Cell Phone and Microwave The Making of Tumors
Originally printed from the April 1994 edition of
Acres U.S.A.
P.O. Box 91299, Austin, Texas 78709
USA
Telephone: 800-355-5313 or (512) 892-4400; Fax: (512) 892-4448
[email protected] at www.acresusa.com
Back in May of 1989, after Tom Valentine
first moved to St Paul, Minnesota, he heard on the car radio a short
announcement that bolted him upright in the driver's seat. The announcement was
sponsored by Young Families, the Minnesota Extension Service of the University
of Minnesota:
"Although microwaves heat food quickly, they are not
recommended for heating a baby's bottle," the announcement said. The bottle may
seem cool to the touch, but the liquid inside may become extremely hot and could
burn the baby's mouth and throat. Also, the buildup of steam in a closed
container such as a baby's bottle could cause it to explode. "Heating the bottle
in a microwave can cause slight changes in the milk. In infant formulas, there
may be a loss of some vitamins. In expressed breast milk, some protective
properties may be destroyed." The report went on. "Warming a bottle by holding
it under tap water or by setting it in a bowl of warm water, then testing it on
your wrist before feeding, may take a few minutes longer, but it is much
safer."
Valentine asked himself: If an established institution like the
University of Minnesota can warn about the loss of particular nutrient qualities
in microwaved baby formula or mother's milk, then somebody must know something
about microwaving they are not telling everybody.
A LAWSUIT
In early 1991, word leaked out about a
lawsuit in Oklahoma. A woman named Norma Levitt had hip surgery, only to be
killed by a simple blood transfusion when a nurse "warmed the blood for the
transfusion in a microwave oven"!
Logic suggests that if heating or
cooking is all there is to it, then it doesn't matter what mode of heating
technology one uses. However, it is quite apparent that there is more to
'heating' with microwaves than we've been led to believe.
Blood for
transfusions is routinely warmed-but not in microwave ovens! In the case of Mrs
Levitt, the microwaving altered the blood and it killed her.
Does it not
therefore follow that this form of heating does, indeed, do 'something
different' to the substances being heated? Is it not prudent to determine what
that 'something different' might do?
A funny thing happened on the way to the
bank with all that microwave oven revenue: nobody thought about the obvious.
Only 'health nuts' who are constantly aware of the value of quality nutrition
discerned a problem with the widespread 'denaturing' of our food. Enter Hans
Hertel.
HANS HERTEL
In the tiny town of Wattenwil, near Basel
in Switzerland, there lives a scientist who is alarmed at the lack of purity and
naturalness in the many pursuits of modern mankind. He worked as a food
scientist for several years with one of the many major Swiss food companies that
do business on a global scale. A few years ago, he was fired from his job for
questioning procedures in processing food because they denatured it.
"The
world needs our help," Hans Hertel told Tom Valentine as they shared a fine meal
at a resort hotel in Todtmoss, Germany.
"We, the scientists, carry the
main responsibility for the present unacceptable conditions. It is therefore our
job to correct the situation and bring the remedy to the world. I am striving to
bring man and techniques back into harmony with nature. We can have wonderful
technologies without violating nature."
Hans is an intense man, driven by
personal knowledge of violations of nature by corporate man and his
state-supported monopolies in science, technology and education. At the same
time, as the two talked, his intensity shattered into a warm smile and he spoke
of the way things could be if mankind's immense talent were to work with nature
and not against her.
Hans Hertel is the first scientist to conceive of
and carry out a quality study on the effects of microwaved nutrients on the
blood and physiology of human beings. This small but well-controlled study
pointed the firm finger at a degenerative force of microwave ovens and the food
produced in them. The conclusion was clear: microwave cooking changed the
nutrients so that changes took place in the participants' blood; these were not
healthy changes but were changes that could cause deterioration in the human
systems.
Working with Bernard H. Blanc of the Swiss Federal Institute of
Technology and the University Institute for Biochemistry, Hertel not only
conceived of the study and carried it out, he was one of eight
participants.
"To control as many variables as possible, we selected
eight individuals who were strict macrobiotic diet participants from the
Macrobiotic Institute at Kientel, Switzerland," Hertel explained. "We were all
housed in the same hotel environment for eight weeks. There was no smoking, no
alcohol and no sex."
One can readily see that this protocol makes sense.
After all, how could you tell about subtle changes in a human's blood from
eating microwaved food if smoking, booze, junk food, pollution, pesticides,
hormones, antibiotics and everything else in the common environment were also
present?
