SEARCH:
Sign in | Join | Help
search Mercola.com
 
FREE Subscription 
The World’s Most Popular Natural Health Newsletter
Cell Phones May be Why Honeybees Are Disappearing

Scientists are having a difficult time explaining the rapid decline of the honeybee population in the United States and Canada, known as colony collapse disorder, that could affect crops depending on these insects for pollination.

Research presented some four years ago speculates the radiation emitted from cellular phones may contribute to the problem.

When cellular phones were placed near hives, the radiation generated by them (900-1,800 MHz) was enough to prevent bees from returning to them, according to a study conducted at Landau University.

Scientists believe the radiation produced by cellular phones may be enough to interfere with the way bees "communicate" with their hives. Cellular phones may create a resonance effect that interferes with the movement patterns bees use as a kind of language.

The Independent April 15, 2007

Telegraph.co.uk April 16, 2006

Science a Go Go April 16, 2007


Dr. Mercola's Comment:

Although another study blamed the ongoing spread of genetically modified crops for the disappearance, cellular phones may also very well be contributing to the problem.

This comes as no surprise, considering all the harm mobile phones can do to male sperm, for example, as well as to your head.

I have run many articles detailing the studies that expose how the harmful radiation from cell phones can wreak havoc. I would encourage you to review an article that was published in Lancet several years ago; you can review my extensive summary of that article or you can go to the journal directly and obtain the information.

Do you really want an acoustic neuroma (tumor) growing inside your head? If you are fortunate enough to avoid nervous system malignancies, then how will you contend with the cellular damage these mobile phones cause?

While protecting your brain from harmful EMFs will do nothing to halt the disappearance of bees, one of your best and safest options would be to restrict your use of cellular phones to the speakerphone function, or find a safe headset.

Remember, just because you can't see the EMFs does not mean that they are not harming you. In many ways this scenario is very similar to smoking 100 years ago. The average person was oblivious to the possibility that smoking could be harmful.

What made it even worse was that the deceptive marketers of the time used physicians to convince people that it was actually "cool" and even healthy to smoke. Similar to cell phones, people would not drop dead until many years later. This delayed effect obscured the damage that was being done.

If you do not believe the data, then I strongly encourage you to review some of the links below and rethink your decision on the safety of cell phones. We won't know the full extent of the damage these devices are producing for many years.

Hard to remember but cell phones are NOT that old. Although they were developed in the '40s and '50s, most people did not adopt them much more than 10 years ago. Think about it for a moment; I will bet you and most people you know have not had cell phones for more than 10 years. Until the late 1980s they were too large to be carried in a jacket pocket so they were permanently installed in the car as car phones.

If most people had just started smoking 10 years ago we would have virtually NO CLUE as to how dangerous it is.

Are you really willing to risk your life on the chance that these devices are perfectly safe?

I certainly am not, which is why I ALWAYS use the safe headset or the speaker phone. My first choice is the speakerphone, and I encourage all of you to get a phone with that feature and use it. Keep that darn phone away from your head.

Occasionally I do use the phone in my car, but I have a model that can wirelessly connect to the phone through Bluetooth and it is completely hands-free. My phone is four feet from me and I just talk to the windshield and the sound comes through the car's audio system. It really is pretty slick and not much different than talking as if the person were in the car with you.

However, most of you will not be able to do this because your car does not have that function. So, the bottom line is use the speaker phone on your phone or use the safe headset that I use, which has an air tube so the radiation doesn't transfer up to your brain.

Let's keep those brain cells healthy, folks!

Related Articles:





 
 Do you find this article interesting?
Comment on This Article Community Comments (105)
 
 
Posted On Apr 16, 2007
Let's not forget another MAIN culprit , on top of all those mentioned by Dr. Mercola and Dr. Gussa - High Fructose Corn Syrup or Invert Sugar Syrup - FORCE FED to the bees in factory hives with 24-7 lighting (to fool them into thinking it's late Spring or early Summer) when natural pollen, sap, nectar and other botanical materials are not readily available for conversion in their gut's to real honey. 

This VAST and widespread practice (over 70% of all products labeled honey per USDA) are force feeding bees artificial man made sweeteners, triggering nutrient depletion in the hives/bees, and resulting in lowered resistance in their immunity.  

Force feeding refined man made saccharides also causes hive, colony/species disease, mite infestations, and mortality rates that spike about every 4th or 5th year cyclically, and has been the case since the early 1970's, when this practice was introduced.

