Is Electro-Pollution a type of radiation?
Yes, it is a type that is known as non-ionizing radiation (NIR). It is located in the spectrum of frequencies below the visible light. It includes an entire range of frequencies used for telecommunications systems and also the frequency ranges where the emissions are associated with the electricity.
Which other terms are also used when referred to Electro-pollution?
There are several terms that are being used as an alternative for Electro-pollution according to the region, country and it may vary also to the scientific knowledge that is possessed in this regard. Technically speaking, the most appropriate term is Non Ionizing Radiation (NIR). However, in NOXTAK we found that the term of Non Ionising Radiation can be frightening to the population and the understanding of its meaning requires specific knowledge at the technical level. Most of the population does not have adequate knowledge about what is the meaning of the word radiation or radiation that does not ionize were it is passes through.
In general, we can list some terms that electrical pollution is referred to:
- Electromagnetic radiation
- Radio Frequency Waves & Microwave
- Artificial Electromagnetic Fields
- Electromagnetic waves
- Radio Frequency Radiation
- Pollution of Electricity
- Environmental Electrical Pollution
- Technological Contamination
- Electromagnetic Emissions
- Emissions of Radiofrequency
- Radio Frequency Interference
Is non-ionizing radiation harmful to us?
The thought for a while was, that this type of radiation will not carry enough force to ionize the area that it is passing true with its propagation. In other words, it would not produce ions interacting with the atoms of a material. It was believed that there was no reason to consider any damages related to this type of radiation and it is for this reason that during the 1980’s a massive collective use of radio frequency and microwave technologies were developed without any regulation, following the previous course.
The debate on whether this type of radiation was harmful or not began when the first cases of adverse effects on health proliferated. Different studies have been conducted for more than 30 years using very precise parameters, and experiments with frequencies and densities similar to those emitted by our modern technologies like mobile phones, WIFI, Bluetooth signals, among others which were product of this long term research. Science have found evidence with very accurate laboratory tests that infuse it into a potential damage to the health. The international protocol requires further deepen these studies and to wait for the long-term epidemiological nature.
Preliminary findings indicate that there are numerous of scientific evidence that the problem of non-ionizing radiation or NIR technology comes from the use of these waves as carriers of information. By placing information on the wave for telecommunications, it produces a load and package of disordered particles that depolarizes elemental and it spreads in the environment.
This means that the damage lies in the data packets information (DPA) with altered electromagnetic charges that are not organized. This imbalance of loads is what affects the whole organism and generate testable biological effects at the cellular level of the DNA, immune system, hearth rhythm, brain frequencies and autonomic nervous system.
Consequently, non-ionizing radiation according to their origin can be harmful or not. For example, if it’s origin is from nature or natural way it is healthy. On the other hand, if it is produced artificially, through machinery and telecommunications equipment, it is unnatural and harmful to health.
Why? What is the difference between natural and artificial radiation?
The difference is balanced, polarized and stable behaviour of subatomic or elemental particles, especially the electrons in artificial radiation presenting an orbit in its spin opposite to a natural and in general an imbalance of charges.
Is this what is harmful to the body?
Yes! Our body or any biological organism can’t process this disorder and imbalance from electromagnetic charges at elemental or subatomic level, since it reacts to that like something harmful, threatening, degrades and fragments the ADN and the cellular mitosis. At the end, the cells react in a state of electro-stress, which slowly leads to the development of a generalized electro-hypersensitivity, triggering a series of biochemical responses associated with stress, recognized as stress proteins and this largely nullifies intercellular communication.
Is this what create Electro-hypersensitivity?
Yes, Electro-hypersensitivity (EHS) is a lo consequence of ng-term exposure to this type of artificial radiation.
Are you saying that we are all at risk of becoming Electro-hypersensitive?
Yes, studies have indicated that everyone, sooner or later, according to their genetic strength will develop Electro-Hypersensitivity.
Does Electro-Hypersensitivity have something to do with electricity?
Yes, even exposure to altering electric fields, particularly high frequency can easily cause the development of this dysfunctionality.
Why is it that after a century of using electricity we are now hearing about EHS?
In the earlier part of the twentieth century, high tension electricity line maintenance workers already showed symptoms which we now associate to EHS. There are studies in the US carried out over 40 years ago on 140,000 workers which confirm this. What has occurred is that it has been denominated in different ways and it was treated within regular range of illnesses associated to this type of labour.
If I don’t live close to a strong electrical field, am I free of risk?
No, actually it is different! The gigantic current mass of signals and wireless communications carry unstable artificial electromagnetic charges which transcend electrical cables and are found throughout the environment. This general issue is known as “background levels” which are nothing more than unbalanced loads that cross all biological organism in a harmful way.
