ALERT: AAEM Releases Recommendations EMF and RF Exposures (7/12/12)

**NEW** The American Academy of Environmental Medicine released its recommendations regarding electromagnetic field (EMF) and radio frequency (RF) exposures.

These recommendations by AAEM, just released on 7/12/12, will take the world by storm. AAEM recommends that patients with a broad range of medical conditions avoid sources of EMF and RF radiation, especially smart meters on patients’ homes and on neighbors’ homes, nearby.

These AAEM recommendations may be useful for accommodation requests.

Print the recommendations below and take to your doctor, immediately! If you have one of these medical conditions, your physician may wish to issue a request for accommodation letter on your behalf, which you may send to the utility to request to have smart meters removed from your home and the homes of your neighbors, without fees. If the utility refuses, you may then consider filing a discrimination complaint with the federal gov’t or you may consider seeking a disability rights attorney to discuss filing a potential discrimination lawsuit.

Learn more at How to File an Accommodation Letter / Discrimination Complaint Associated with RF Radiation from Smart Meters. Disability law clinics are available for free consultations in some areas.

Updated: CA & Federal Laws Supporting No Opt-out Fees and Complaint Info

—————————–

American Academy of Environmental Medicine Recommendations Regarding

Electromagnetic and Radiofrequency Exposure (7/12/12)

Physicians of the American Academy of Environmental Medicine recognize that patients are being adversely impacted by electromagnetic frequency (EMF) and radiofrequency (RF) fields and are becoming more electromagnetically sensitive.

The AAEM recommends that physicians consider patients’ total electromagnetic exposure in their diagnosis and treatment, as well as recognition that electromagnetic and radiofrequency field exposure may be an underlying cause of a patient’s disease process.

Based on double‐blinded, placebo controlled research in humans,1 medical conditions and disabilities that would more than likely benefit from avoiding electromagnetic and radiofrequency exposure include, but are not limited to:

• Neurological conditions such as paresthesias, somnolence, cephalgia, dizziness, unconsciousness, depression

• Musculoskeletal effects including pain, muscle tightness, spasm, fibrillation

• Heart disease and vascular effects including arrhythmia, tachycardia, flushing, edema

• Pulmonary conditions including chest tightness, dyspnea, decreased pulmonary function

• Gastrointestinal conditions including nausea, belching

• Ocular (burning)

• Oral (pressure in ears, tooth pain)

• Dermal (itching, burning, pain)

• Autonomic nervous system dysfunction (dysautonomia).

Based on numerous studies showing harmful biological effects from EMF and RF exposure, medical conditions and disabilities that would more than likely benefit from avoiding exposure include, but are not limited to:

• Neurodegenerative diseases (Parkinson’s Disease, Alzheimer’s Disease, and Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis. 2‐6

• Neurological conditions (Headaches, depression, sleep disruption, fatigue,

dizziness, tremors, autonomic nervous system dysfunction, decreased memory,

attention deficit disorder, anxiety, visual disruption). 7‐10

• Fetal abnormalities and pregnancy. 11,12

• Genetic defects and cancer.2,3,13‐19

• Liver disease and genitourinary disease.12,20

Because Smart Meters produce Radiofrequency emissions, it is recommended that patients with the above conditions and disabilities be accommodated to protect their health. The AAEM recommends: that no Smart Meters be on these patients’ homes, that Smart Meters be removed within a reasonable distance of patients’ homes depending on the patients’ perception and/or symptoms, and that no collection meters be placed near patients’ homes depending on patients’ perception and/or symptoms.

Approved July 12, 2012 by the Executive Committee of the American Academy of Environmental Medicine

Submitted by: Amy L. Dean, DO and William J. Rea, MD

Bibliography

1. Rea WJ, Pan Y, Fenyves EJ, et al. Electromagnetic field sensitivity. Journal of Bioelectricity. 1991;

10(1 &2): 243‐256.