In case you doubt these facts, please remember the average real 'honey' has less that 17% levulose (naturally occuring) in it, yet current USDA standards for Grade A Honey allow up to almost 40% "fructose" by weight, and "fructose" is generated from CORN, via HFCS intake. 

There is no plant source of "fructose" and never has been...

 
Russ Bianchi
Savvy User Savvy User, Joined On 9/2006
Russ Bianchi  
Replied

LM36
Apprentice User Apprentice User Joined On 12/2006
LM36  
 
Posted On Apr 16, 2007
Hey Russ, I just bought raw honey from a local farmer at the farmer's market which was about $7 for 25 oz.  I also bought some bee pollen and was curious as to your thoughts on bee pollen.  Is there any way to tell by looking at honey whether they use HFCS?  The honey I bought is very dark and it is from "Vetch".  Thanks, -Lora   


Michigan Mom
Savvy User Savvy User Joined On 6/2006
Michigan Mom  
 
Posted On Apr 16, 2007
The great part about buying local is you can speak to the farmer. I would ask right at the stand, what/how do you feed your bees? Present it in a nonthreatening way. I'm sure they'll answer.


Russ Bianchi
Savvy User Savvy User Joined On 9/2006
Russ Bianchi  
 
Posted On Apr 16, 2007
You can easily tell if your "real" or "USDA Certified" honey is the real deal, first on PRICE. 

Your cost, direct, of about $7.00 bucks for a pound in and one half, would tend to STRONGLY indicate you are NOT getting refined sugar(s) regurgitated bee barf.

Secondly, refined fructose (from corn, typically in the syrup form of HFCS) BURNS at 140 degrees F and crystallized or grains out at 65 degrees F.  Therefore, if the honey darkens at 140 degrees F, or within 15 degrees plus or minus of 140 degrees F, then it is more likely it's HFCS tainted and phony 'honey'.

If is costs real money, it's probably honey...if it is lower in cost, you have been cheated and lost.


Gingerman
Novice User Novice User Joined On 4/2007
Gingerman  
 
Posted On Apr 20, 2007
Also, let's not forget the smuggled in queens that brought mites that our honey bees have no immunization to.


Pat Ormsby
Savvy User Savvy User Joined On 6/2006
Pat Ormsby  
 
Posted On May 05, 2007
Russ, this is a good point. I can imagine HFCS having as bad an effect on bees as it has on us. Do you have any information on how widespread the practice of feeding HFCS to bees is worldwide?


hayseed
Apprentice User Apprentice User Joined On 4/2007
hayseed  
 
Posted On May 07, 2007
Sounds like the bees are getting the old 1-2 punch. Genetically modified corn (BT) produces its own toxin that kills any insect that eats it and presumably bees that gather the pollen and bring it back to their hives. If commercial honey producers are feeding the bees high fructose corn syrup, doesn't sound like they stand much of a chance.


halcyon
Apprentice User Apprentice User Joined On 5/2007
halcyon  
 
Posted On May 10, 2007
First, I'd like to say that this is a great article.  I hope more and more people will heed these warnings.  Unfortunately, it seems that some people are just to stubborn to believe it.

The only small point of disagreement I have concerns the "safe headset," which has an air tube that supposedly prevents the radiation from going to your brain.  Well, I've bought the safe headset, and I also have an EMF meter.  And guess what--some radiation *does* still go to your brain!  I've tested it many times with my meter.  Now, I'm sure the radiation is a lot less than with a normal headset, but there is still some radiation.  So, even if you have this "safe" headset, please use it in moderation.


 
 
 
Posted On Apr 16, 2007
Restriction of cell phones?  We have a million plus teenagers sending text messages across the cellular airwaves every second!  People use cell phones as a social connection device and not as a tool for emergency forms of communication.  Some people abandon land lines all together because of taxes, etc. and primarily use a cellular phone.   These are not "smart phones" at all, in fact, they contribute widely to the social decline of America.  

It is ironic that someone would use a cell phone to discuss the weather, yet the very use of that phone is directly impacting our climate.  However, the cellular phone industry will be the first to contest this theory.  If technology can create such devices then they should have the wherewithal to solve any problems it creates.  Do you think the cellular industry has a clue about the fate of the honeybee or the impact it will have on our food supply?  We should have had an answer to this problem already but science is too caught up in "saving the world" by means of GMO's and other useless technologies. 

