EMR exposure to bodies, blood and other bits.

By Dr Chris Barnes

Bangor Scientific Consultants 

( Internet version published without full publications list and just with reference hyperlinks for quicker release to Scientific Community - Aug 2011  




Some  comments on some of the literature on observed correlations between EMR and various types of cancers and how this can be related to country specific history of radio and TV broadcasting,  transmitter frequency, dielectric energy absorption and electromagnetic propagation. Finally the significance of the magnetic vector potential (magnetic time integral) is stressed and how this gives rise to deleterious bio-effect at hitherto unexpected distances form transmitting antennas.


 Many types of cancer appear to be on the increase over the last fifteen to twenty years or so (http://www.wsws.org/articles/2003/apr2003/canc-a26.shtml). The temptation is to try to account for some of these by correlating with the existence of emerginhttp://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15232509g modern technology particularly the use of mobile phones and wifi. Indeed one two particular Swedish studies suggest a strong link ( and http://home.scarlet.be/~tsf94646/001/documents/1997%20-%20A%20curious%20year%20in%20Sweden.pdf).  Likewise a Brazilian study suggests similar dire danger  http://whyfry.org/brazilian-study-cancer-associated-with-radiation-from-cellular-antennas/ and another Swedish paper suggests general sickness, dementia and other CNS diseases are linked to mobile phone emissions particularly at 1800 and 2100 MHz posing the question will G4 2600 MHz be even worse? http://hir.nu/Papers/123.pdf.

 It has also been suggested that microwaves from cell towers could account for the staggering rise in ME (CFS) , ADHD and the like http://next-up.org/pdf/PrPaulDoyonAreMicrowavesAtheMajorCausalFactorInCfsME.pdf.

Interestingly, Doyon states that these diseases are extremely rare amongst the Amish a tribe who for religious reasons do not use electricity!

Additionally, other types of EMR have been with us far longer. Indeed, all species on earth evolved in natural EMR due to Schumann resonances and the like in addition to the earth's weak static magnetic field and solar and cosmic EMR. In the former respect human beings have been described as being 'electromagnetic' and there are valid reasons why biological systems ought to act as quantum receivers for ELF EMR. It is proposed for example, that magnetic fields cause quantum interference at protein-ion binding sites http://pre.aps.org/abstract/PRE/v65/i5/e051912. Indeed some would argue that the whole of life itself is driven by electromagnetic processes http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0306987792900225.

Radio, the first unnatural sort of EMR was discovered about a hundred years ago and there have been transmissions ever since, likewise humans have lived in the constant 50 or 60 Hz field of AC mains electricity for almost as long.

 Television was introduced extensively in the 1950’s with transmission been in so called band 1 with frequencies around 60MHz and later Band 3 around 180 MHz. Similarly VHF FM broadcasting began on Band 2 between 88 and 108 MHz.  Further change did not occur until the advent of UHF broadcasting in the 1970’s. 

 So if we look to see if there were any correlated increases in cancers when these every day types of broadcasting began it ought to present a clue as to whether it is reasonable to be suspicious of  our  more modern  technology which when all is said and done also employs EMR but at significantly higher frequencies or shorter wavelengths.  Again the answer appears to be provided by the first of the above Swedish studies.

Skin cancer more than just a sunshine story ).   Purely from a quantum physics aspect the EMR of modern technology packs more of a punch per quantum we only have to examine Einstein’s equation relating energy and frequency via Planck’s constant to buy into that.                

 Since the advent of mobile phone technology there have been almost innumerable publications either trying to prove or disprove cause and deleterious effect both for cancer and perhaps more alarmingly in terms of the percentage increases Alzheimer’s disease with an attendant doubling since 1980 http://www.cdc.gov/mentalhealth/data_stats/alzheimers.htm

. Being such a mine field it is almost impossible to comment on all such publications or prepare an adequate review and indeed it is not the present author’s aim to do so. However, two useful reviews appear to have been given by by Sage and by Hyland   http://www.salzburg.gv.at/Proceedings_(15)_Sage_2.pdf ;  http://www.tetrawatch.net/papers/hyland_2005.pdf

Additionally, there are some underlying trends which the author would wish to pass comment on.  Many studies conclude that EMR at whatever frequency significant increase the odds of contracting various leukaemias.  Furthermore there is the   study referred to above which interestingly suggests that the rise in malignant melanoma is due to EMR exposure and not sunshine!. Other cancers which have been directly associated with EMR emission at close quarters directly form a mobile handset are of the brain especially acoustic neurinoma and glioma (http://www.cancermonthly.com/blog/2007/12/braincancer-cellphones.html). In similar association, there are those of the body such as those of the Prostrate, Bladder, Myeloma and non Hodgkin’s Lymphoma.   In some countries including  Britain and areas of Switzerland, Breast cancer has increased alarmingly and also cancer of the Bowel has also shown dramatic increase but there have been few attempts to link these directly with EMR. Surprisingly however taking all cancers as a whole in the USA there has been an 18% drop in the death rate due to cancer since 1979. This is almost certainly due to better diagnosis and treatment rather than a fall in initial cases.       

