Positive Health Online

Part I of this series was published in Issue 225

adverse:  unfavourable, harmful

radiation:  emission of energy as electromagnetic waves

(varying lengths) or as moving particles

Like it or not, society is geared to consumerism, economic gain and profit from a massive sickness industry.  We are all part of society and there is no room for finger-pointing.  We can only choose to take responsibility for our own actions.  I cannot emphasize enough that education and information are the most important starting places. 

For those who wish to know, they will ‘find’ information to enable them to change their state of exposure to adverse radiation but this does not mean that we have to live in a state of technological deprivation.  It means removal and/or protection from known adverse radiation situations, where relevant, and counting the cost of what we want.  I know one lady who cleans her house with a brush and pan, hand washes clothes and has no television, mobile ‘phone or computer.  That certainly would not do for most of us, but it very much suits her.  I know others who bury their heads in the sand, don’t want to know about potential damages caused by radiation and have an ‘I have to die of something’ attitude.  That would not do for some of us either, but is also a valid choice.  We are not the same but we can choose to evaluate what is important to us.  We cannot do this if we sit in ignorance and blame the government, power industries, manufacturing companies, employers, medical establishment etc. if the results we get are not to our liking.  It takes both sides for such a partnership. 

For those responsible for employing people who are exposed to equipment which gives off adverse radiation, it is morally caring, economically and legally sensible to take steps to protect and inform employees.  For the dental and medical professionals who initiate the requirement, or necessity, of an X-ray, patients could be protected by having anti-radiation shields on their bodies whilst being X-rayed.  One particular type of anti-radiation shield which is worn on the body (round the neck or in a shirt pocket for example) will help protect from mobile ‘phones, computers etc. but large radiation equipment such as a CAT/MRI scans might require more than one - kinesiology testing would be able to determine the amount necessary.  Pilots who fly constantly would also probably need more than one shield but common sense must prevail (provided that it has not been hi-jacked by propaganda from those with vested interests which goes for most things which require common sense).  Flying like any other activity which has an increased risk of radiation exposure, is the only thing considered in this article.  There are several shields available which have been laboratory tested and validated.  Immune efficiency is the overall goal of such shields. 

Immune efficiency is not the result of radiation shields

but they are one input aspect to overall immune efficiency.

For those who wish to make active choices based on information, there is plenty of information available.  Where the effects of adverse radiation are not clear such as whether mobile ‘phone radiation is intensified through an ear piece, at least the possibility of it can now be considered and decisions of use based on that possibility.  Laboratory research indicates that ear pieces act as aerials and intensify the signal into the head.  Other research refutes this.  Ignoring research is not going to accomplish anything but possible damage can be avoided where there is doubt.  Perhaps the effects of the ear-piece radiation enhancement is far more relevant to those who have mercury fillings acting as a ‘drawing aerials’? 

No one knows because such trials have never been done but mercury fillings (and other metals in the mouth) grossly enhance the negative effects of radiation, especially where gold and mercury are in the same mouth.  This is a primary piece of information which can be acted upon by getting metals removed from the mouth and fillings replaced with the least toxic, fluoride-free, white ones.  In the case of one man, this was dramatically illustrated in that he had fits each time he used his computer.  After removal of his amalgam fillings he no longer had fits when he used his computer.  One would assume that the removal of amalgam fillings had some bearing on the absence of fits after removal of them.  Even without adverse radiation, amalgam removal will be a great step forward in attaining health but amalgam replacement must be done properly (see Mercury Poisoning from Amalgam Fillings article). 

Some people notice adverse effects from using the computer mouse such as a cold hand or muscle fatigue.  A radiation protection button on the mouse can help with this along with other steps.  One company has produced an ear-piece for mobile phones using a sound channel, instead of wire, to connect the phone to the ear.

Easily discernable symptoms of being affected by adverse radiation are multiple but can include headaches, backache, sugar cravings, fatigue, lack of concentration (brain fag), depression, irritability, anxiety, cold hands, neck and shoulder ache, blurred vision or eye strain, mental disorientation when on the computer or mobile ‘phone, and heat or ringing in the ears. Other symptoms might only manifest as disease states after long term exposure (such as miscarriages and cancers).  Sleeping over, or sitting in one particular place over a negative radiation spot can be extremely damaging to health and such things as ‘toxic houses’ can be explained by this.