Did you know that the use of cell phones is causing the world to spin faster too?  Not really,  but it does speed up our pace of life, eh!       

 
LM36
Apprentice User Apprentice User, Joined On 12/2006
LM36  
Replied

Russ Bianchi
Savvy User Savvy User Joined On 9/2006
Russ Bianchi  
 
Posted On Apr 16, 2007
Now not only is prolonged cell phone frequency use potentially harming humans, it is exsemplified in what it may also be doing to bees or any other living creatures...

Say, has Monsanto invested in cell phones also, to finish off what they cannot killed with their GMO crops and seeds?


proatc
Apprentice User Apprentice User Joined On 12/2006
proatc  
 
Posted On Apr 16, 2007
If your teenager or child uses their cell phones primarily to text message, let them, sure seems safer to let them text which doesn't require putting the cell phone near your brain, just like using the speakerphone function.


Author_203
Novice User Novice User Joined On 6/2006
Author_203  
 
Posted On May 05, 2007
I think this article is a mis-direction.  Cell phones have been around too long and have been being used too long with no problem for well over 10 - 15 years.  And the problem is more recent -- within the last year or so.  It could be pollution, it could be GMO foods -- but I believe this is a mid-direction.


fishface
Apprentice User Apprentice User Joined On 2/2007
fishface  
 
Posted On May 05, 2007
Not so. CCD is not a new phenomenon. It's only the name that's new. Neither are cellphones/cellphone towers likely to be the most significant factor here. Smallholders report having perfectly healthy hives close to cellphone towers. See my post further down.


Ouisi
Novice User Novice User Joined On 3/2007
Ouisi  
 
Posted On May 05, 2007
If you think it is safe to use a phone simply by manipulating it's position you are sadly mistaken... in fact non cell phone users are a great risk for Electromagnetic residue as much as the user themselves. If you are truly interested in guarding yourself against harmfull frequencies then you should investigate the direction of counter frequency devices such as Biopro products. Biopro  has  a patented cell phone chip (using MRET technology) that nutralises the  frequency from the cell phone and diminishes the effects on the surrounding cell structure.. such as the ear or brain matter behind the ear.
In Uk, it is ilegal for children under the age of 12 to be in possession of a live cell phone. Children are allowed to carry phones and use them only for emergencies. The impact from electromagnetic frequencies has been present for many years but with increased use of this technology through the use of personal devices such as  cell phone has brought the frequencies much closer to our bodies. Their are numerous court cases in California, you can read more visit Dr. George Carlos Safe Wireless network.
Since I have started protecting myself from Electromagnetic Pollution I have lost 10 kg and that is only since January 2007, I have done nothing but apply protective devies to my home, my body and my environment. If you have to use the wireless technology that makes us all so independent and must have it to survive in your business at least understand the implications it has to your health and try to protect yourselves. Children are our futurs, let us not allow them to be our test subject for this explosive era of tecno devices.

Radiation!
 you can't see it, feel it or hear it, but it does exist
I have electromagntic pollution sollutions

Namaste

Louise

www.mybiopro.ca/armondillo


Witch Doctor
Apprentice User Apprentice User Joined On 9/2006
Witch Doctor  
 
Posted On May 05, 2007
Please everybody don't overlook Guru's comment below: "Today the LA Times reports that researchers at UC San Francisco have uncovered what they believe to be the real culprit: a parasitic fungus. Other researchers said Wednesday that they too had found the fungus, a single-celled parasite called Nosema ceranae, in affected hives from around the country."


Witch Doctor
Apprentice User Apprentice User Joined On 9/2006
Witch Doctor  
 
Posted On May 05, 2007

Ouisi - you are sadly mistaken.

1) The signal from a cellphone drops off in power by an inverse square law. That means the power is 100 times less at 10 inches as it is at 1 inch distance from the antenna. At 100 inches, it is 10,000 times less. Think about it - the signal originates at a "point" and spreads out from there. Otherwise we would all be dead now, almost instantly, when multiple phones are on.

2) The website says: “Powered by a hi-tech polymer, the particles within the MRET compound - once stimulated by EMF/EMR - oscillate, emitting a low frequency noise-field that superimposes itself over the harmful high-frequency microwave radiation. Studies have shown that this process creates an incoherent, bio-friendly wave, thereby dramatically reducing the otherwise inappropriately triggered protective responses by the body's key systems. ERT-charged carriers emit a subtle energy field, restoring vital communication across the biofield by assisting the transmission of signals that improve resistance to stressors and support key energetic functions in the body.” Any scientific person can recognize this as meaningless biobabble and they don't cite the studies about this biofriendly wave they claim to create.