"We had one American, one Canadian and six Europeans in the
group. I was the oldest at 64 years, the others were in their 20s and 30s,"
Hertel added.
Valentine published the results of this study in Search
for Health in the Spring of 1992. But the follow-up information is available
only in a later edition, and also in Acres, USA.
In intervals of
two to five days, the volunteers in the study received one of the food variants
on an empty stomach. The food variants were: raw milk from a biofarm (no. 1);
the same milk conventionally cooked (no. 2); pasteurised milk from Intermilk
Berne (no. 3); the same raw milk cooked in a microwave oven (no. 4); raw
vegetables from an organic farm (no. 5); the same vegetables cooked
conventionally (no. 6); the same vegetables frozen and defrosted in the
microwave oven (no. 7); and the same vegetables cooked in the microwave oven
(no. 8). The overall experiment had some of the earmarks of the Pottenger cat
studies, except that now human beings were test objects, the experiment's
time-frame was shorter, and a new heat form was tested.
Once the
volunteers were isolated at the resort hotel, the test began. Blood samples were
taken from every volunteer immediately before eating. Then blood samples were
taken at defined intervals after eating from the above-numbered milk or
vegetable preparations.
Significant changes were discovered in the blood
of the volunteers who consumed foods cooked in the microwave oven. These changes
included a decrease in all haemoglobin values and cholesterol values, especially
the HDL (good cholesterol) and LDL (bad cholesterol) values and ratio.
Lymphocytes (white blood cells) showed a more distinct short-term decrease
following the intake of microwaved food than after the intake of all the other
variants. Each of these indicators point in a direction away from robust health
and toward degeneration. Additionally, there was a highly significant
association between the amount of microwave energy in the test foods and the
luminous power of luminescent bacteria exposed to serum from test persons who
ate that food. This led Hertel to the conclusion that such technically derived
energies may, indeed, be passed along to man inductively via consumption of
microwaved food.
"This process is based on physical principles and has
already been confirmed in the literature," Hertel explained. The apparent
additional energy exhibited by the luminescent bacteria was merely extra
confirmation.
"There is extensive scientific literature concerning the
hazardous effects of direct microwave radiation on living systems," Hertel
continued. "It is astonishing, therefore, to realise how little effort has been
made to replace this detrimental technique of microwaves with technology more in
accordance with nature.
"Technically produced microwaves are based on the
principle of alternating current. Atoms, molecules and cells hit by this hard
electromagnetic radiation are forced to reverse polarity 1 to 100 billion times
a second. There are no atoms, molecules or cells of any organic system able to
withstand such a violent, destructive power for any extended period of time, not
even in the low energy range of milliwatts.
"Of all the natural
substances-which are polar-the oxygen of water molecules reacts most
sensitively. This is how microwave cooking heat is generated-friction from this
violence in water molecules. Structures of molecules are torn apart, molecules
are forcefully deformed (called structural isomerism) and thus become impaired
in quality.
HEATING FOOD
"This is contrary to conventional heating
of food, in which heat transfers convectionally from without to within. Cooking
by microwaves begins within the cells and molecules where water is present and
where the energy is transformed into frictional heat."
The question
naturally arises: What about microwaves from the sun? Aren't they
harmful?
Hertel responded: "The microwaves from the Sun are based on
principles of pulsed direct current. These rays create no frictional heat in
organic substance."
In addition to violent frictional heat effects
(called thermic effects), there are also athermic effects which have hardly ever
been taken into account, Hertel added.
"These athermic effects are not
presently measurable, but they can also deform the structures of molecules and
have qualitative consequences. For example, the weakening of cell membranes by
microwaves is used in the field of gene altering technology. Because of the
force involved, the cells are actually broken, thereby neutralising the
electrical potentials-the very life of the cells-between the outer and inner
sides of the cell membranes. Impaired cells become easy prey for viruses, fungi
and other micro-organisms. The natural repair mechanisms are suppressed, and
cells are forced to adapt to a state of energy emergency: they switch from
aerobic to anaerobic respiration. Instead of water and carbon dioxide, hydrogen
peroxide and carbon monoxide are produced."
It has long been pointed out
in the literature that any reversal of healthy cell processes may occur because
of a number of reasons, and our cells then revert from a "robust oxidation" to
an unhealthy "fermentation".