Marie Curie

The discovery of electromagnetic radiation of short wavelength, able to pass through opaque bodies (i.e. X-rays), the radioactivity of uranium and radium in the 1890s lead to a host of treatments for various illnesses and the use of X-rays for routine diagnostic purposes in medicine and dentistry. The sad catalogue of death and destruction from use of such adverse radiation could have been avoided if caution had been used in these areas of the unknown. Instead, as usual, the potential for economic gain took centre stage ensuring suppression of evidence which would interfere with the economic status quo. One famous death from radiation-caused cancer was that of Marie Curie (1867-1934), twice Nobel Prize winner and professor at the University of Paris.  She was a pioneer in the field of radioactivity but unfortunately without adequate knowledge about the inherent dangers involved in her field of study.  Relatively, we have much more knowledge today but sadly it is not yet properly applied for the benefit of mankind and many are suffering unnecessarily because of this. I cannot help wondering if Ms Curie would have died much earlier had she have lived at a time when vaccinations, drugs, fluoride and amalgam fillings etc. were routine for her from childhood as well as having inherited such toxins from her parents and her diet were from processed, chemicalized foods.

As stated in Nexus September 2000 Dr John Gofman MD PhD (nuclear and physical chemistry) and University Professor Emeritus (Molecular and Cell Biology) was asked by the Atomic Energy Commission to evaluate the health effects of all types of nuclear activities.  Between 1960 and 1974 he became convinced that radiation was more dangerous than previously believed and spoke out about the unproven safety in using radiation and against the experimental use of it.  As one would expect, his funding was cut but he then began a series of books on the dangers of radiation:

• Radiation and Human Health (1981);
• X-Rays: Health Effects of Common Exams (1985);
• Radiation-induced Cancer from Low-Dose Exposure: An Independent Analysis (1990);
• Preventing Breast Cancer: The Story of a Major, Proven, Preventable Cause of This Disease (1995, 1996);
• Radiation from Medical Procedures in the Pathogenesis of Cancer and Ischemic Heart Disease (1999).

In his extensive research Gofman considers cancers caused by various combinations of X-rays, poor diet, inherited genetic mutations and smoking.  However, there is no mention of this considering amalgam fillings, water and food toxicity (especially fluoride), vaccines, drugs (especially anti-biotics), dehydration, specific vitamin and mineral deficiency (especially that produced by lack of unrefined salt and essential fatty acids).  These factors are vitally important and had he studied these, the results may have been quite eye-opening.

The major problem with any such study would be providing a control group because virtually everyone comes into the category of multiple-toxicity.  It is rare indeed to find anyone who does not drink fluoride in water, juice, beer, tea and coffee etc., eat contaminated food, has no amalgam fillings, has not been vaccinated, has not taken anti-biotics, has not had an X-ray at some time or taken in some other form of adverse radiation etc. or who takes daily the required amount of pure water, unrefined salt, vitamins, mineral and proteins, essential fatty acids, proper balanced organic nutrient-packed foods (see relevant Informed Choice Health Course articles for more on each aspect).

As a society in general, we are like frogs in water, coming to the boil so slowly that we do not discern what our real state is.  Sickness, immorality, violence, death by doctor (iatrogenic) and vehicle (road traffic collisions) are looked upon as normal.  The people of yesteryear would be horrified at the compound state of unnaturalness in society and our complacency to it.  Perhaps this article will serve as a nudge to awaken some from unawareness and do what can be done in order to help prevent consequences which are avoidable.

Information and Research:

Be diligent to get information from various sources and don’t rely on research carried out only by those with vested interests.  Research has a purpose and whoever pays the researcher will want them to fulfil a specified purpose.  For instance, a company might pay researchers to prove that ..... (“whatever”).  The researchers may do just that and not look at the research commission from any other angle.  Others with opposite interests might employ the same researchers to prove the contrary ..... (opposite to “whatever”).  The researchers may then look at the commission from this opposite angle and no other.  This is why there are so many seemingly contradictory pieces of research not only about adverse radiation but other health topics such as mercury fillings, soy products, vitamins etc.  Those who manufacture amalgam fillings will fund research to prove that there are no health risks from mercury in amalgams.  They will certainly not fund research to prove the opposite but those who have suffered from mercury toxicity or have no vested interest in the manufacture of amalgam might well fund,  carry out, or even stumble across research to prove that mercury from amalgams is toxic.

To avoid total confusion over the implications of quoted research papers, it is very important to understand the premise upon which research is based.  We also need to be unbiased and consider all aspects of a topic realizing that, invariably, there are other factors involved also.  There are those who belittle smaller research studies or research in opposition to their own bias but that does not make the ‘belittlers’ right or credible. Understanding the most accurate interpretation from research requires a compilation of all information from all angles of a topic along with knowledge of who funds what.  It is important to be able to ‘read between the lines’, appreciate that available money is in the hands of the ‘big’, and keep things in balance. 

