How Can Something That Looks Like This Protect You and Your Family from Cell Phone Radiation?
Biopro is the only company to receive a US Patent for this type of product, known as noise field nano-techology. 
This tube is just like a stethoscope tube. There is a speaker in the black triangular piece, which brings the conversation to your ear as clear as a bell.
Cell Phone Research Page 3
Articles on this page:
Monday, October 23, 2006
Do Cell phones Affect Sperm Quality?
CBS news
Tuesday, June 27, 2006
Brain tumors and cell phones linked
MRI of Brain Tumor
Sunday, February 05, 2006
New cordless phone danger
News of the world
By: Robbie Collin
Friday, July 29, 2005
Cell Phone Radiation May Cause Visual Damage IsraCast Technology
News, July 29, 2005 by Iddo Genuth
Tuesday, July 19, 2005
Johnny Cochrane`s brain tumor linked to cell phone use
CNN TV
Tuesday, March 01, 2005
Big Tobacco 2.0?
CNET.com
By: Molly Wood
Do Cell phones Affect Sperm Quality?
CBS news
Monday, October 23, 2006
Do Cell Phones Affect Sperm Quality? Early Findings Suggest Link, But Further Study Needed
(WebMD) There just might be a connection between a suspected decline in male fertility and increased cell phone use, but experts say much more research is needed to confirm an association.
In a study led by researchers from The Cleveland Clinic, men who used their cell phones the most had poorer sperm quality than those who used them the least.
The lowest average sperm counts seemed to be in men who had the most cell phone use (more than four hours a day); those who didn't use cell phones seemed to have the highest.
Brain tumors and cell phones linked
Tuesday, June 27, 2006
MRI of Brain Tumor
Brain Tumors Two new studies have shown links between mobile phone usage and brain tumors. They found a correlation between phone use and cancer. The studies showed that mobile phone use, regardless which side of the head it was held against, increased the risk of a brain tumor by almost two and a half times. Some of the leading researchers were contracted by Motorola to carry out some experiments. Two of the world's leading radiation experts reported to The Express that multinational companies tried to influence the results of their research. Professor Ross Adey, a biologist, had his funding withdrawn by Motorola before completing research which showed that mobiles affected the number of brain tumors in animals. Dr. Henry Lai, who has been studying the biological effects of electromagnetic fields for 20 years, was asked three times to change findings on how they caused DNA breaks in rats. Both of these scientists have been involved in academic, military and other research projects throughout their lives.
Jerry Phillips, who has a doctorate in biochemistry, worked with U.C. Riverside's [Ross] Adey on Motorola-funded research beginning in 1991. He describes a pleasant relationship with them until studies linked exposure to changes in the incidence of brain tumors in rats. "Motorola was adamant that Adey never mention DNA damage and RF radiation in the same breath," Phillips said. "Motorola has been manipulative of research that we and others have reported to them," said Adey. "Essentially they cut us off because we were too inquisitive." Phillips, Adey, and others said they see a strong parallel between what's happening now and the decades of denial by the tobacco industry. Though the head absorbs 60% of the energy radiated from cell phones, the amount is not significant enough to cause heating. Evidence points to DNA damage as a source of the health problems associated with cell phone use. It is suggested that RFR may hinder the ability of DNA to repair itself. For the first time in history, we are holding a high-powered microwave transmitter against the head.
When you talk on your mobile phone, your voice is transmitted from the antenna as radio frequency radiation (RFR) between 800MHz and 1,990MHz at a range that's right in the middle of microwave territory. Microwaves similar to those emitted by cell phones affect long-term memory, according to a new study by a University of Washington researcher, Henry Lai. Public exposure to electromagnetic radiation (radio frequency and microwave) is growing exponentially worldwide with the introduction and use of cordless phones, cellular phones, pagers and antennas in communities designed to transmit their RF signals.
