LTE Cell Phone Radiation Affects Brain Activity in Cell Phone Users + Starlink to Kill the Earth?

By | September 24, 2013

Brain images pre- and post-LTE exposureBrain images pre- and post-LTE exposure
The first study on the short-term effects of Long Term Evolution (LTE), the fourth generation cell phone technology, has been published online in the peer-reviewed journal, Clinical Neurophysiology. (1)

In a controlled experiment, researchers exposed the right ear of 18 participants to LTE cellphone radiation for 30 minutes. The source of the radiation was 1 centimeter from the ear, and the absorbed amount of radiation in the brain was well within international (ICNIRP) cell phone legal limits. The researchers employed a double-blind, crossover, randomized and counter-balanced design to eliminate any possible study biases.

The resting state brain activity of each participant was measured by magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) at two times — after exposure to LTE microwave radiation, and after a sham exposure.

The results demonstrated that LTE exposure affected brain neural activity not only in the closer brain region but also in the remote region, including the left hemisphere of the brain. The study helps explain the underlying neural mechanism for the remote effects of microwave radiation in the brain.

In 2011, Dr. Nora Volkow, Director of the National Institute on Drug Abuse, published a similar study in the Journal of the American Medical Association that received worldwide news coverage. Dr. Volkow reported that a 50 minute exposure to CDMA, a second generation cell phone technology, increased brain activity in the region of the brain closest to the cell phone. (2)

The current study establishes that short-term exposure to LTE microwave radiation affects the users’ brain activity. Although LTE is too new for the long-term health consequences to have been studied, we have considerable evidence that long-term cell phone use is associated with various health risks including increased risk of head and neck cancers, sperm damage, and reproductive health consequences for offspring (i.e., ADHD).

Cell phone users, especially pregnant women and children, should limit their cell phone use. Moreover, cell phone users should not keep their phones near their head, breasts or reproductive organs when using the phone or whenever the phone is turned on unless it is in airplane mode.

For more information about the health effects of cell phone radiation see my Electromagnetic Radiation Safety Web site at

Joel M. Moskowitz, Ph.D.
School of Public Health Health

via Prlog

Cell phones are sometimes described as unshielded microwave ovens. You might want to use that image to help you reduce your use.  The above research has probably not made a dent in the sale of cell phones and at this time in 2018 a new wave of cell towers using 5G technology are rolling out.

According to 5G will support at least 100 billion devices and will be 10 to 100 times faster than current 4G technology.(4G was already about 10 times faster than 3G).

It’ll bring download speed up to 10 Gigabits per second. This would let us have an entire building of people send each other data in close to no time, thus improving productivity.

What is 5G?

5G offers mind-blowing data capabilities, practically unrestricted call volumes and near infinite data broadcast. It does this by 5G using largely untapped bandwidth of the millimeter wave (MMW), which is between 30GHz and 300GHz, as well as some lower and mid-range frequencies.

… The USA is currently leading the way on 5G. At the June 2016 press conference where the Federal Communications Commission’s (FCC) head Tom Wheeler announced the opening up of low, mid and high spectrum’s. There was no mention of health effects whatsoever. But the dangers are real.

Thousands of studies link low-level wireless radio frequency radiation exposures to a long list of adverse biological effects, including:

  • DNA single and double strand breaks
  • oxidative damage
  • disruption of cell metabolism
  • increased blood brain barrier permeability
  • melatonin reduction
  • disruption to brain glucose metabolism
  • generation of stress proteins

Let’s not also forget that in 2011 the World Health Organization (WHO) classified radio frequency radiation as a possible 2B carcinogen.

More recently the $25 million National Toxicology Program concluded that radio frequency radiation of the type currently used by cell phones can cause cancer.

But where does 5G fit into all this? Given that 5G is set to utilize frequencies above and below existing frequency bands 5G sits in the middle of all this. …

“The plans to beam highly penetrative 5G milliwave radiation at us from space must surely be one of the greatest follies ever conceived of by mankind. There will be nowhere safe to live.”
-Olga Sheean former WHO employee and author of ‘No Safe Place’

Possible effects of 5G are given by the site, according to various research, as: skin pain, impaired vision and cataracts, heart arrythmias, immune system effects, depressed cell growth and more.  What’s this about 5G from space? Is that a real thing?

One week ago, Elon Musk announced an audacious plan to launch 12,000 low-orbit satellites “to beam an ultrafast, lag-free Internet connection” to every square inch of the earth. They will contain PHASED ARRAY ANTENNAS and will operate in the MILLIMETER WAVE SPECTRUM. In other words,5G FROM SPACE. The first two test satellites were launched on a Falcon 9 rocket yesterday. News reports say “The initial satellites in the network are expected to come online next year.”

Each satellite will be the size of a mini-refrigerator and weigh about 400 kg. 4,425 satellites will be at an altitude of about 700 miles and 7,518 satellites will be at an altitude of only 210 miles.

To give you an idea of just how radical of an assault this will be, as of September 2017 there were a grand total of 1,738 operating satellites in orbit. About 930 of them were in low orbit (less than 1,000 miles above the earth). None of them were lower than 400 miles in altitude. Only 208 low orbit satellites were used for communication. Only 125 (Iridium and Globalstar) were for cell phone service. None of them provided high speed data. None of them were phased arrays.

