ncbi is another rothschilds funded institution see link below for proof
so expect more fuckery and truth from me
For example, NRSA stipends are not competitive with other stipend sources, and training grant ... NRSA institutional training grants play an important role in providing funds to ... C.T. Clotfelter, editor; and M. Rothschild, editor. , pp.183-206.😈💩👎
Study Reports No Cell Phone Mast Exposure Link to Cancer
Study Reports No Child Hood Cancer Risk Connected to Mobile Phone Base Stations
(shall i just stop there?, i think we can all see just how utterly full of shit this is going to be DL)
Excerpts quoted from "Mobile phone base stations and early childhood cancers: case-control study":
Abstract
Objective To investigate the risk of early childhood cancers associated with the mother’s exposure to radiofrequency from and proximity to macrocell mobile phone base stations (masts) during pregnancy.
Design Case-control study.
Setting Cancer registry (scam DL) and national birth register data in Great Britain. (strawman scam DL)
Participants 1397 cases of cancer in children aged 0-4 from national cancer registry 1999-2001 and 5588 birth controls from national birth register, individually matched by sex and date of birth (four controls per case).
Main outcome measures Incidence of cancers of the brain and central nervous system, leukaemia, and non-Hodgkin’s lymphomas, and all cancers combined, adjusted for small area measures of education level, socioeconomic deprivation, population density, and population mixing.
Results Mean distance of registered address at birth from a macrocell base station, based on a national database of 76 890 base station antennas in 1996-2001, was similar for cases and controls (1107 (SD 1131) m v 1073 (SD 1130) m, P=0.31), as was total power output of base stations within 700 m of the address (2.89 (SD 5.9) kW v 3.00 (SD 6.0) kW, P=0.54) and modelled power density (−30.3 (SD 21.7) dBm v −29.7 (SD 21.5) dBm, P=0.41).
For modelled power density at the address at birth, compared with the lowest exposure category the adjusted odds ratios were 1.01 (95% confidence interval 0.87 to 1.18) in the intermediate and 1.02 (0.88 to 1.20) in the highest exposure category for all cancers (P=0.79 for trend), 0.97 (0.69 to 1.37) and 0.76 (0.51 to 1.12), respectively, for brain and central nervous system cancers (P=0.33 for trend), and 1.16 (0.90 to 1.48) and 1.03 (0.79 to 1.34) for leukaemia and non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma (P=0.51 for trend).
wait for it, you know whats coming,,,,#deathtothenwo
😈💩👎
Conclusions There is no association between risk of early childhood cancers and estimates of the mother’s exposure to mobile phone base stations during pregnancy.
now that is straight up bullshit, and you can quote me on that DL)
Study Conclusions and policy implications
In summary, we found no association between risk of childhood cancers and mobile phone base station exposures during pregnancy. JUST WTF (you see how they lie to protect their own selfish interest for money and power DL) The results of our study should help to place any future reports of cancer clusters near mobile phone base stations in a wider public health context.
What is already known on this topic
Previous reports of apparent cancer clusters near mobile phone base stations are difficult to interpret because of small numbers (no the numbers are quite significantly more given there are base stations every 15 meters or less in some places DL) and possible selection and reporting biases (yeah by them DL) There is no known radiobiological explanation for such cancer excesses (just OMG these people need to be taken out of their homes or offices and put directly in jail all assets seized and all properties sold life without the possibility of reprieve or parol maximum slam Standard Ops DL)
What this study adds
This study used national registers of cancers and births and available data on macrocell mobile phone base stations, thus avoiding selection and reporting biases There was no association between risk of early childhood cancers and estimates of exposure to mobile phone base stations during pregnancy (LIES)
Paul Elliot , Mireille B Toledano, J Bennett, L Beale, K de Hoogh, N Best, D J Briggs, "Mobile phone base stations and early childhood cancers: case-control study", British Medical Journal, June 2010, BMJ. 2010; 340: c3077. Published online 2010 June 22. doi: 10.1136/bmj.c3077 Cite: BMJ 2010;340:c3077, retrieved 8/8/2012, original source http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3191724/, [copy on file as Elliot_BMJ_2010_Mobile_phone_base_stations_childhood cancers_ case-control study.pdf ]
"Large study finds no cell phone mast link to cancer", (LIES) Reuters News, 6/22/2010, retrieved 8/6/12, original source http://www.reuters.com/article/2010/06/22/us-cancer-cellphones
-masts-idUSTRE65L6L520100622 [copy on file as Elliott_Cell_Phone_Reuters.pdf]
Suggestions for Reducing Cellphone Radiation Exposure
While the jury is out on health risks from cell phone use (no i would say they definitely came back and ruled in favor of the people and the complicit scumbags are all fucked DL), those who agree that prudent avoidance is wise, even a cursory scan of the literature indicates that holding a cellphone further from the head (try using the speakerphone feature?) reduces exposure. (obviously, you know what im not even going to comment on the rest of this article as its too stupid, i now feel dumber having read it all, apologise DL)
While hands-free sets have been sold to possibly reduce the exposure to cell phone EMF, we have read that the hands free wire connecting the cell phone to the earpiece can actually act as an antenna to increase the level of EMF exposure at the head by a factor of three. (and the chest and lymph glands)
If the cellphone has an extended antenna, pointing the antenna away from the head may also reduce exposure. As does limiting cellphone use.
Watch out: SAR is not the whole story of cellphone safety. As our cellphone photo shown here demonstrates, cellphone design, cell phone antenna placement, and cellphone use style (holding phone further from the ear) can make a difference in the potential EMF exposure of the cell phone user.
Both of the flip-type cell phones in our photo include an upper segment that includes the earphone - a portion of the cell phone that most users hold against or close to their ear.
But the design of the cell phone, using an extendable antenna, places the antenna roughly two inches further from the user's head than the phone shown at left.
Further, talking or texting while driving may be a more immediate life-safety hazard to both the cell phone user and to others exposed to automobile injury from this dangerous practice.
Other Cellphone Hazard Reduction Suggestions - US FDA
The US FDA advice on cellphone hazard reduction is reiterated and commented-on just below. Of these two are most useful: [paraphrasing]
Reduce the amount of time you spend using a cellphone
Use the speakerphone feature to allow holding the cellphone further from your head.
The FDA recommendation for use of headsets, wired or wireless, does not address other sources who warn (as we repeated above) possible increases in EMR exposure when using a headset on which the wire acts as an antenna. Further, we have not found sources describing any increase or decrease associated with using a wireless bluetooth-connected headset.
Watch out: buying a "cell phone radiation shield" is not recommended by the FDA:
Cell phone accessories that claim to shield the head from RF radiation
Since there are no known risks from exposure to RF emissions from cell phones, there is no reason to believe that accessories that claim to shield the head from those emissions reduce risks.
Some products that claim to shield the user from RF absorption use special phone cases, while others involve nothing more than a metallic accessory attached to the phone. Studies have shown that these products generally do not work as advertised.
Unlike "hand-free" kits, these so-called "shields" may interfere with proper operation of the phone. The phone may be forced to boost its power to compensate, leading to an increase in RF absorption.