3) Research1: they claim the person's head dropped 4ºC by using the Biopro chip. If cellphone heated our head at least 4ºC they would be WAY off the market right now. Its nonsense - everyone would feel 4ºC and it would be a well-known phenomena, easily measured, if it were true.

4) Research 2: they used Meridian Stress Assessment Testing (MSAS) for most of their data. The report I looked at was written by a non-scientifically-credentialed individual. The machine was a Vollmeter, designed by Dr. Reinhol Voll. I had one of those tests, and NO ONE can explain how it works, other than mumbo-jumbo. I challenge anyone to explain the works of this "scientific" instrument in scientific terms. If it does work, and maybe it does, no one knows why.

5) Research 3: this "research" was done using "God knows what" because they make it look like electromagnetic data and it's not, and they don't say what it is. PLEASE, I SAID PLEASE!!!

(My M.S. degree. includes some microwave training. I would welcome comments from an Electrica/Electronics Engineer with extensive microwave application experience and /or training.)



Witch Doctor
Apprentice User Apprentice User Joined On 9/2006
Witch Doctor  
 
Posted On May 05, 2007
Ouisi - I see no signs of science, engineering or technical background at BioPro, makers of a "microwave engineering device".  I see sales, business, sales, ...  The closest thing to science is a bachelor's degree in sociology!  Where's the science?  Where?  Where?  Where?


Witch Doctor
Apprentice User Apprentice User Joined On 9/2006
Witch Doctor  
 
Posted On May 05, 2007
GammaGirl - that would blow the mind of the average scientist.  Are you sure you did not drop a poison thought pill, based on that Japanese water scientists results?  Try again with NO NEGATIVE THOUGHTS, or find someone else who likes microwaves...okay, microwave neutral...  to perform this experiment.  Also, did both waters start off as bog-standard?

Regarding the Russians, please read Bear Hunting with the Politburo, about Russian perestroika, and you may not bother asking again.  They've done alot of good science, but it's the misinformation... I too have heard these claims, and that they set their safe microwave emissions limit 100x lower than ours.  That's all I know.


katieannpc
Savvy User Savvy User Joined On 2/2007
katieannpc  
 
Posted On May 05, 2007
As wonderful as the technology can be, it also is helping to destroy us as  a society. We sit behind screens to talk to our neighbors because we are "too busy" to visit the old fashioned way. It's nice to have forums for us around the world to meet and learn, but as for those in our immediate communities, we barely know - or want to know for that matter - eachother.  Most people are in their own little pods, completely oblivious to their own neighborhoods. I am new in mine, and only one neighbor has bothered to knock on my door - many of us here have children, and that is how I met my neighbors across the street. The neighbors next door have kids the same age as mine, yet they never get to play - they even moved her bus today to sheild themselves. It's ridiculous how they shelter their children. I was very excited when we moved in - I thought my children would have buddies to play with. I really miss the days of my youth when we sat around goofing off, playing cards, taking long walks - we looked forward to BEING WITH our friends.

It's sad that so many people are in these "pods" that they don't even know that we are facing many upcoming crisis - regardless of what the "cause(s)" may be.


Ouisi
Novice User Novice User Joined On 3/2007
Ouisi  
 
Posted On May 06, 2007
Watchdog:

The industry itself has published numerous articles that could not support what they had hoped would be harmless technology. The ERT chip was researched and invented by a Russian scientist and these devices were used for the armed forces in dessert storm. If you go to Dr. George Carlos website, Safe Wireless you will find that Dr. Carlo was hired by the industry with a 28 million dollar budget  from 1993 to 1999 to determine the safety of the use of cellphones. He could not find data that would support it's safety. I personally am affected by the waves from the phone when my ear is absolutely on fire. The San Diego court case of July is ample proof  for me to accept that their is a cause and effect scenario happening here. If that judge felt that their was sufficient information to support direct cell structure change then that 's good enough for me. I have a personal friend who is an engineer for Samsung and he supports me by using his chip on a low power phone that we both use. While you might be waiting for the absolute data to help you decide what to believe  I live my life somewhat different,. My quality of life has improved since using these products and if it's a placebo effect so be it. It still is worth sharing and if the information helps a few other people learn and explore what might change their lives then it's worth it. 