  So is EMR a carcinogen or not? Very recently indeed, IARC has classified it as a possible carcinogen type 2B at Lyon France on May 31st, 2011 based on an increased risk for glioma, a malignant type of brain cancer, associated with wireless phone use.

 Thermal or non thermal?

 Some scientists place a big distinction on the difference between so called thermal and non-thermal effects of EMR in tissue.  The present author’s understanding of physics is that every kind of wave carries energy with it. An EMR ought to be no different. Some define thermal effects of EMR in terms of SAR (Specific Absorption Rate). If there is sufficient power level in an EMR   field impinging on tissue there will be a corresponding SAR associated with this and if the blood flow into the tissue is insufficient to cool it then its temperature will rise. Indeed classic thermotherapy devices and RF cancer ablation devices purposely exploit this principle.

 The present author has recently confirmed the bio-absorption sites mechanisms cited by some for so called microwave hearing which is accepted to occur  because of demodulation in tissue  by means  a of a thermo-acoustic or thermal expansion principal. The present author has also     The present author has also shown that     various structures in the body can be virtue of their dielectric properties act as resonant dielectric antennas, which can maximise EMR absorption at certain frequencies. In hearing the weakest sounds the cilia hair cells in the ear’s cochlea have amplitude in the region of 1 micron or less and effectively in persons who experience the phenomenon known as the Hum which in some facets is due to EMR at so called safe levels can provide sufficient energy for such displacement, albeit in demodulated form. 

 There is no reason to suppose that other biological structures, cells and organelles could not be similarly displaced as a result of thermo-acoustically demodulated (pressure) shock which in itself will be a simple or complex oscillatory waveform, especially when dielectric resonance phenomena are taken into account.  The point being made is there is really no distinction between so called thermal and non –thermal when it comes to EMR. These motions will still occur irrespective of whether blood flow keeps the surrounding tissue to 37C or not.  There may be a other  mechanisms  whereby EMR can interact with bio-material in vivo these include ion cyclotron resonance (http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/bem.2250120202/abstract) and the disturbance of coherent cellular activity with individual cell pairs acting like Josephson  Junctions (http://jjjtir.files.wordpress.com/2010/11/1402-4896_40_6_017.pdf) in these cases the magnetic time integral of EMR fields would be the perturbing agent and could according to the act at distance with little or no attenuation. If cells act like toroidal coils, this is reminiscent of Tesla’s ideas for longitudinal electro- scalar as distinct to Marconi’s  transverse wave radio communication.   The present author proposes a new 4-stage definition of the effects of EMR. 

  1. Thermal bio –displacement, mean temperature stable

  2. Thermal bio-displacement, mean temperature rising

  3. Thermal with membrane de-naturisation

  4. Subtle field magnetic effects

 Even at low field strength levels which satisfy classifications 1 and 4 EMR has the potential to interfere with innumerable and subtle biological process from protein mediated ion channel transport   to full blown cellular coherent communication (http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0375960181903443 ) and division.   

It is hardly surprising then that quite a multitude of cancers and medical conditions have been associated with EMR.

 Risk factors 

 As with any cancer just because EMR might, from an epidemiological point of view cause an enhanced risk of contraction, a risk is just that    there is no certainty, or is there this is something which will be examined later.

Put into context the sum total of experimental and epidemiological studies for cancers and EMR on human and animal models conclude excess risk multipliers in the numeric regions 1.3-4.  Contrast this with lung cancer and cigarette smoking where the value is about 25!  So EMR would appear at first site to offer very little excess risk or would it?  When you smoke a cigarette it is in your mouth and the smoke is inhaled into your lungs but you could be a ‘pretend’ smoker just putting the cigarette to your lips and moving it away again.  Obviously this would give some what less exposure to the carcinogens like 3, 5 benzpyrone and alpha emitting plutonium in your cigarette! Since nicotine is so highly addictive, the proportion of pretend smokers is likely to be very low. Hence the overall very high risk multiplier factor. A similar sort of variation can be expected to exist with EMR exposure the difference being that for carcinogenesis with cigarette smoke you only need to put your lungs in contact with it in an ad hoc manner, the inhalers dominate.  The present author has shown that a very precise set of ‘coupling rules’ are necessary to make the same link with EMR, see later.    So with EMR, you might be an office worker seated for most of the day in exactly the right position to receive maximum exposure and with the components of field at exactly the correct frequency and phase relationship to trigger a certain cancer or similarly a deep sleeper not moving much and receiving the same. Alternatively you may have a manual or a driving job where you are changing location all day long and suffer only fleeting random exposures of the deleterious kind. The same would go, perhaps to a slightly lesser extent to a light sleeper tossing and turning all night or rising from slumber for frequency toilet visits.  Thus  with EMRpretenders’ dominate and from this simplistic analogy it is easy to see why excess risk rates for cancer and EMR average out so much less than for smoking.  What is worrying is what becomes of the EMR equivalents of the inhalers!       