New cordless phone danger
News of the world
By: Robbie Collin
Sunday, February 05, 2006
New Cordless Phones Danger News of the World, February 5, 2006 by Robbie Collin
Cordless handsets 100 times worse than mobiles, say experts.
Having a cordless phone in your house can be 100 times more of a health risk than using a mobile. The popular phones constantly blast out high levels of radiation - even when they are not in use. Landlines are widely thought a safer option than mobiles. But researchers in Sweden now warn cordless phones are far more likely to cause brain tumours than today's mobiles.
Emissions from a cordless phone's charger can be as high as six volts per metre - twice as strong as those found with a 100 metres of mobile masts. Two metres away from the charger the radiation is still as high as 2.5 volts per metre - that's 50 times what scientists regard as a safe level.
Powerful At a metre away the danger is multiplied 120 times - and it only drops to a safe 0.05 volts per metre when you are 100 metres away from the phone. Because of the way cordless phones work, the charger constantly emits radiation at full strength even when the phone is not in use - and so does the handset when it is off the charger.
The most common cancers caused by such radiation are leukemias. But breast cancer, brain tumours, insomnia, headaches and erratic behaviour in kids have also been linked. Those with chargers close to their beds are subjected to radiation while they sleep.
Phone watchdog Powerwatch, using a testing device called the Sensory Perspective Electrosmog Detector, even found electromagnetic fields as strong as three volts per metre in a bedroom above a room holding a cordless phone.
The group's director, Alasdair Philips said: "As ill-health effects have been found at levels of only 0.06 volts per metre, this is very concerning. It's likely everyone in a house with a cordless phone will be constantly exposed to levels higher than this."
The shock Swedish report - by scientists Lennart Hardell, Michael Carlbery and Kjell Hansson Mild - is backed up by many medical experts who believe cordless phones are a health risk.
Harley Street practitioner Dr David Dowson said: "Having a cordless phone is like having a mobile mast in your house. I'd recommend anyone who has one to switch to a plug-in phone."
Cell phone radiation may cuase visual damage
By: Iddo Genuth
Friday, July 29, 2005
Cell Phone Radiation May Cause Visual Damage IsraCast Technology News, July 29, 2005 by Iddo Genuth
In a recent scientific study conducted by a team of researchers from the Technion, a possible link between microwave radiation, similar to the type found in cellular phones, and different kinds of damage to the visual system was found. At least one kind of damage seems to accumulate over time and not heal, challenging the common view and leading the researchers to the assertion that the duration of exposure is not less important than the intensity of the irradiation. The researchers also emphasized that existing exposure guidelines for microwave radiation might have to change.
Microscope photographs of lenses incubated in organ culture conditions for 12 days. Right frame shows Control lens with no damage. Bottom frame demonstrates the effect of microwave radiation on bovine lens sutures for a total exposure of 192 cycles (1.1GHz, 2.22mW).Each cycle lasts 50min followed by 10 min pause. In the absence of microwave radiation, the bubbles are generated by temperature increase to 39.5 8C during 4 h; see left frame. The effects of exposure to electromagnetic radiation have long been a subject for debate among scientists. The technological developments of the last twenty years such as cell and cordless phones, wireless communications, monitors and even high voltage lines have all been studied as potential risk factors for cancer and other diseases. Less known to the public, but still a matter of some extensive research, is the study of the effect of microwave radiation on the visual system and especially on the lens of the eye. The basic motivation for this research came after World War II when it was suspected that radar operators suffered a greater risk of developing cataracts (a condition characterized by clouding in the natural lens of the eye). Although these particular suspicions were eventually shown to be debatable, they were the trigger for the first guidelines for exposure to electromagnetic radiation. Moreover, the eye as our natural radiation detector is the obvious choice for investigating the effects of electromagnetic radiation upon the human body.