There are many negative aspects to the society in which we live and contribute to.  Ignorance about such negative aspects is not bliss, as many have found to their cost.  However, pointing the finger in one direction whilst ignoring the others pointing back is not going to produce health, which is a little like a jigsaw - all the pieces have to be put into place to see the picture.   It is certainly not uncommon for people with health problems to be utterly frustrated because they think that they have tried everything and got nowhere but what they had not addressed, was what they were not aware.  It didn’t mean that what they did do was not worth doing but it just needed to be added to.  Adverse radiation is a factor which must be looked at in the search for the cause of ill health.  Where you live and work, along with equipment used, must be assessed for potential damage from radiation exposure and corrective measures taken where relevant.

The subject of adverse radiation and its various fields would fill volumes. Detailed expositions of the subjects raised are not the purpose of a short article which only presents sufficient information to promote further research and make an informed choice towards health.  If we drink enough clean water, take in sufficient unrefined sea salt, remove the toxins from our mouths[9] and lives, learn how to keep the lymphatic system[9] moving, eat foods which are not detrimental to health[9] and correct nutritional deficiencies, especially essential fatty acids,[9]  then we stand a much better chance of not reacting so badly to exposure to adverse radiation.

Along with other corrective measures including dealing with any relevant emotional factors, using proven anti-radiation shields on the person and on equipment such as mobile and cordless ‘phones, will help to keep the radiation ‘in-out-balance’ principle as near to optimum as possible. 

References to Part I and Part II.

Opening Image courtesy of:

http://05lovesgeography.blogspot.co.uk/2011/01/longwave-radiation-and-shortwave.html

1.         The human bio-electrical system is mediated through nerves, tissues and meridians and can be monitored through ECGs, EEGs, kinesiology and other bio-feedback systems. 

2.         F Batmanghelidj, Your Body's Many Cries for Water, Global Health Solutions, 3rd edition. ISBN-10: 0970245882, ISBN-13: 978-0970245885. 1 Nov. 2008.

3.         F Batmanghelidj, Water and Salt: Your Healers from Within, Tagman Press, an Imprint of Tagman Worldwide Ltd. ISBN-10: 1903571243, ISBN-13: 978-1903571248. 1 Sept. 2003

Jacques De Langre Seasalts Hidden Powers, Happiness Press. ISBN-10: 0916508420, ISBN-13: 978-0916508425. Dec. 1987.

4.         Andrea Taddei, The 5 Biological Laws and Dr. Hamer's New Medicine,

CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform. ISBN-10: 1479228184

ISBN-13: 978-1479228188. 14 Sept. 2012.

5.         Many people are unaware of toxicity sources promoted in food, drink and every day materials, toxic dental materials like mercury in amalgam fillings, aluminium and fluoride in white fillings and filling liners, radiation in medical and utility areas etc.  Such unawareness is common place and if exposure has not been able to escape media attention it has been ‘balanced with’ ridicule, dismissal or plain fraudulent counter information to keep the public unaware.  ‘You have been watching too much television’ is an excellent tactic for hiding in plain sight.

6.         James McKitting, Aspartame – a true horror story: Hidden Poisons. Kindle Edition. 15 May 2015.

7.         Robert O. Becker MD, Cross Currents,  Tarcher/Putnam,US; Reprinted edition., ISBN-10: 0874776090 , ISBN-13: 978-0874776096. 1 Jan. 1990.

David Cowan and Rodney Girdlestone, Safe As Houses? Ill Health and Electro-stress in the Home, Gateway Pub.  ISBN-10: 1858600375, ISBN-13: 978-1858600376. July 1996.

Alan Hall, Water, Electricity & Health Protecting Yourself from Electrostress at Home and Work, Hawthorn Press; Reissue edition  ISBN-10: 1869890949, ISBN-13: 978-1869890940. 1 Oct. 1997.

Kathe Bachler & John M Living, Earth Radiation, Pub: John Living,  ISBN-10: 0968632351, ISBN-13: 978-0968632352. Feb 2007.

8          By misinterpreted data I do not impute motives to any research sources/individuals but simply state that conclusions isolated from other relevant factors are not complete and can constitute misinterpretation by way of incomplete input.

9. ICHC articles, V Bradshaw-Black:

• Mercury Poisoning from Amalgam Fillings Fluoride
• Dehydration – Just Lack of Water?
• Lymphatic System
• Diet and Nutritional Principles