Namaste

Ouisi


Witch Doctor
Apprentice User Apprentice User Joined On 9/2006
Witch Doctor  
 
Posted On May 06, 2007
PPARGammaGirl - One outstanding (not outstanding, but outstanding) question.  Was the microwaved water from the tap, too?  Please don't be offended by the question - it's just that you had a blindfold on...


Witch Doctor
Apprentice User Apprentice User Joined On 9/2006
Witch Doctor  
 
Posted On May 06, 2007
Ouisi - namaste.  I enjoyed your impassioned (is that a word? I'm tired...) reply.  If you care to, you will find a post of mine from a coupla/few months back, in which I lay out why I believe cellphones are a legitimate danger.  Since, I have more posts adjoining subsequent discussions on cellphone dangers.  So I may not be motivated to learn the stuff you presented about the dangers and will instead accept your word on that stuff.  The rest of your post is interesting, and so you fit my stereotype of an individual who is genuinely concerned about alerting others to a danger, and to the solution you have chosen and why.  You said "it still is worth sharing and if the information helps a few other people learn and explore what might change their lives then it's worth it", and that is also the reason I post, in the hope something better ultimately comes out of the discussion than was originally said.  So you jumped to the top of my list, for what little that is worth.  Namaste.

Witch Doctor, formerly Raw Materials, formerly Duane, but never Watch Dog (but I made that impression on you - I hope you like me better now)

p.s. I don't need absolute data to live my life - you just walked into my lair, that's all.


Witch Doctor
Apprentice User Apprentice User Joined On 9/2006
Witch Doctor  
 
Posted On May 06, 2007
GammaGirl - hi!  You're experiment is intriguing and may put me in the experimental mode.  Are you trying to compete with the Japanese water/emotions doctor?  Why not?  Write a book and go on Coast-to-Coast Radio with George Noory.  One question.

Is your water chlorinated?  If so, it may need to be tried w/o chlorine.  Plants love chlorine (my opinion), and the microwave may have outgassed it.  We add a little Clorox to Christmas tree water to keep them alive longer.


Witch Doctor
Apprentice User Apprentice User Joined On 9/2006
Witch Doctor  
 
Posted On May 06, 2007
ReceptorGirl - I decided to make up with Ouisi when she admitted if it is a placebo she doesn't care, her main interest is to alert to the danger and let people explore solutions.  Namaste gets me every time as well, since when I was married to a Hindu, all the Powers of the universe came down to join us, and I'm not sure they are still around.  (We also had an equal time Christian minister - a lovely British gal.)  Then I read your post.

I'm really glad you posted, to keep the bias in the posts oriented strongly toward the "crock" direction.  Wow what a way to read that thermography! A thermologist!


Witch Doctor
Apprentice User Apprentice User Joined On 9/2006
Witch Doctor  
 
Posted On May 07, 2007
PPARGammaGirl - I will be happy to send you some good thoughts.  I can think of two reliable mediums.  I'm gonna smoke a cigar now, after the uwave breakthrough (?), but am more concerned than happy.

BTW, I have observed that you operate, to some extent, by taking things and flipping them over "on top of their head", and finding a truism or witticism.  Since 90% out there is BS (my rule), your method probably works quite well all around.


Reesacat
Savvy User Savvy User Joined On 1/2007
Reesacat  
 
Posted On May 07, 2007
PPARGammaGirl, if the water was chlorinated for both experiments, then your research would still be valid.

You are in my prayers.  Take good care of yourself-we need you.

When our young Jedi (Raw Materials) smokes a Bad Cigar and gets
Attacked by Technobable, you are the only Yoda that can talk him down.........


Witch Doctor
Apprentice User Apprentice User Joined On 9/2006
Witch Doctor  
 
Posted On May 07, 2007
Reesacat - thanks for contributing to our experimental setting, here.  You are right, unless the microwave caused the chlorine to leave the water, which seems plausible.   Even if that is so, you are still correct that the experiment is valid, because it measured the effect of chlorine on germination of those seeds.  Either way the experiment is a smashing success.  GammaGirl has also illustrated how even a simple experiment accumulates potentially confounding variables rapidly.

 
 
 
Posted On Apr 16, 2007
 

Cell Phones (Microwaves), genetic energizing of our food crops, Nothing is natural anymore! The whole world will react and is in upheaval now!

The bees are going to be a real “barometer” of things to come.