In more recent studies on animals the effects of microwave radiation as a risk factor for cataracts have been established and have helped determine the guidelines put forth by the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP) in 1998. A common measure for microwave radiation is the Specific Absorption Rate (SAR) which is the average power density absorbed in a given volume per average weight density (Watt/Kg). This is the standard used by cell phone companies, among others, to measure levels of radiation. When microwave energy impinges upon body tissue, part of it is absorbed and converted to heat due to ionic conduction. This heat manifests itself as a temperature increase inside the tissue. Past studies in animals have shown that even a slight increase in temperature close to the lens (as low as 3 degrees Celsius) can increase the risk of developing a cataract. With a low enough SAR the local temperature in the lens might never increase to that level. A less common measure is called Specific Energy Absorption (SA), and is defined as the energy density absorbed in the tissue divided by its weight density. While SAR is the measure of the rate microwave radiation is absorbed by a tissue, SA is the measure of the total energy absorbed. This difference played a significant role in a recently published study on the effects of microwave radiation on the visual system.
In the study conducted by researchers in the Rappaport Faculty of Medicine at the Technion, and published in the journal Bioelectromagnetics, a new link has been found between microwave radiation and the development of cataracts. Eye lenses of one-year-old male calves obtained from a slaughterhouse were exposed to microwave radiation - one eye from each pair used for control. Each exposure session lasted about two weeks. Both control and exposed lens were kept in an incubator at a constant temperature. During this period each exposed lens had experienced up to 2mW of 1.1GHz radiation virtually around the clock, and each hour it was exposed for a 50 minute session followed by a 10 minute break. During one of these breaks, every 24 hours, it was tested optically and compared to the control lens. During the short (5 minutes) optical test, the lens was not exposed to radiation, but when exposed, its average temperature was maintained constant in an incubator.
The experiment yielded a number of interesting results:
Good quality lens as demonstrated by the optical scanner. All rays passing Through the lens have similar focal length. The thick dashed line connects the points of the back vertex Distance for each ray passing through the lens. The thick solid line shows the relative intensity of each beam.
Exposed lens, showing considerable variability in the focal length of the beams passing through the lens. 1. Exposing the lens for a prolonged time to microwave radiation (in the frequency and intensity described above) caused macroscopic damage affecting the optical quality of the lens. This damage increased as the experiment and irradiation continued and reached a maximum level after a number of days. When the exposure stopped the optical damage began to heal gradually. Interestingly enough, a similar maximum level was observed when the irradiation intensity was reduced to one-half the original, except that it took twice the time.
2. On the microscopic level a different kind of damage occurred. Tiny "bubbles" were created on the surface of the lens. The bubbles were formed by irradiation with microwave and were not the result of a heat created throughout the lens. The researchers have speculated that the mechanism responsible for the creation of the bubbles is microscopic friction between particular cells exposed to electromagnetic radiation. Contrary to the macroscopic damage, the microscopic damage did not show any signs of healing and continued to accumulate during the course of the experiment.
Although the researchers are cautious about interpreting the results of the experiment and its possible implications to public health, it seems that prolonged exposure to microwave radiation similar to that used by cellular phones can lead to both macroscopic and microscopic damage to the lens and that at least part of this damage seems to accumulate over time and does not seem to heal. Professor Levi Schächter, who worked on the research, told IsraCast that attention should be paid not only to the Specific Absorption Rate (SAR) but also to the total energy absorbed by the tissue (SA), which is not currently under supervision by the appropriate regulative authorities. Implying that the duration of exposure is not less important than the intensity of the irradiation.
Johnny Cochranes`s Brain Tumor linked to cell phone use
cnntv
Tuesday, July 19, 2005
Johnny Cochrane`s brain tumor linked to cell phone use
CNN TV
Johnny Cochrane, the famous lawyer from the O.J.Simpson trial died recently from a brain tumour. Dr Keith Black, well known neuro surgeon from Cedars -Sinai medical center in Los Angeles has determined that the tumour and his death were strongly connected to his cell phone use.