What are the types of Electro-pollution that are known?
In simple words we can classify the Electros-pollution in: High Frequency (Signals and Waves), Low Frequency (Fields) and static problems caused in AC/DC circuits.
What other way can electro-pollution be classified?
The 4 most common types in which it is expressed:
- ESD (Electrostatic Discharge)
- EMI (Electromagnetic Interference)
- RFI (Radiofrequency Interference)
- DPA (Data Packing Alterations)
What is the greatest risk on human health from electro-pollution?
It is difficult to mention only one risk. Perhaps we have to say that, in terms of irreversible implications, there is the fragmentation of the DNA, the loss of the blood-brain barrier and factor of infertility to the fifth generation.
What does a person with EHS feel?
There are several descriptions which give people some degree of EHS, however, the most common are:
A) Repeated long lasting headache with unknown cause.
B) Feeling of numbness and tingling in the extremities.
C) Stabbing sensations in the neck, head or back.
D) Different sleeping disorders.
E) Increased irritability and / or emotional anxiety.
F) Feeling tired and unusual fatigue, among others.
Does NOXTAK have testimonials of people with EHS that have seen an improvement?
Yes, we continuously accumulate data of people with EHS, who have purchased our products and demonstrate that it has ceased the pain or discomfort which they had before when they find themselves in an area with WIFI or other type of signals.
So NOXTAK products cure people with EHS?
No, NOXTAK products do not claim to cure EHS, any of the symptoms, nor any other illnesses associated with this problem.
NOXTAK products have the function to stop exposure to harmful artificial radiation and convert them into ecological fields and signals that stimulate healthy environments and consequently it will grant the system the ability to health recovery. Scientific studies have shown that NOXTAK products increase or promote health benefits over time.
Does it mean that NOXTAK products improve health in general?
Exactly, in general its components stimulate health while cr eating healthy spaces which facilitating recovery.
Does NOXTAK know any treatment for EHS?
Yes, first we recommend using our products and make your environment completely free of Electro-pollution. This way you are no longer exposed to radiation and it will stop the most common symptoms of pain and discomfort in your body. Secondly we suggest a nutritive diet, intake of supplementary vitamins and natural health products, certain routine and practical tips. (Please contact us for more information).
Why is this topic unknown to the population?
Well, there are serval reasons. First of all, the collective concern about whether these technologies are harmful or not has been under discussion for more than 20 years and evidence of the damage were isolated to be considered an international consensus.
The World Health Organization (WHO), allocated $ 250 million to the International EMF Project in 1996, and to have a better understand on the risk involve to electromagnetic fields.
Literally thousands of studies have been conducted worldwide by various private and government laboratories, but it is not yet accepted as irrefutable truth because there are still long-term studies going on.
On the other hand, currently the form of long-term medical studies, has passed to the concept of lifelong studies, by making it increasingly difficult to ensue in any area conclusive statements.
This is the reason why the Group of scientists who signed the Benevento resolution in 2006, decided to go out together and report the results they were seeing in their laboratories, as well as to inform the public. This led to 2007 Bio-initiative Report, subsequently updated in 2012 which represents literally thousands of studies proving precisely the types of risk and harm to health by Electro- pollution.
What has Science and the WHO said about this in the recent years?
In the last few years a stronger indication to a potential health risk caused by Electrosmog came to light on May 31, 2011, when the International Agency for Research on Cancer, which is an arm of the World Health Organisation, wrote a paper which indicated that RF and microwave are potentially carcinogenic.
This was the result of more than 200 studies, in which 31 scientists from 14 countries participated. In the paper they classified RF and microwave range at 2B, however experts said that more studies were needed for more accurate conclusions about the potential damage that they could represent.
In the same year 2011, a couple of studies were publicized. In these studies, they claimed that they were not conclusive evidence of any harm, but were later overruled because they were considered as sponsored by the industry.
However, after reviewing more than 1800 studies in late 2012, a group of scientists authors of the Bio-initiative Report 2007, published an even stronger updated report which had more evidence about the harm of these radiations, (If you wish to have a digital copy of Bio-initiative Report, you can contact us and we will send it to you).
Is cancer the biggest risk?
No, experts in the subject consider that the least important risk is cancer. They are known to exist and are real but the problem with almost all current research is that they are based on long term studies which focus only on cancer risks excluding research on other worrying topics which need to be considered.
What are the main worries outside of CANCER?
What worries experts in the field the most are the immediate effects visible in DNA fragmentation that arises, through the comet experiment, damage to the immune system, fertility, the quality of harvests, in the tomato plants, bees and implications in every biological organism and the sustainability of life on the planet.