The earth has never experienced anything like this. Even if Musk’s Falcon Heavy rocket could launch 100 of these satellites at a time, which is likely, that still means 120 rocket launches. If he wants to get them all up there in a year’s time, that’s one launch every three days. And there are at least ten other companies that want to launch thousands of satellites each to do the same thing. OneWeb plans to launch the first ten of its planned 2,400 satellites in May.

The earth’s protective ozone layer is still being depleted, scientists have just discovered, even though everyone thought the problem was solved by the Montreal Protocol. With so many rockets blasting holes in the atmosphere these days, that could be the reason. But nobody is talking about it.

The most current satellite database, kept by the Union of Concerned Scientists, is here:

Musk’s scheme alone could cause a catastrophic ozone loss, and it could also destroy all life on the planet. Musk’s project is called Starlink.

via HopeDance

A wikipedia article on Starlink had this to say:

Starlink is a satellite constellation development project underway by SpaceX, to develop a low-cost, high-performance satellite bus and requisite customer ground transceivers to implement a new space-based Internet communication system. By 2017, SpaceX had submitted regulatory filings to launch a total of nearly 12,000 satellites to orbit by the mid-2020s. SpaceX has plans to also sell satellites that use the same satellite bus that may be used for scientific or exploratory purposes.

via Wikipedia

Is there anything to the claims about rocket launches damaging the ozone layer?

Thirteen companies are competing to cover the entire Earth with high-speed wireless Internet from low-orbit satellites within one to two years. This would be an ecological and public health nightmare. The biggest players are SpaceX (12,000 satellites), OneWeb (4,560 satellites) and Boeing (2,956 satellites).

The recent finding, in 2018, that stratospheric ozone is still declining despite the Montreal Protocol took everyone by surprise. The increasing pace of ever-more-powerful rocket launches is a likely factor. Imminent plans for beaming high-speed Internet from space would require the launching of large rockets almost daily. This is expected to alter, if not destroy, the ozone layer and contribute significantly to climate change. Although many new rockets burn liquid fuel containing no ozone-destroying chlorine, the assumption that this is environmentally friendly is proving wrong.

Martin Ross and colleagues at the Aerospace Corporation have been sounding the alarm. Their 2009 paper, “Limits on the Space Launch Market Related to Stratospheric Ozone Depletion,” pointed out that although liquid fuels do not contain chlorine, they produce significant amounts of nitrogen and hydrogen oxides, as well as water vapor and soot, when burned. All of those destroy ozone.

Martin Ross of the Aerospace Corporation was also the lead author of a paper published in 2010 titled “Potential climate impact of black carbon emitted by rockets.” The authors developed a computer model to predict what would happen in different parts of the planet if the number of launches burning kerosene (then 25 annually) increased by a factor of ten. His model predicts as much as a 4% loss of ozone over the tropics and subtropics, as much as a 3-degree Celsius summertime increase in temperature over the South Pole, more than a one-degree overall increase in Antarctic temperature, and a decrease in Antarctic sea ice by 5% or more.

In a 2011 Aerospace article titled “Rocket Soot Emissions and Climate Change“, Ross states “The Aerospace study shows that the radiative forcing of soot from a given hydrocarbon rocket scenario is as much as 100,000 times that of the carbon dioxide from the rockets.” Obviously, the soot or black carbon emissions would be an important factor in accelerating climate change if the planned launches move forward.

Solid state rocket exhaust is no better. It contains ozone-destroying chlorine, water vapor (a greenhouse gas), and aluminum oxide particles, which seed stratospheric clouds. Complete ozone destruction is observed in the exhaust plumes of solid state rockets.

The New York Times (May 14, 1991, p. 4) quoted Aleksandr Dunayev of the Russian Space Agency saying “About 300 launches of the [space] shuttle each year would be a catastrophe and the ozone layer would be completely destroyed.”

At that time, the world averaged only 12 rocket launches per year. Maintaining a fleet of (ultimately) 4,000 satellites, each with an expected lifespan of five years, will likely involve enough yearly rocket launches to be an environmental catastrophe.

via GUARDS stop global wifi

These are perhaps the good days. Get some sun while we still have an ozone layer. One day soon it may not be as safe as it still is in 2018 to go outside. What happens if we lose the ozone layer?

Within days of the ozone layer’s disappearance, many plants would die. The intensity of the sun’s radiation would make photosynthesis — a process by which plants convert light energy into chemical energy to fuel their growth — an impossibility for all but the largest and slowest-growing florae. And even these holdouts, primarily massive trees, would eventually die, too. Without plants, the food chain would collapse. Herbivores would starve. Omnivores and carnivores could feed off their bodies for a time, but their food supply would dwindle and cause widespread extinction [source: Vermaas].

Even knowing the risks of destroying life on earth, if given the choice, most humans, and those that make the decisions, the rich, powerful and influential, may think they can choose to have humanity live forever underground with great download speeds, but the collapse of earth’s plant life will not allow many humans to continue to survive.

You can keep an eye on the ozone layer at NASA’s Ozone Watch site. If this information motivates you, do what you can to learn the truth, help others accept the research and perhaps to save humanity.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.