The same violent friction and athermic
deformations that can occur in our bodies when we are subjected to radar or
microwaves, happens to the molecules in the food cooked in a microwave oven. In
fact, when anyone microwaves food, the oven exerts a power input of about 1,000
watts or more. This radiation results in destruction and deformation of
molecules of food, and in the formation of new compounds (called radiolytic
compounds) unknown to man and nature.
Today's established science and
technology argues forcefully that microwaved food and irradiated foods do not
have any significantly higher "radiolytic compounds" than do broiled, baked or
other conventionally cooked foods-but microwaving does produce more of these
critters. Curiously, neither established science nor our ever-protective
government has conducted tests-on the blood of the eaters-of the effects of
eating various kinds of cooked foods. Hertel and his group did test it, and the
indication is clear that something is amiss and that larger studies should be
funded. The apparently toxic effects of microwave cooking is another in a long
list of unnatural additives in our daily diets. However, the establishment has
not taken kindly to this work.
"The first drawing of blood samples took
place on an empty stomach at 7.45 each morning," Hertel explained. "The second
drawing of blood took place 15 minutes after the food intake. The third drawing
was two hours later."
From each sample, 50 millilitres of blood was used
for the chemistry and five millimetres for the haematology and the luminescence.
The haematological examinations took place immediately after drawing the
samples. Erythrocytes, haemoglobin, mean haemoglobin concentration, mean
haemoglobin content, leukocytes and lymphocytes were measured. The chemical
analysis consisted of iron, total cholesterol, HDL cholesterol and LDL
cholesterol.
The results of erythrocyte, haemoglobin, haematocrit and
leukocyte determinations were at the "lower limits of normal" in those tested
following the eating of the microwaved samples.
"These results show
anaemic tendencies. The situation became even more pronounced during the second
month of the study," Hertel added. "And with those decreasing values, there was
a corresponding increase of cholesterol values."
Hertel admits that
stress factors, from getting punctured for the blood samples so often each day,
for example, cannot be ruled out, but the established baseline for each
individual became the "zero values" marker, and only changes from the zero
values were statistically determined.
With only one round of test
substances completed, the different effects between conventionally prepared food
and microwaved food were marginal-although noticed as definite "tendencies". As
the test continued, the differences in the blood markers became "statistically
significant". The changes are generally considered to be signs of stress on the
body. For example, erythrocytes tended to increase after eating vegetables from
the microwave oven. Haemoglobin and both of the mean concentration and content
haemoglobin markers also tended to decrease significantly after eating the
microwaved substances.
LEUKOCYTOSIS
"Leukocytosis," Hertel explained, "which
cannot be accounted for by normal daily deviations such as following the intake
of food, is taken seriously by haematologists. Leukocyte response is especially
sensitive to stress. They are often signs of pathogenic effects on the living
system, such as poisoning and cell damage. The increase of leukocytes with the
microwaved foods was more pronounced than with all the other variants. It
appears that these marked increases were caused entirely by ingesting the
microwaved substances."
The cholesterol markers were very interesting,
Hertel stressed: "Common scientific belief states that cholesterol values
usually alter slowly over longer periods of time. In this study, the markers
increased rapidly after the consumption of the microwaved vegetables. However,
with milk, the cholesterol values remained the same and even decreased with the
raw milk significantly."
Hertel believes his study tends to confirm newer
scientific data that suggest cholesterol may rapidly increase in the blood
secondary to acute stress. "Also," he added, "blood cholesterol levels are less
influenced by cholesterol content of food than by stress factors. Such
stress-causing factors can apparently consist of foods which contain virtually
no cholesterol-the microwaved vegetables."
It is plain to see that this
individually financed and conducted study has enough meat in it to make anyone
with a modicum of common sense sit up and take notice. Food from the microwave
oven caused abnormal changes, representing stress, to occur in the blood of all
the test individuals. Biological individuality, a key variable that makes a
mockery of many allegedly scientific studies, was well accounted for by the
established baselines.
So, how has the brilliant world of modern
technology, medicine and 'protect the public' government reacted to this
impressive effort?
A GAG ORDER
As soon as Hertel and Blanc announced
their results, the hammer of authority slammed down on them. A powerful trade
organisation, the Swiss Association of Dealers for Electroapparatuses for
Households and Industry, known simply as FEA, struck swiftly. They forced the
President of the Court of Seftigen, Kanton Bern, to issue a 'gag order' against
Hertel and Blanc. The attack was so ferocious that Blanc quickly recanted his
support-but it was too late. He had already put into writing his views on the
validity of the studies where he concurred with the opinion that microwaved food
caused the blood abnormalities.
