Berkhamsted Electro-Sensitivity

Information for anyone wishing to know the less known aspects and side effects of indiscriminately 'spraying' digitally modulated microwave pollution.

We are searching for a way to negate the harshness. The careless placement of cell towers on residential buildings is at best ambitious when studies as far back as 1940-1960 suggest biological alterations in exposed subjects. Lloyds of London won't insure against Wifi/Cell-Tower related claims which basically means liability lands on the operator/installer. Neurasthenia was an old name given to the electro-sensitive condition and microwave sickness is also a term for electro-sensitivity. Everyone has the Right to a healthy existence and electro-sensitivity is a disability recognised abroad (see: http://www.hese-project.org/hese-uk/en/niemr/ehs.php)
Twisted logic; parents sacrifice a great deal doing the best for their young and yet blindly saturate their homes, resting and sleeping areas with a 2b carcinogen, often 24/7. Then there are those who do use wifi but switch it off when not required as they prefer to be cautious, probably are still not able to escape it's effect because of a cell tower or more, keeping microwave radiation levels high, in their homes. An external source. Dependency has been built upon cordless devices which is unfortunately, a double-edge sword. The convenience is a great innovation and the ability to place information literally in the pockets of all who carry is indeed no mean feat. Alarmingly, a patent to reduce biological effects was never built in to the system which is perplexing and perhaps an admission to the risk of harm from the horses mouth. The device instruction manuals express caution which also shifts liability to the user. The frequencies deployed seem to be the most awkward for our bodies to negate and the question remains, why? There are many sides to the story and it's not necessarily all from dark intent. However, it is difficult to overlook the warnings from concerned individuals and groups that do encounter issues with microwave emitting technology, some of whom are and have been involved in the industry like Frank Clegg, former president of Microsoft Canada, Dr Magda Havas, Dr. Devra Davis, Dr Barry Tower and others. So to say there is no merit in their opinions is somewhat arrogant. Perhaps with some discussion, a compromise could be reached where those who wish to utilize wifi related products can do so without infringing upon the Rights of others. White zones. A transition period, a remodelled safe system would be great if such a thing could exist that could be rolled out to replace harmful infrastructure. Thinking caps on! Time out now to ponder this paradox. Can our habits and dependency be revised with a common-sense precautionary approach whilst remaining altruistic in one's conduct, observing the Rights and needs of those who are allergic to the 2b carcinogen that is microwave radiation. A paradigm shift, people all over are waking up to the bigger picture. Surely just a matter of time before the mainstream media can no longer refuse to report the truth about the issue, perhaps only then will alarm bells ring on mass. Until then, would it not be pro-active to look for solutions ahead of time? Would 'Li-fi' (internet through an led light-bulb) bridge the gap? It is vital something is done to alleviate the discomfort forced upon those who are unable to tolerate radiation. Perhaps industry funded EMF protection for the homes that require it. Thousands of pounds are collected in rent for the mast sites, why isn't that available to shield 'victims'? Enough said for now but the thought persists. There can never be a 'them and us' in a peaceful world and there cannot be a healthy world whilst being pulse radiated. Bees, Birds and Nature have Rights too, it's not all about us. We need harmony.