DR. SANJAY GUPTA, CNN MEDICAL CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): The news of her father's illness opened a well spring of sadness and fear in Johnnie Cochran's doctor Tiffany. Her father, relatively young and healthy, struck suddenly by a brain tumor.
TIFFANY COCHRAN, JOHNNIE COCHRAN'S DAUGHTER: It was traumatic because I thought, well, biopsy, that's not good. Spot on the MRI. You know, I put two and two together, and I knew it wasn't good.
GUPTA: So she turned to her father's physician, renowned Los Angeles neurosurgeon Dr. Keith Black, to answer the question by so many of when cancer strikes, why? And he offered the family an opinion they found stunning.
COCHRAN: He explained that this type of cancer is a balance between environment and genetics, but he thought for my dad it was more environment. And he said perhaps cell phone usage.
DR. KEITH BLACK, CEDAR SINAI HOSPITAL: It's my own belief that there probably is a correlation between the use of cell phones and brain cancer, even though there's no scientific proof.
GUPTA: Dr. Black, who's the head of neurosurgery at Cedars Sinai Medical Center, believes one day science will catch up to what he's already seen with his own patients.
BLACK: We know that people who use cell phones a lot also complain of headaches, difficulty with concentration, with memory. You know, this is a microwave antenna, so you're essentially cooking the brain when you hold the receiver right next to your brain.
GUPTA: That's a hypothesis that Dr. Howard Frumkin, who studies the relationship between cancer and cell phone use, vehemently disputes.
DR. HOWARD FRUMKIN, EMORY UNIV.: The level of energy is so different with a cell phone than it is with a microwave oven or with some of the other big sources of energy, that there's really no way to equate the two. They're completely different phenomena.
GUPTA: Still Dr. Black points out something else that troubles him: Cochran's tumor was on the left side of his brain. He was known to hold the cell phone on that same side. Dr. Black's experience with his own patients...
BLACK: We do know that there is a significant correlation between the side that one uses their cell phone on and the side that you develop the brain tumor on.
GUPTA: Today in the United States, 175 million people use cell phones. Worldwide, the number is 1.6 billion. And according to the FDA, they say this: There is no hard evidence of adverse health effects on the general public from exposure to radio frequency energy, while using wireless communication devices.
Dr. Frumkin insists there's no way cell phones could have led to Cochran's or anyone else's death given the scientific evidence.
FRUMKIN: I'm worried that, if people hear claims like that, they'll be unduly concerned. This is a very low probability kind of a thing, approaching a zero probability. So I think that there's no evidence to support the idea that Mr. Cochran's brain tumor resulted from cell phone use.
GUPTA: While the FDA says no study has definitively drawn a connection between cancer and cell phone use, the agency points out there haven't been any studies to rule one out either. The FDA and Dr. Frumkin agree that more studies should be done protectively.
COCHRAN: That was my wedding day.
GUPTA: Tiffany Cochran realizes the question of whether cell phone use was a factor in her father's illness cannot be answered today. And Cochran's friend and doctor, Keith Black, stresses cell phone moderation and using an earpiece to be on the safe side.
Dr. Sanjay Gupta, CNN, Los Angeles.
Transcripts from CNN
Big Tobacco 2.0?
CNET.com
By: Molly Wood
Tuesday, March 01, 2005
Big Tobacco 2.0?
By Molly Wood, senior editor, CNET.com Tuesday, March 8, 2005
So, there's this incredibly popular product that has widespread consumer use and a massive marketing presence. Nearly everyone uses it, and it has very high social acceptance, even though some people find it annoying when it's used in public. It's highly habit-forming; people who use the product on a regular basis find it almost impossible to live without.
Unfortunately, studies start to appear showing that the product might be harmful to its users--even cancer-causing. The product's manufacturers deny the presence of any danger and even spend millions of dollars trying to discredit the research that points to problems. Then, an insider emerges, seemingly with proof that the product could be dangerous. The industry agrees to publish warning data about the product, but continues to maintain that the product itself is safe for use. Lawsuits against the product's manufacturers are filed, but all are dismissed. Industry analysts know that any case that does succeed could start a domino effect of future lawsuits, which keeps the industry determined to maintain that the product is harmless, despite increasing evidence to the contrary.
