Are mobile phones wiping out our bees?

\Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2007 20:31:42 -0400

Yep, pretty scary... and impacts on humans too...

http://news.independent.co.uk/enviro...cle2449968.ece

Independent.co.uk Online Edition: Home

Are mobile phones wiping out our bees?
Scientists claim radiation from handsets are to blame for mysterious
'colony
collapse' of bees
By Geoffrey Lean and Harriet Shawcross
Published: 15 April 2007

It seems like the plot of a particularly far-fetched horror film. But
some
scientists suggest that our love of the mobile phone could cause
massive
food shortages, as the world's harvests fail.

They are putting forward the theory that radiation given off by mobile
phones and other hi-tech gadgets is a possible answer to one of the
more
bizarre mysteries ever to happen in the natural world - the abrupt
disappearance of the bees that pollinate crops. Late last week, some
bee-keepers claimed that the phenomenon - which started in the US,
then
spread to continental Europe - was beginning to hit Britain as well.

The theory is that radiation from mobile phones interferes with bees'
navigation systems, preventing the famously homeloving species from
finding
their way back to their hives. Improbable as it may seem, there is now
evidence to back this up.

Colony Collapse Disorder (CCD) occurs when a hive's inhabitants
suddenly
disappear, leaving only queens, eggs and a few immature workers, like
so
many apian Mary Celestes. The vanished bees are never found, but
thought to
die singly far from home. The parasites, wildlife and other bees that
normally raid the honey and pollen left behind when a colony dies,
refuse to
go anywhere near the abandoned hives.

The alarm was first sounded last autumn, but has now hit half of all
American states. The West Coast is thought to have lost 60 per cent of
its
commercial bee population, with 70 per cent missing on the East Coast.

CCD has since spread to Germany, Switzerland, Spain, Portugal, Italy
and
Greece. And last week John Chapple, one of London's biggest
bee-keepers,
announced that 23 of his 40 hives have been abruptly abandoned.

Other apiarists have recorded losses in Scotland, Wales and north-west
England, but the Department of the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
insisted: "There is absolutely no evidence of CCD in the UK."

The implications of the spread are alarming. Most of the world's crops
depend on pollination by bees. Albert Einstein once said that if the
bees
disappeared, "man would have only four years of life left".

No one knows why it is happening. Theories involving mites,
pesticides,
global warming and GM crops have been proposed, but all have
drawbacks.

German research has long shown that bees' behaviour changes near power
lines.

Now a limited study at Landau University has found that bees refuse to
return to their hives when mobile phones are placed nearby. Dr Jochen
Kuhn,
who carried it out, said this could provide a "hint" to a possible
cause.

Dr George Carlo, who headed a massive study by the US government and
mobile
phone industry of hazards from mobiles in the Nineties, said: "I am
convinced the possibility is real."

The case against handsets

Evidence of dangers to people from mobile phones is increasing. But
proof is
still lacking, largely because many of the biggest perils, such as
cancer,
take decades to show up.

Most research on cancer has so far proved inconclusive. But an
official
Finnish study found that people who used the phones for more than 10
years
were 40 per cent more likely to get a brain tumour on the same side as
they
held the handset.

Equally alarming, blue-chip Swedish research revealed that radiation
from
mobile phones killed off brain cells, suggesting that today's
teenagers
could go senile in the prime of their lives.

Studies in India and the US have raised the possibility that men who
use
mobile phones heavily have reduced sperm counts. And, more
prosaically,
doctors have identified the condition of "text thumb", a form of RSI
from
constant texting.

Professor Sir William Stewart, who has headed two official inquiries,
warned
that children under eight should not use mobiles and made a series of
safety
recommendations, largely ignored by ministers.
===
I am working on creating wildlife habitat that is off-limits to
humans ("pure habitat"). Want to help? (I spent the previous 8
years fighting auto dependence and road construction.)

Please don't put a cell phone next to any part of your body that you are fond of!

http://home.pacbell.net/mjvande

On Tue, 17 Apr 2007 21:20:23 -0700, Mike Vandeman
wrote:

Are mobile phones wiping out our bees?


So what! I could live off cheese nips, beef jerky, pizza and ice cream.
--
Slack

?Slack wrote:
On Tue, 17 Apr 2007 21:20:23 -0700, Mike Vandeman
wrote:

Are mobile phones wiping out our bees?


So what! I could live off cheese nips, beef jerky, pizza and ice
cream.

Good thing you're slow on climbs.

Bill "ain't 'splainin'" S.

Mike Vandeman wrote:

Are mobile phones wiping out our bees?

No.

Next question?

CC

"Mike Vandeman" wrote:
\Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2007 20:31:42 -0400

CCD has since spread to Germany, Switzerland, Spain, Portugal, Italy
and
Greece. And last week John Chapple, one of London's biggest
bee-keepers,
announced that 23 of his 40 hives have been abruptly abandoned.

