has published extensively on environmental causes of cancer including Agent Orange, pesticides and cell phone radiofrequency radiation.


“The evidence indicating wireless is carcinogenic has increased and can no longer be ignored,” stated University of Toronto Dalla Lana School of Public Health Professor Emeritus Anthony B. Miller MD, Member of the Royal Colleges of Physicians of Canada and the UK, and Senior Medical Advisor to EHT who is also a long-term advisor to the World Health Organization.

“This study raises concerns that simply living close to a cell tower will pose threats to human health. Governments need to take measures to reduce exposures from cell tower emissions. Cell towers should not be near schools, hospitals or people’s homes. Public health agencies need to educate the public on how to reduce exposure from all sources of wireless radiofrequency radiation—be it from cell towers or cell phones or Wi-Fi in schools,” stated David O. Carpenter MD, former Dean of the School of Public Health at the University at Albany. “This is particularly urgent because of current plans to place small 5G cell towers about every 300 meters in every street across the country. These 5G ‘small cell’ antennas will result in continuous exposure to everyone living nearby and everyone walking down the street. The increased exposures will increase risk of cancer and other diseases such as electro-hypersensitivity.”

Ramazzini Institute investigators have completed nearly 500 cancer bioassays on more than 200 compounds, and their study design is unique in that animals are allowed to live until their natural deaths in order to allow detection of late-developing tumors. Eighty percent of all human cancers are late-developing, occurring in humans after 60 years of age. This longer observation period has allowed the RI to detect such later-occurring tumors for a number of chemicals, and their published research includes studies of benzene, xylenes, mancozeb, formaldehyde and vinyl chloride.

The Ramazzini research results come in the wake of similar findings from the US National Toxicology Program (NTP) large-scale experimental studies on cell phone radiation. Both studies found statistically significant increases in the development of the same type of very rare and highly malignant tumor in the heart of male rats—schwannomas.

“This publication is a serious cause for concern,” stated Annie J. Sasco MD, DrPH, SM, MPH, retired Director of Research at the INSERM (French NIH) and former Unit Chief at the International Agency for Research on Cancer/World Health Organization, France, who commented that, “some of the results are not statistically significant due to the relatively small number of animals involved. Yet, that does not mean they should be ignored. Larger studies could turn out statistically significant results and in any event statistical significance is just one aspect of evaluation of the relation between exposure and disease. Biological significance and concordance of results between humans and animals clearly reinforces the strength of the evidence of carcinogenicity. The facts that both experimental studies found the same types of rare tumors, which also have pertinence to the human clinical picture, is striking,”

“Such findings of effects at very low levels are not unexpected,” stated Devra Davis PhD, MPH, president of EHT, pointing to a Jacobs University replication animal study published in 2015 that also found very low levels of RFR promoted tumor growth. “This study confirms an ever growing literature and provides a wake-up call to governments to enact protective policy to limit exposures to the public and to the private sector to make safe radiation-free technology available.”

In January 2017 at an international conference co-sponsored by Environmental Health Trust and the Israel Institute for Advanced Study at Hebrew University, Fiorella Belpoggi PhD, Director of Research at the Ramazzini Institute, presented the study design and the findings that RFR-exposed animals had significantly lower litter weights. Belpoggi’s presentation and slides are available online. The Ramazzini findings of lower litter weights are consistent with the NTP study, which also found lower litter weights in prenatally exposed animals. At that time, the Italian journal Corriere published an article about the presentation of the Ramazzini study and quoted Belpoggi’s recommendation of “maximum precaution for children and pregnant women.”

Noting that “current standards were not set to protect children, pregnant women, and the growing numbers of infants and toddlers for whom devices have become playthings,” Davis, who is also Visiting Professor of Medicine of Hebrew University Medical Center and Guest Editor in Chief of the journal Environmental Research, added, “Current two-decade old FCC limits were set when the average call was six minutes and costly cell phones were used by very few. These important, new, game-changing studies show that animals develop the same types of unusual cancers that are being seen in those few human epidemiological studies that have been done. In light of these results, Environmental Health Trust joins with public health experts from the states of California, Connecticut and Maryland, as well as those in France, Israel and Belgium to call on government and the private sector to carry out major ongoing public health educational campaigns to promote safer phone and personal device technology, to require and expedite fundamental changes in hardware and software to reduce exposures to RFR/microwave radiation throughout indoor and outdoor environments, and to institute major monitoring, training and research programs to identify solutions, future problems and prevention of related hazards and risks.”