TalkBack What do you think? Is the cell phone radiation scare a conspiracy theory or worth using a headset for? Post your comment hereSound familiar?
Well, put down your lighter, I'm talking about cell phones. I've already maintained that I don't like the cell phone industry's iron-clad control over phone releases and pricing, its ever-lengthening contracts, and the annoying habit it has of crippling Bluetooth phones so that I can't use them the way I want to. But it takes only a few minutes of looking into the cell phone radiation quagmire before I start to think, man, these guys have Big Tobacco 2.0 written all over them. Actually, I'm not the first to think of it, but a recent article in the University of Washington alumni magazine indicates that the behaviors aren't going away, even as the potentially damning research continues to mount.
OK, I know the obvious differences: I'm sure cell phone manufacturers are not deliberately making their products more addictive, for example--although they are, of course, always offering new and improved services and ever-increasing buckets of minutes, which can't help but encourage us to use our phones more and more frequently. But, just as Big Tobacco did, the cell phone industry seems bound and determined to thwart and deny any suggestion that its product might be dangerous.
A history of bad news For example, in 1994, University of Washington bioengineering professors Henry Lai and Narendra Singh found that the DNA in rats' brains was damaged after two hours of exposure to levels of microwave radiation considered safe by the government. When Lai and Singh published the research, a leaked memo from Motorola's head of global strategy, Norm Sandler, talked about ways to minimize damage by undermining their research, with Sandler writing, "I think that we have sufficiently war-gamed the Lai/Singh issue." Ouch. Worse, research biologist Jerry Phillips, who was paid by Motorola to conduct similar testing, says he was able to duplicate Lai and Singh's findings, but was then asked not to publish the research and was subsequently shunned by the company. Motorola says it told Phillips that his findings needed clarification, and the industry still maintains that Lai and Singh's results have never been duplicated and can't be considered legitimate.
The biggest Russell Crowe-style insider in this case, though, is Dr. George Carlo, who was hired by the Cellular Telecommunications & Internet Association to head up a $28 million research program into possible health effects from cellular phones. Unfortunately, he now says his findings show an increased rate of brain cancer deaths, development of tumors, and genetic damage among heavy cell phone users. He wrote this letter of concern to the president of AT&T Corporation and later went public with his findings after what he considered to be neglect by the industry. He's since broken with the industry, become a vocal critic, and coauthored a book called Cell Phones: Invisible Hazards in the Wireless Age--so you can tell he's on the "cell phones could cause cancer" side of things.
Meanwhile, more studies keep coming, and they seem to be getting worse. A study funded by the European Union reported last December that radio waves from mobile phones do, definitively, damage DNA and other cells in the body--and that the damage extended to the next generation of cells. Even though mutated cells are considered a possible cause of cancer, the UK National Radiological Protection Board said that since the study didn't show that the damage definitely led to disease, consumers shouldn't worry too much about the findings.
Uh, right. In the meantime, the report recommended that children use mobile phones only in emergency situations. You know, just in case. How reassuring.
The cell phone industry hasn't commissioned another large-scale study--at least not publicly--since its fateful encounter with Dr. Carlo--and why would they? They're in a catch-22. It's a multibillion dollar industry, and they simply can't afford to find out, definitively, that cell phones are dangerous. Worse, just like the tobacco companies, if they start issuing warnings and precautionary tales now, it'll look like they knew all along that the radio waves were dangerous, opening them up to major liability claims. They've already dodged one big, big bullet--an $800 million lawsuit against Motorola and cell phone carriers was thrown out in 2002, with the judge ruling that there wasn't sufficient evidence for trial. Since then, neurologist Dr. Christopher Newman, who filed the lawsuit, has died of brain cancer.