As a Clinical Herbalist I think the taking of Pharm Meds is still the biggest threat to our national health. Not OURS as such but when you get out into the world and rub shoulders with the “Average Joe” over 50 it is freighting what they tell you they are taking!

They have swallowed the whole deadly game hook line and sinker!

I was always taught, “If it isn’t natural don’t put it in your body! And guess who said that! A doctor visiting our school in the 50s! What happened????

We must somehow change the face of medicine! I think there may just be enough on our side to do it soon but how many more will have to die first?

If you want to look at the Biblical side to this please click here!


 
The Herb Doc
Apprentice User Apprentice User, Joined On 11/2006
The Herb Doc  
Replied

Michigan Mom
Savvy User Savvy User Joined On 6/2006
Michigan Mom  
 
Posted On Apr 16, 2007
It is really scary the drugs people take and give to their children. I never bring down my kid's fevers and you would be amazed at how this is viewed as an extremely radical and dangerous position by everyone! How did the human race ever survive before Tylenol?!


Witch Doctor
Apprentice User Apprentice User Joined On 9/2006
Witch Doctor  
 
Posted On Apr 16, 2007
Michigan Mom - once, while traveling, one of my children had 105ºF.  The nurses treated me like a child abuser because I was hesitant to bring it down.  When the doctor showed up, I asked him if 105ºF would hurt my child.  He said "no".  My children are fine (it has happened to both of them).  I must admit at that time I knew little - just had a notion and was stubborn.  But I think there is not universal agreement in the medical communiy about bringing a fever down.  How high did your children's temperature get?  Duane


Michigan Mom
Savvy User Savvy User Joined On 6/2006
Michigan Mom  
 
Posted On Apr 16, 2007
Hi again, Duane, 
I rarely ever use the thermometer lately, so I'm not really sure, but my girls have had high fevers of 103 or 104. My family acts like I'm a child abuser, but it must be much worse from a doctor. I have read Dr. Mendelson's Book, How to Raise a Healthy Child In Spite of Your Doctor. From that and this site, I tend to think that the fever will not go "too high" unless there is something horribly wrong (like heat stroke).

I think there is agreement that low fevers are beneficial. They always claim you should bring down a high fever to make the child comfortable. I guess I don't agree that a sick child should be up playing. If her body wants her in bed with a high fever to fight the infection, who am I to argue?

Marianne



katieannpc
Savvy User Savvy User Joined On 2/2007
katieannpc  
 
Posted On May 05, 2007
AMEN Michigan Mom and Duane!!!
I always check their temps when they feel much warmer than normal, and keep an eye on them. Since I have stopped giving them fever reducers - when they do get ill, it only lasts 2-3 days - not the week or more that they used to.

Ya hit the nail on the head - how did they do it in the MANY centuries before tylenol??? LOL.  Same with the vaccines. Yes, these terrible diseases were widespread and deadly - but I wonder - if the Public Heath movment had begun 100 years earlier than the vaccines, would we even have the vaccines we have now??? 

 
 
 
Posted On May 06, 2007
Another factor I believe which is being overlooked are the amount of chemicals used to treat lawns, golf courses, any large grassy area that once contained wild flowers, dandelions, creeping charlie, etc., are all being snuffed out.  Where is a bee to go???? 
Mo

 
MaureenU
Novice User Novice User, Joined On 1/2007
MaureenU  
Replied

Reesacat
Savvy User Savvy User Joined On 1/2007
Reesacat  
 
Posted On May 06, 2007
MaureenU, excellent point.  We use organic lawn and garden products
and the bees and deer (sigh, my roses!) love to hang around!  :)))

 
 
 
Posted On May 05, 2007
I have a feeling this article is propaganda to be quite honest. I really doubt that cellphones have anything to do with it and this is their way of making the real problems (GMO foods and HFCS) go away so to speak.

They want to blame something like cellphones so that their money making business with GMO crops, do not get in the mainstream media.  If the topic of GMO foods ever hit mainstream media, they would be in quite a lot of trouble.  So what better way than to blame some other industry.

Of course holding a cellphone to your head is bad, so I am not advocating that it is not destructive.  However, I just have a weird feeling about this story.  I guess we will see in time!

 
Birdlady
Apprentice User Apprentice User, Joined On 6/2006
Birdlady  
Replied

Pat Ormsby
Savvy User Savvy User Joined On 6/2006
Pat Ormsby