Subject:  (Lundquist) Memory loss after MW exposure (fwd)
Date:     Wed, 25 Nov 1998 023318 -0600 (CST)
From:     "Roy L. Beavers" <rbeavers@llion.org>
To:       emfguru <rbeavers@llion.org>
--------------------------------------------------


---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Wed, 25 Nov 1998 06:00:23
From: marjlundquist@usa.net
To: rbeavers@llion.org
Cc: aphilips@gn.apc.org
Subject: Memory loss after MW exposure

Roy, in view of the reports of memory loss that have come from some users
of cellular telephones (only digital ones, I think) an earlier report of
memory loss after accidental exposure to an airplane radar may be of
interest.  The citation is Journal of the American Medical Association
259, No. 3 (Jan. 15, 1988) page 355.  This is a letter written by two MDs
in Florida, Mauricio Castillo & Robert M. Quencer.
A 42-year-old male pilot stood in front of a functioning microwave radar
system on a fighter aircraft for approximately 5 minutes, by which time
he perceived a moderate sensation of heat in his head and neck, and
removed himself from the vicinity.  The next morning he noticed a lump in
his lower neck; it enlarged over time.  A month later he consulted a
physician.  During the following month, he noted loss of recent memory
and extreme sleepiness (and the mass in his neck persisted).  I'll skip
the details, except to note that his complain of memory loss continued.
The authors don't give a date for this accident, but do say that "during
the last four months, his memory has improved."  So it sounds like his
problem of memory loss may have finally corrected itself, at least
partially, after many months.
Radar is pulsed microwave radiation.  Digital cellular phones put out
what is essentially pulsed microwave radiation.  Is it really any
surprise that there are such similar complaints?
Finally, I'd like to point out that in the case of radiation sickness
(which occurs after exposure to too much ionizing radiation) there is no
apparent damage immeidately, then the health problems develop over a
period of days or weeks, becoming worse as time passes.  Eventually the
situation turns around and the person's health begins to improve -- if he
has not died in the meantime!  This is the same pattern of health change
that was reported in this case of microwave radiation overexposure.
Cioincidence?  I doubt it.
One more point:  the mass at the base of his neck is almost certainly
where the microwave beam struck the pilot.  This means his brain was
outside the main beam, which means it was exposed to a much lower
intensity field than that in the main beam.  I have noticed this pattern
in other cases of microwave irradiation -- I am thinking of the law
enforcement officers who used traffic radar guns and later developed
cancers at the site where this gun's microwave beam had irradiated their
bodies.  Once again, the cancers developed NOT in the main beam, but
where the radiation just OUTSIDE the main beam hit the body.  What this
means is that the lower-intensity field was AROUND the main beam was MORE
hazardous than the higher-intensity main beam!
This is consistent with other information I have, indicating that the
simple idea that lowering the intensity reduces the health hazard is not
ALWAYS correct!  Lowering the intensity does lower the hazard, down to
something roughly around 1 mW/sq. cm.  But at some point below this
value, it seems that lowering the intensity INCREASES the hazard to
health!
This is why I am suspicious that the shields for cellular telephones may
not work.  (It would be nice if they did, and maybe they will.  But once
again, human beings who pay cash for the gadget are going to be the
"guinea pigs" upon whom it is tested.) -- Marjorie



____________________________________________________________________
Get free e-mail and a permanent address at http://www.netaddress.com/?N=1



Archive provided courtesy of WaveGuide, http://www.wave-guide.org
Reprinted with permission of Roy Beavers, http://www.feb.se/EMF-L/EMF-L.html