 Inverse square?

 From the point view of epidemiology studies, they usually make certain assumptions about EMR, the main one being that of the inverse square law. That is the further form the transmitter the safer one ought to be.  From studies of other radiation we know that fall off amplitude is often faster than Inverse Square and may be exponential.  When electromagnetic radiation enters a conduction medium the fall off has also been assumed to be exponential.  However it is now known that this is not the case and that the fall off can be algebraic (http://ajp.aapt.org/resource/1/ajpias/v67/i11/p954_s1?isAuthorized=no).  Electromagnetic waves have also shown to propagate anomalously further than expected in periodic structures http://prl.aps.org/abstract/PRL/v65/i21/p2650_1 The implication is that field strengths and bio effects could vary in unexpected ways as distance between the subject and the transmitting antenna increases.   This is similar to but not the same as the effect of ground reflection and SSL in antenna theory (http://www.tetrawatch.net/papers/apmobile_annesilk.pdf ).    None inverse square law behaviour of EM fields is not considered by planning authorities on decisions on cellular base station location.  We also now know that the structure of electromagnetic waves per se is far more complex than had previously been assumed ( Munera and Guzman Apeiron Vol 7 Nr 1-2, Jan-April 2000), the author here is also thinking of Evan's Longitudinal Photomagneton http://www.springerlink.com/content/k8132n1n504564x0/.

 Interestingly there is also now experimental evidence for so called electro scalar radiation http://villaolmo.mib.infn.it/ICATPP_CR_2010/manuscripts/accepted/Broader_ImpactS_Activities_and_Treatments/Zaymidoroga.pdf

Accounting for cancers

 Returning then to various documented cancers it ought to be possible to account these by considering the body, its fluids, tissues and organs as either collective or separate dielectric antennas or both.     


Returning first to the issue of leukaemia, here we have the most commonly correlated cancer when it comes to EMR exposure at all frequencies from Medium Wave to Microwave. Yet no one appears to have asked the question why, let alone answer it!   The answer as far as the present author is concerned lies in the dielectric properties of blood and the fact that blood is truly a connective tissue providing a continuum of antenna lengths from the height of the human body literally down to the size of the smallest capillary.  It is instructive to calculate the wavelength in blood of a typical medium wave radio transmission, Radio 4 Wales 882 kHz.  This can be done courtesy of the IFAC Internet calculator and yields a value of 3.39m, thus an adult’s blood volume approximates to a half wave antenna at this frequency. It follows that virtually all other frequencies can be accommodated in shorter lengths of blood vessel.  Low frequencies propagate by ground wave and get virtually everywhere in the UK. This together wit the coupling of all frequencies into blood probably accounts for why Leukaemia has some of the strongest EMR correlations.  

Lymphatic system

 The dielectric properties of lymph are not that dissimilar to blood using the same medium wave frequency yields a resonant wavelength of 4m in lymph. Non –Hodgkin’s lymphoma is cited by many as being another cancer correlating with general   exposure to EMR. 


There are several reports that recent increases in malignant melanoma may have their origins in the 1950’s when FM RADIO broadcasting commenced calculation yields  a half wave resonance for skin at about 15cm, is it more than coincidence then that common sites for melanoma are the face and neck where expanses of skin of this order of length are found?


The prostate is a gland that is part of the male reproductive system and adds certain components to the ejaculate.  It is about the size of a walnut actually about 2x3x4 cm. In recent times,   there have been increases of prostate cancer in Sweden ascribed to either the advent of digital TV broadcasting or GSM 1800 with a better correlation with DVB locations than for GSM (ref). 

 A typical DVB transmission frequency is 600 MHz, which has a wavelength in prostate of 6.1 cm, i.e. the prostate is an ideal half wave antenna in one plane at 600 MHz.  At 1800 MHz the wavelength in prostate is approximately 2cm so although in one plane the prostate could act as a three half wave antenna this is not so efficient given the lower penetration depth of 1800 MHz.  Indeed it would seem it was right for the Swedes to conclude the issue is with TV broadcasting! It is particularly interesting to note that Sweden only recently changed form Band 1 TV broadcasting to band V DVB. To look for a similar association with Prostate cancer in the UK we should look in the 1970’s after UHF TV broadcasting first commenced    and indeed we find EXACTLY the link we are looking for at info.cancerresearchuk.org

Types of cancerProstate cancer - The latest UK prostate cancer incidence statistics from the Statistics team quote ‘During the late 1970s and 1980s rates rose consistently’.