Hertel stood his ground, and today is
steadfastly demanding his rights to a trial. Preliminary hearings on the matter
have been appealed to higher courts, and it's quite obvious the powers that be
do not want a 'show trial' to erupt on this issue.
In March 1993, the
court handed down this decision based upon the complaint of the
FEA:
Consideration.
1. Request from the plaintiff (FEA) to prohibit
the defendant (Dr Ing. Hans Hertel) from declaring that food prepared in the
microwave oven shall be dangerous to health and lead to changes in the blood of
consumers, giving reference to pathologic troubles as also indicative for the
beginning of a cancerous process. The defendant shall be prohibited from
repeating such a statement in publications and in public talks by punishment
laid down in the law.
2. The jurisdiction of the judge is given according
to law.
3. The active legitimacy of the plaintiff is given according to
the law.
4. The passive legitimacy of the defendant is given by the fact
that he is the author of the polemic [published study] in question, especially
since the present new and revised law allows to exclude the necessity of a
competitive situation, therefore delinquents may also be persons who are not
co-competitors, but may damage the competing position of others by mere
declarations.
[Apparently, Swiss corporations have lobbied in a law that
nails "delinquents" who disparage products and might do damage to commerce by
such remarks. So far, the US Constitution still preserves freedom of the
press.]
5. Considering the relevant situation it is referred to three
publications: the public renunciation [sic] of the so-called co-author Professor
Bernard Blanc, the expertise of Professor Teuber [expert witness from the FEA]
about the above-mentioned publication, the opinion of the public health
authorities with regard to the present stage of research with microwave ovens as
well as to repeated statements from the side of the defendant about the danger
of such ovens.
6. It is not considered of importance whether or not the
polemic of the defendant meets the approval of the public, because all that is
necessary is that a possibility exists that such a statement could find approval
with people not being experts themselves. Also, advertising involving fear is
not allowed and is always disqualified by the law. The necessity for a fast
interference is in no case more advised than in the processes of competition.
Basically, the defendant has the right to defend himself against such
accusations. This right, however, can be denied in cases of pressing danger with
regard to impairing the rights of the plaintiff when this is
requested.
Conclusion.
On grounds
of this pending request of the plaintiff, the court arrives at the conclusion
that because of special presuppositions as in this case, a definite disadvantage
for the plaintiff does exist, which may not easily be repaired, and therefore
must be considered to be of immediate danger. The case thus warrants the request
of the plaintiff to be justified, even without hearing the defendant. Also,
because it is not known when the defendant will bring further statements into
the public.
The judge is also of the opinion that because the
publications are made up to appear as scientific, and therefore especially
reliable-looking, they may cause additional bad disadvantages. It must be added
that there does obviously not exist a just reason for this publication because
there is no public interest for pseudo-scientific unproved declarations.
Finally, these ordered measures do not prove to be disproportionate.
The
defendant is prohibited, under punishment of up to F5,000, or up to one year in
prison, to declare that food prepared in microwave ovens is dangerous to health
and leads to pathologic troubles as also indicative for the beginning of a
cancerous process.
The plaintiff pays the costs.
(Signed)
President of the Court of Seftigen Kraemer."
If you cannot imagine this
kind of decision coming from a court in the United States, you have not been
paying attention to the advances of administrative law.
Hertel defied the
court and has loudly demanded a fair hearing on the truth of his claims. The
court has continued to delay, dodge, appeal and avoid any media-catching
confrontation. As of this writing, Hans is still waiting for a hearing with
media coverage-and he's still talking and publishing his findings.
"They
have not been able to intimidate me into silence, and I will not accept their
conditions," Hertel declared. "I have appeared at large seminars in Germany, and
the study results have been well-received. Also, I think the authorities are
aware that scientists at Ciba-Geigy [the world's largest pharmaceutical company,
headquartered in Switzerland] have vowed to support me in court."
As
those powerful special interests in Switzerland who desire to sell microwave
ovens by the millions continued to suppress open debate on this vital issue for
modern civilization, new microwave developments blossomed in the United
States.