2. Xu S, Zhou Z, Zhang L, et al. Exposure to 1800 MHZ radiofrequency radiation induces oxidative

damage to mitochondrial DNA in primary cultured neurons. Brain Research. 2010; 1311: 189‐196.

3. Zhao T, Zou S, Knapp P. Exposure to cell phone radiation up‐regulates apoptosis genes in primary

cultures of neurons and astrocytes. Neurosci Lett. 2007; 412(1): 34‐38.

4. Nittby H, Brun A, Eberhardt J, et al. Increased blood‐brain barrier permeability in mammalian

brain 7 days after exposure to the radiation from a GSM‐900 mobile phone. Pathophysiology.

2009; 16: 103‐112.

5. Awad SM, Hassan NS. Health Risks of electromagnetic radiation from mobile phone on brain of

rats. J. Appl. Sci. Res. 2008; 4(12): 1994‐2000.

6. Leszczynski D, Joenvaara S. Non‐thermal activation of the hsp27/p38MAPK stress pathway by

mobile phone radiation in human endothelial cells: Molecular mechanism for cancer ‐ and bloodbrain

barrier ‐ related effects. Differentiation. 2002; 70: 120‐129.

7. Santini R, Santini P, Danze JM, et al. Study of the health of people living in the vicinity of mobile

phone base stations: 1. Influences of distance and sex. Pathol Biol. 2002; 50: 369‐373.

8. Abdel‐Rassoul G, Abou El‐Fateh O, Abou Salem M, et al. Neurobehavioral effects among

inhabitants around mobile phone base stations. Neurotox. 2007; 28(2): 434‐440.

9. Hutter HP, Moshammer H, Wallner P, Kundi M. Subjective symptoms, sleeping problems, and

cognitive performance in subjects living near mobile phone base stations. Occup. Environ. Med.

2006; 63: 307‐313.

Page 3

10. Kolodynski AA, Kolodynska VV. Motor and psychological functions of school children living in the

area of the Skrunda Radio Location Station in Latvia. Sci. Total Environ. 1996; 180: 87‐93.

11. Magras IN, Xenos TD. RF radiation‐induced changes in the prenatal development of mice.

Bioelectromagnetics. 1997; 18:455‐461.

12. Ingole IV, Ghosh SK. Cell phone radiation and developing tissues in chick embryo ‐ a light

microscopic study of kidneys. J. Anat. Soc. India. 2006; 55(2): 19‐23.

13. Phillips JL, Singh NP, Lai H. Electromagnetic fields and DNA damage. Pathophysiology. 2009; 16:

79‐88.

14. Ruediger HW. Genotoxic effects of radiofrequency electromagnetic fields. Pathophysiology.

2009; 16(2): 89‐102.

15. Lee S, Johnson D, Dunbar K. 2.45 GHz radiofrequency fields alter gene expression on cultured

human cells. FEBS Letters. 2005; 579: 4829‐4836.

16. Demsia G, Vlastos D, Matthopoulos DP. Effect of 910‐MHz electromagnetic field on rat bone

marrow. The Scientific World Journal. 2004; 4(S2): 48‐54.

17. Lai H, Singh NP. Magnetic‐field‐induced DNA strand breaks in brain cells of the rat. Environmental

Health Perspectives. 2004; 112(6): 687‐694. Available from:

http://ehp03.niehs.nih.gov/article/info:doi/10.1289/ehp.6355

18. Mashevich M, Foldman D, Kesar, et al. Exposure of human peripheral blood lymphocytes to

electromagnetic fields associated with cellular phones leads to chromosomal instability.

Bioelectromagnetics. 2003; 24: 82‐90.

19. Ban R, Grosse Y, Lauby‐Secretan B, et al. Carcinogenicity of radiofrequency electromagnetic

fields. The Lancet Oncology. 2011; 12(7): 624‐626. Available from:

http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanonc/article/PIIS1470‐2045(11)70147‐

4/fulltext?_eventId=login

20. Lubec G, Wolf C. Bartosch B. Amino acid isomerisation and microwave exposure. Lancet. 1989;

334: 1392‐1393.