Astonishingly nothing can be found on any of Germanys beekeeper
websites not even on national association of beekeepers.
Doh!
Perhaps there were no more bees they could write about?

On Apr 17, 10:42Â*pm, â–€Slack wrote:
On Tue, 17 Apr 2007 21:20:23 -0700, Mike Vandeman Â*
wrote:

Are mobilephoneswiping out ourbees?

So what! I could live off cheese nips, beef jerky, pizza and ice cream.
--
Slack

Yes, but you obviously have a brain tumor!:

http://www.sun-sentinel.com/features...,7105692.story

Cell phone risks cited in studies

Three groups find danger of tumors

By Nancy McVicar
South Florida Sun-Sentinel Health Writer
Posted February 1 2006



Adding new fuel to the debate over cell phone safety, three European
research groups in separate studies have found an increased risk of
brain tumors in people who have used the phones for 10 years or more.

Two of the studies found a correlation between the tumor's location
and the side of the head where people reported they held the phone.
One also suggests the greatest risk is in people who began using the
phones before age 20, but researchers said the study group was small
and more research should be done.

Two of the studies, one in England and one in Germany, are part of the
13-nation Interphone Study, an effort sanctioned by the World Health
Organization to assess possible health risks from the radiation
emitted by cell phones.

Both studies found an increased risk of glioma, an often deadly brain
cancer, in people who had used cell phones 10 years or more.

An earlier Interphone study, reported in October 2004 by researchers
at the Karolinska Institute in Sweden, found an increased risk for a
non-cancerous brain tumor called acoustic neuroma after 10 years of
cell phone use, but not for glioma. "When you put the three large
Interphone results together -- the German, English and Swedish -- they
tell a story, and it begs for attention," said Louis Slesin, publisher
of Microwave News, who has been reporting on the health effects of
such radiation for two decades.

John Walls, vice president of public affairs for CTIA, The Wireless
Association, a cell phone industry trade group in Washington, D.C.,
said the increase in glioma in people who had used the phones more
than 10 years was "statistically insignificant," and said there is no
cause for concern.

The German study, conducted by Joachim Schuz and colleagues at the
University of Mainz, was published online by the American Journal of
Epidemiology. The researchers compared a group of 749 brain tumor
patients with 1,494 similar people who had not used cell phones and
found a doubling of the risk of gliomas after 10 years of use.

They said numbers of people in the study who had used the phones for
10 years was small, and the findings need to be confirmed by other
studies.

The British researchers compared a group of 966 brain tumor patients
with a group of 1,716 healthy patients who had not used cell phones.
They found a 20 percent increase in cancers among long-term users, but
no overall increased risk in people who used cell phones.

The study, funded largely by the cell phone industry and published
online by the British Medical Journal, found a significantly increased
risk for tumors that developed on the same side of the head where
patients said they most often held the phone. But lead researcher
Patricia McKinney said that finding probably was due to many patients
not accurately recalling which ear they'd used most of the time.

Critics said conclusions drawn by the researchers were "highly
misleading" and might give cell phone users a false sense of security.

George Carlo, who headed the American cell phone industry's 1990s
research program, said the findings indicate a 24 percent increase in
tumors among people who used the phone on the same side as the tumor.

Alasdair Philips, director of Powerwatch, an independent watchdog
group in England, also said the claim of no association of risk is
unjustified because the study excluded half the people who developed
gliomas because they died before they could be interviewed.

McKinney, an epidemiologist at the Leeds Institute of Genetics, Health
and Therapeutics, said "we have no reason to believe the findings were
affected by the [exclusion of half the cases]."

In an e-mail to the South Florida Sun-Sentinel, she defended the
decision to discount the high number of cases reported on the same
side of the head where the phone was held.

A third study, in the February edition of International Journal of
Oncology, found an increased risk of acoustic neuromas in long-term
users. Dr. Lennart Hardell and colleagues at Orebro University in
Sweden analyzed the cases of 1,254 people diagnosed with benign brain
tumors between 1997 and 2003, and compared them with a similar group
of 2,162 people who had not used cell phones.

They found that people who used analog cell phones starting 15 years
before diagnosis developed acoustic neuromas at a rate almost four
times higher than the comparison group.

Walls, of the CTIA, said he had not seen the Swedish study, but
questioned the validity of the findings and the researchers' study
design.

An analysis late last year by Dr. Henry Lai, who heads the
Bioelectromagnetics Research Laboratory at the University of
Washington in Seattle, said of 271 laboratory or clinical studies done
in recent years, about 60 percent have shown a biological effect in
cells or animals exposed to radio frequency radiation.