INFANT DANGER
In the journal Pediatrics (vol. 89,
no. 4, April 1992), there appeared an article titled, "Effects of Microwave
Radiation on Anti-infective Factors in Human Milk". Richard Quan, M.D. from
Dallas, Texas, was the lead name of the study team. John A. Kerner, M.D., from
Stanford University, was also on the research team, and he was quoted in a
summary article on the research that appeared in the 25 April 1992 issue of
Science News. To get the full flavour of what may lie ahead for
microwaving, here is that summary article:
"Women who work outside the
home can express and store breast milk for feedings when they are away. But
parents and caregivers should be careful how they warm this milk. A new study
shows that microwaving human milk-even at a low setting-can destroy some of its
important disease-fighting capabilities.
"Breast milk can be refrigerated
safely for a few days or frozen for up to a month; however, studies have shown
that heating the milk well above body temperature-37°ree;C-can break down not
only its antibodies to infectious agents, but also its lysozymes or
bacteria-digesting enzymes. So, when paediatrician John A. Kerner, Jr, witnessed
neonatal nurses routinely thawing or reheating breast milk with the microwave
oven in their lounge, he became concerned.
"In the April 1992 issue of
Pediatrics (Part I), he and his Stanford University co-workers reported
finding that unheated breast milk that was microwaved lost lysozyme activity,
antibodies and fostered the growth of more potentially pathogenic bacteria. Milk
heated at a high setting (72°ree;C to 98°ree;C) lost 96 per cent of its
immunoglobulin-A antibodies, agents that fend off invading
microbes.
"What really surprised him, Kerner said, was finding some loss
of anti-infective properties in the milk microwaved at a low setting-and to a
mean of just 33.5°ree;C. Adverse changes at such low temperatures suggest
'microwaving itself may in fact cause some injury to the milk above and
beyond the heating'.
"But Randall M. Goldblum of the University of
Texas Medical Branch in Galveston disagrees, saying: 'I don't see any
compelling evidence that the microwaves did any harm. It was the heating.'
Lysozyme and antibody degradation in the coolest samples may simply reflect the
development of small hot spots-potentially 60°ree;C or above-during microwaving,
noted Madeleine Sigman-Grant of Pennsylvania State University, University Park.
And that's to be expected, she said, because microwave heating is inherently
uneven-and quite unpredictable when volumes less than four millilitres are
involved, as was the case in the Kerner's study.
"Goldblum considers use of a microwave to thaw milk an especially bad idea, since it is likely to boil some of the milk before all has even liquefied. Stanford University Medical Center no longer microwaves breast milk, Kerner notes. And that's appropriate, Sigman-Grant believes, because of the small volumes of milk that hospitals typically serve newborns-especially premature infants."
CHASING A STORY
Journalist Tom Valentine, after chasing this story, found
it interesting that 'scientists' have so many 'beliefs' to express rather than
prove fact. Yet facts eventually snuff out credential-based
conjecture.
Researcher Quan, in a phone interview, said that he believed the
results of research so far warranted further detailed study of the effects of
microwave cooking on nutrients. The summary sentence in an abstract of the
research paper is very clear:
"Microwaving appears to be contra-indicated
at high temperatures, and questions regarding its safety exist even at low
temperatures."
The final statement of the study conclusion
reads:
"This preliminary study suggests that microwaving human milk could
be detrimental. Further studies are needed to determine whether and how
microwaving could safely be done." Unfortunately, further studies are not
scheduled at this time.
If there are so many indications that the effects
of microwaves on foods can degrade the foods far above the known breakdowns of
standard cooking, is it not reasonable to conduct exhaustive studies on living,
breathing human beings to determine if it's possible that eating microwaved
foods continuously, as many people do, can be significantly detrimental to
individual health?
If you wanted to introduce a herbal supplement into
the American mainstream and make any health claims for it, you would be
subjected to exhaustive documentation and costly research. Yet the
microwave-oven industry had only to prove that the dangerous microwaves could,
indeed, be contained within the oven and not escape into the surrounding area
where the radiation could do damage to people. The industry must admit that some
microwaves escape even in the best-made ovens. So far, not one thought has been
given by the industry to the possibility that the nutrients could be so altered
as to be deleterious to health.
Well, this makes sense in a land that
encourages farmers to poison crops and soils with massive amounts of synthesised
chemicals, and encourages food processors to use additives that enhance
shelf-life of foods regardless of the potential for degrading the health of the
consumer.
How many hundreds of pounds of microwaved food per
capita is consumed in America each year? Are we going to continue to take it
from established authority, without question, on the premise that they
know best?