How come it can damage DNA?
Studies that have been conducted in what is known as the comet experiment, indicating that DNA in the face of electromagnetic radiation of RF and microwave, appears in a photograph laboratory it is fragmented and looks like a comet when it is being moved in an electrophoretic environment. This is the same aspect that happens to the DNA when it is subjected to exhibitions of Ionizing Radiation. It is dismembered as a comet similar to as happens in exposures to radioactivity.
These studies were originally made by Henry Lai and Narendra P. Singh in 1996 and subsequently repeated by 12 laboratories in 7 European countries and they obtained the same results.
NOXTAK offers solutions to this problem, what is its position on the matter?
NOXTAK has accumulated experience of more than one decade on Electro-smog and people claiming to suffer with these technologies.
However, it understands that there is no complete science consensus between telecommunications and energy industry, given that many studies are still ongoing. NOXTAK does not align with either of the 2 current positions which stats that there are no harmful effects and the other position which acknowledges that there is a harmful effect and that the solution is to eliminate all technologies.
NOXTAK considers those positions as incomplete and believes there is a third alternative of how to address this problem and give a different solution to what has been considered so far.
Why are these 2 positions incomplete?
If we analyse both angles in depth, we know that the actual form of use for electricity and telecommunications could be:
- Noxious for the health of any living organism
- Cause of electromagnetic interference.
- Cause greater waste of electricity.
- Greater carbon emissions.
- Reduces the useful of any technological equipment.
- Degrade the quality of soil and seas.
The origin of the problem is the use of electricity in its actual form. It is a fact that people are not willing to give up technologies. They will not stop at the realisation that the technology alters their health and produces pain in their body (EHS). In their support we would like to state that removing, for example, a mast from the proximity of a school doesn’t solve anything and does not eliminate children’s exposure levels to Electropollution, given that the very background levels are found to be at levels much higher than those deemed healthy.
Eliminating these technologies is not an option. It is literally impossible not only because people want to keep using their smart phones and WIFI, but also because behind the use of these antennae and transmission centrals are legal agreements and licences which give them the right to operate for many years and cancelling these contracts would be a useless and unnecessary litigation given the third alternative that we consider at NOXTAK.
The THIRD alternative is the only way to take care of public health and the natural ecosystem, as well as being the means to a more efficient use of electricity. As well as decreasing carbon emissions, electromagnetic interferences and prolonging useful life of equipment, the most important key is that it allows us to use TECHNOLOGY as an ally to our HEALTH.
Is NOXTAK then the inventor of solutions for ELECTRO-POLLUTION?
No, for over a decade, there have been various solutions to the problem of Electrosmog in Germany and Switzerland. In the United States dozens of products have been marketed for this purpose. There are also hundreds of (fake) products coming out of Asia available on the internet which were considered quite fashionable in some countries but which almost ridicule this serious and important subject. The pioneer products for the control of this problem are anti-radiation clothing, as well as anti-radiation paint.
Are these fakes products the reason why there are so many conflicting information about this important topic on the internet?
In many aspects yes! In the last decade this brought a lot of confusion in the population. There has been only a handful of solutions similar to NOXTAK, which in general are extremely costly and began to bring forward awareness about the threat to our health from these radiations in Europe.
But on the other hand we have a large group of fake products available online, that are promoted as “effective” solutions but they don’t possess scientific accreditation or some kind of verifiable certification by third-party and they lack in seriousness in their explanations. In some cases, they use expressions pseudo-science that give cause for
further confusion to the population.
Another reason about the confusion on this issue focuses on internet fanaticism group of people who demonstrate against the installation and use of modern technologies such as WIFI or cell phone. These groups devote themselves to fight for the cause of exterminating technologies by encouraging the population and misinforming them. These debates are being promoted by people with paranoia or senseless urban legends.
Also on the internet there are many outdated scientific information. Even Wikipedia is not updated with the information about the topic. This is another example that not everything that appears on the Internet is true or is the most up-to-date official information.
This confusion debate on Internet data, is on average, from 5 years ago, even before the alert by the WHO.
What is the difference between NOXTAK and the other solutions?
Out of all the existing solutions in the marketplace, NOXTAK is different in many ways, however, we would like to highlight the following:
- Our focus is intended to neutralize Electro-pollution 100%.
- Our prices are reasonable and we maintain the highest quality.
- Our arguments are scientific, without pseudo-science languages.
- Our products solve all levels of Electro-pollution.
- Our products leverage the same technologies that produced electro-smog and convert them into allies for health.
- Our focus is completely eco-friendly and does not add artificial elements to the environment to counteract Electro-pollution.