--------

Cell phones and radiation
Because questions remain about the long-term safety of cell phones,
users who want to reduce their exposure to radio frequency radiation
can follow these strategies:
Use a landline phone when one is available.
Keep cell phone calls short.
Don't carry a cell phone in a pocket.
Use a hands-free headset or use a speakerphone so that the phone is
not placed against the head.
When using a hands-free headset, allow the wire to fall naturally down
the torso to the phone clipped at the waist, which allows any
radiation to be absorbed in small amounts along the body rather than
concentrated in the head.
SOURCES: MOTOROLA, U.S. FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION, FEDERAL
COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION, NATIONAL RADIOLOGICAL PROTECTION BOARD,
UNITED KINGDOM; VERUM FOUNDATION, GERMANY
-- NANCY MCVICAR

"Mike Vandeman" wrote in message
...
\Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2007 20:31:42 -0400

Yep, pretty scary... and impacts on humans too...

http://news.independent.co.uk/enviro...cle2449968.ece



Actually, IF this turns out to be accurate, it is scary stuff indeed.

Sad thing is, it's probably not scary for the reason YOU think it's scary.
The problem becomes, the affect of loss of bees might have on human
populations. I'm certain that your view is that the loss of bees is
important to the bees, and that radio waves are bad for people. Radio waves
are not directly bad for people, but if they are bad for bees, then bad
things happening to bees might be bad for people.

On Apr 18, 1:58 pm, "Jeff Strickland" wrote:
"Mike Vandeman" wrote in message

...

\Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2007 20:31:42 -0400

Yep, pretty scary... and impacts on humans too...

http://news.independent.co.uk/enviro...cle2449968.ece

Actually, IF this turns out to be accurate, it is scary stuff indeed.

Sad thing is, it's probably not scary for the reason YOU think it's scary.
The problem becomes, the affect of loss of bees might have on human
populations. I'm certain that your view is that the loss of bees is
important to the bees, and that radio waves are bad for people. Radio waves
are not directly bad for people, but if they are bad for bees, then bad
things happening to bees might be bad for people.

The evidence that electromagnetic radiation at some wavelengths can
harm people is inconclusive - but it is clearly too early to wrote it
off. Some kinds of radio waves at modest intensity - microwaves for
example - can clearly cause short term harm. A UHF signal at close
range may have other effects that we'd rather not think about...

Having said this, I agree - the loss of bee populations is a very
frightening scenario. I doubt if global warming is responsible for
this one, since bees seem to do well in numerous habitats and
ecozones. So, it has to be something else, and it must be something
that has reared its ugly head in the last few years *where the bees
have been disappearing*. Massive cell phone connectivity could be the
culprit - but consider that lots of new broadcast technology has been
erupting (digital TV on a brand new set of frequencies, digital AM &
FM on their respective bands)...and in a few places, internet access
via powerline transmission is being bandied about...

Maybe it's even a new *something* brought about by Homeland Security!
How about that, Tinfoil-hat-types?

Until now I had always been under the impression that bees navigate
primarily through visual methods, but - well, learn somethng new every
day, eh?

Bruce Jensen

Jeff Strickland wrote:

"Mike Vandeman" wrote in message
...
\Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2007 20:31:42 -0400

Yep, pretty scary... and impacts on humans too...

http://news.independent.co.uk/enviro...cle2449968.ece



Actually, IF this turns out to be accurate, it is scary stuff indeed.

Sad thing is, it's probably not scary for the reason YOU think it's
scary. The problem becomes, the affect of loss of bees might have on
human populations. I'm certain that your view is that the loss of bees
is important to the bees, and that radio waves are bad for people. Radio
waves are not directly bad for people, but if they are bad for bees,
then bad things happening to bees might be bad for people.




The story appears to have something to it!

Central or Southern Canada is also having bee disappearance issues big
time. It is in the major Toronto newspapers this week.

Mike
86/00 CJ7 Laredo, 33x9.5 BFG Muds, 'glass nose to tail in '00
88 Cherokee 235 BFG AT's
Canadian Off Road Trips Photos: Non members can still view!
Jan/06 http://www.imagestation.com/album/pi...?id=2115147590
(More Off Road album links at bottom of the view page)

"Mike Romain" wrote in message
g.com...
Jeff Strickland wrote:

"Mike Vandeman" wrote in message
...
\Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2007 20:31:42 -0400

Yep, pretty scary... and impacts on humans too...

http://news.independent.co.uk/enviro...cle2449968.ece



Actually, IF this turns out to be accurate, it is scary stuff indeed.

Sad thing is, it's probably not scary for the reason YOU think it's
scary. The problem becomes, the affect of loss of bees might have on
human populations. I'm certain that your view is that the loss of bees is
important to the bees, and that radio waves are bad for people. Radio
waves are not directly bad for people, but if they are bad for bees, then
bad things happening to bees might be bad for people.




The story appears to have something to it!

Central or Southern Canada is also having bee disappearance issues big
time. It is in the major Toronto newspapers this week.



FINALLY, Vandeman is worried about something that appears to have merit. The
sad thing is, he is probably not worried about the aspects that carry the
merit.

Maybe he'll grace us with a logical explanation of his position.