“More than a dozen countries recommend reducing radiofrequency radiation exposure to children, and countries such as China, Italy, India and Russia have far more stringent cell tower radiation regulations in place when compared to the United States FCC. However, this study provides scientific evidence that governments can use to take even further action,” stated Theodora Scarato, Executive Director of EHT.

The article is “Report of final results regarding brain and heart tumors in Sprague-Dawley rats exposed from prenatal life until natural death to mobile phone radiofrequency field representative of a 1.8 GHz base station environmental emission” by L. Falcioni, L. Bua, E.Tibaldi, M. Lauriola, L. De Angelis, F. Gnudi, D. Mandrioli, M. Manservigi, F. Manservisi, I. Manzoli, I. Menghetti, R. Montella, S. Panzacchi, D. Sgargi, V. Strollo, A.Vornoli, F. Belpoggi . It appears in Environmental Researchpublished by Elsevier.


3 Replies to “World’s Largest Animal Study On Cell Tower Radiation Confirms Cancer Link”

1. PJ London
   March 24, 2018 at 12:48 pm
   30 years ago I suggested a simple and effective means of checking whether the towers posed a threat.
   Every executive of a cell phone company and every manager in the EPA must have a tower situated on the roofs of their homes.
   Of course it would never work. They are beyond us mere mortals.
   
   
2. lois
   March 24, 2018 at 1:45 pm
   We already knew this! I grew up in a time when brain cancer was unheard of. Interesting that it’s appearance coincides with the overwhelming use of cell phones.
   
   
3. Strayhorse
   March 24, 2018 at 2:26 pm
   5G is e-smog on steroids. It will further decline the intellectual capacity of humans and render humans near zombie, being ever more suggestible. Cell towers are complicit in the deep state’s efforts to program and control human behavior – they are what is causing the increased school, university, workplace mass shootings. Read the studies on the effects of cell towers on developing brains. CIA-Facebook and CIA-Google. Its the real conspiracy. This ##### is real and in your face. And the deep state don’t give a damn as long as $$$ and population/gun control is theirs to wield.
   

 

[Prorootect]

Cosmic Rays in the Atmosphere

on spaceweather.com: SpaceWeather.com -- News and information about meteor showers, solar flares, auroras, and near-Earth asteroids

Readers, thank you for your patience while we continue to develop this new section of Spaceweather.com. We've been working to streamline our data reduction, allowing us to post results from balloon flights much more rapidly, and we have developed a new data product, shown here:

This plot displays radiation measurements not only in the stratosphere, but also at aviation altitudes. Dose rates are expessed as multiples of sea level. For instance, we see that boarding a plane that flies at 25,000 feet exposes passengers to dose rates ~10x higher than sea level. At 40,000 feet, the multiplier is closer to 50x. These measurements are made by our usual cosmic ray payload as it passes through aviation altitudes en route to the stratosphere over California.

What is this all about? Approximately once a week, Spaceweather.com and the students of Earth to Sky Calculus fly space weather balloons to the stratosphere over California. These balloons are equipped with radiation sensors that detect cosmic rays, a surprisingly "down to Earth" form of space weather. Cosmic rays can seed clouds, trigger lightning, and penetrate commercial airplanes. Furthermore, there are studies ( #1, #2, #3, #4) linking cosmic rays with cardiac arrhythmias and sudden cardiac death in the general population. Our latest measurements show that cosmic rays are intensifying, with an increase of more than 13% since 2015:

Why are cosmic rays intensifying? The main reason is the sun. Solar storm clouds such as coronal mass ejections (CMEs) sweep aside cosmic rays when they pass by Earth. During Solar Maximum, CMEs are abundant and cosmic rays are held at bay. Now, however, the solar cycle is swinging toward Solar Minimum, allowing cosmic rays to return. Another reason could be the weakening of Earth's magnetic field, which helps protect us from deep-space radiation.
The radiation sensors onboard our helium balloons detect X-rays and gamma-rays in the energy range 10 keV to 20 MeV. These energies span the range of medical X-ray machines and airport security scanners.
The data points in the graph above correspond to the peak of the Reneger-Pfotzer maximum, which lies about 67,000 feet above central California. When cosmic rays crash into Earth's atmosphere, they produce a spray of secondary particles that is most intense at the entrance to the stratosphere. Physicists Eric Reneger and Georg Pfotzer discovered the maximum using balloons in the 1930s and it is what we are measuring today.

 

[DarkLense]

An awesome post this time and I would like to just calmly say to everything written above:
"We are all gonna die"
and
"Are we really that blind to the indirect manipulation?"