 The standard way of measuring breast size other than for bra measurement is in compressed tissue measurement for mammography wherein compressed thickness varies from 2-10cm.   Breast cancer has recently been shown to be dramatically on the increase particularly in younger women.  No association has been made, but one wonders if mobile phone use or wifi may play a part.  Dielectric calculations ought, once again, to be instructive.

 At 900 MHz the wavelength in breast fat is 14cm thus a slightly larger than average breast could easily act as a half wave antenna. 1800 MHz and wifi ought, by extrapolation of this principle, to be more hazardous to women with less fuller breasts.


 In brain the penetration depths associated with mobile phone frequencies are too shallow to allow resonance phenomena but most power will be dumped between the surface and this depth which is typically a maximum of 5 cm.   In fact the brain is a half wave resonator at typical VHF FM broadcast frequencies.   

 Location, location, location! 


It was stated earlier that there could be problems in interpreting epidemiology if EMR fall off does not follow simple inverse square law.   Indeed an assumption of simple inverse square law could cause important cancer clusters to be either missed or not interpreted as being due to known EMR sources. A classic example of this are the studies of Dolk http://aje.oxfordjournals.org/content/145/1/1.full.pdf where cancer clusters were found not immediately nearby the Sutton Coldfield TV and FM radio transmitter but some 5 km away. The mobile phone companies are very keen to have us believe in inverse square law even through the Stewart report documents diagrammatically the effect of antenna SSL.      

Professor Cyril W. Smith has re-evaluated the work of Dolk and suggested that maximum bio-damage would occur at 5 km from a 100 MHz transmitter antenna at the point wherein the mutually orthogonal electromagnetic vectors E/H were 180 degrees out of phase with the magnetic time integral A which unaffected by matter travels at the speed of light. The stated phase shift needing a 5ns transit time or 5km of distance to achieve at 100MHz. In other words only at this key distance from the transmitting antenna the same effect would be achieved as being in close proximity to a toroidal coil.  The present author has extended the work of Smith to take into account odd integer multiples of such a phase- shift in a study of the complex electro-acoustic human affliction generally known as the Hum (http://www.btinternet.com/~gmbarnes/HUMPRED.htm. ).  The work of Smith on water memory and coherent states is particularly poignant here  http://www.scientificexploration.org/journal/jse_15_4_cardella.pdf for only the magnetic vector potential ( magnetic time integral) of an EMR field, strong from a toroidal coil*, can perturb coherent processes of the sort involved with all life processes including cancer http://informahealthcare.com/doi/abs/10.3109/15368370802708827 first proposed by the late Physicist Herbert Frolich a brilliant man with theories a good thirty years ahead of their time and with whom the author has personally met and this also ties in with both the findings of the present author and the work of Pilla et al on a Larmor precession model for bio effects of weak magnetic fields. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0302459896051616.

*Every antenna or coil will have an associated a magnetic vector potential in addition to a magnetic B field but in a toroid (dough nut shaped coil) the classic B field is confined to within the windings and on the magnetic vector potential A exists outside the plane of the dough nut.  

Conclusions and Future implications

 Very recently indeed the present author came across references to EMR as a possible cause of the phenomenon know as tree die back where an otherwise apparently healthy tree starts dying from the top down!  So dramatic have been the author’s own findings for all kinds of trees and vegetation and the way in which they are all occurring at predictable radial distances form transmitter's antennas depending on frequency and phase of the magnetic time integral and seemingly also interleave with locations of first hand anecdotal cancer reports in the locality that this has led to the author filing of UK patent application which yields a method of predicting general cross-species bio-damage from EMR. It should be stressed that these distances are not predictable from simple antenna theory and are generally further from the the transmitter than could be predicted by main beam SSLS or have otherwise been considered dangerous. Because of the coherent nature of electromagnetic bio-absorption there will be quantum windows in field strength and frequency wherein bio-effect is maximised. It is no longer adequate to assume a region of low electric field strength to be safer than a higher one. A preliminary study on tree die back suggests whereas some 60 -70 % takes place in areas of classical high field strength > 20mV/m the rest can take place at virtually any field strength down to a few tens of microvolts/metre, provided the above special phase relationship is satisfied.

Thus due to IP considerations precise detail of the method is not being released in this publication but it is expected to have striking significance for what we do and don’t define as cancer clusters in the vicinity of mobile phone base stations and other types of transmitting antenna.   There will be excepted implications for ‘mast victims’ and their lawyers, for planners and for those charged with safety in the mobile phone and TV and Radio broadcasting industries.