Posted with permission from Marjorie Lundquist, Bioelectromagnetic Hygienist, USA. The letter was submitted to the New York Times.

Dear Editor:

Jane Brody, in her October 1st column on cellular phones, assumes that Robert Park of the American Physical Society tells the world everything it needs to know in his "What's New" column on the APS Web site.  Actually, in my professional judgment as a Ph.D. physicist and Certified Industrial Hygienist, he shoots from the hip rather irresponsibly.

He correctly advises that microwave radiation lacks sufficient photon energy to break chemical bonds.  Nevertheless, microwaves can produce a health effects that mimics a case of mild radiation poisoning; this has been known for nearly half a century.

Ionizing radiation, which does possess enough photon energy to break chemical bonds, produces its damage by the creation of free radicals in living tissues. Microwave radiation also is capable of producing free radicals in living tissues, but by a different mechanism:  a chemical mechanism that involves the oxidation and reduction of iron.

The correct answer to the question in the title of Jane Brody's column is "Both".  Microwave radiation is capable of causing, to a mild degree, the same kind of damage to health as a low dose of ionizing radiation can cause.  This damage to health includes, but is not limited to, cancer.

Marjorie Lundquist, Ph.D., C.I.H.
Bioelectromagnetic Hygienist
P. O. Box 11831
Milwaukee, WI  53211-0831 

 October 2002


ALLERGIC  TO MICROCHIPS  September 9th 2000 report in a UK newspaper of a woman  who is allergic to microchips.

Mrs Stock's allergy has been diagnosed as a  reaction to the electro-magnetic radiation generated by  microchips,  whose signals  interfere with the electrical pulses in her own brain.  She has  been suffering from blinding headaches whenever she goes near a computer or other high-tech electronic equipment and is unable to  shop in supermarkets, watch a colour television, travel on public transport or  in a modern car, or even cross a road at a  pelican crossing.  "It has got worse and worse over  the last ten years. Everything has computer chips in it these days. It is very  frustrating because I am so limited to what I can do and where I can go. It is also  very frightening because it is an unbearable pain that is completely out of  my control."

Mrs Stock's GP, Dr David Dowson, said: "Electro-magnetic sensitivity is so rare, people often dismiss it as a psychological problem, but it is certainly not."

Simon Best, editor of the medical news journal Electromagnetic Hazard and Therapy, described Joan's symptoms as classic: "A significant number of people are reporting some kind of electrode sensitivity. The allergy is very restrictive. It affects both the working and domestic life.  "Sufferers can fall unconscious at any time.  They are also plagued by nausea, blurred  vision and migraines. It is a very serious condition."



A Sydney school teacher set a task for her class of 6year olds, to draw a word picture using the letter ‘x’.

One little girl, with the reading skills of a  child about to enter high school (even though she was only 6 yrs, presented her picture story of a fox sitting on a table. Nearby she had drawn a square containing a bone and another square contained a machine-like device. In the lower right hand corner well away from the other drawings was a little girl holding an umbrella. When asked to relate her story the child said  “Fox is spelled with an ‘x’.  The fox is lying on the x-ray table and  the bone is an x-ray of his leg and the other square is an x-ray machine." When asked what the little girl in the drawing was doing way over in the corner, the teacher was told that "Everyone knows that x-rays can do bad things to you so she is standing a long way away and the umbrella is protecting her.” 

If only more  children  were as  aware and had the understanding of this little girl. Where  the present generation has struggled, her generation will hopefully make greater progress in convincing  the authorities that   x-rays are not the only  levels of electrical energy with  the potential to harm our health, if used unwisely.

While we recognise the immense benefit that electricity has provided for society we now need to learn to use it with caution and respect in the interest of community health. Maybe we should draw pictures for the authorities caring for community health ?  


Global Recognition Campaign for  Multiple Chemical Sensitivity and other chemically induced illnesses, diseases and injury affecting civilians and military personnel

Thank you,    Diana Buckland, Australia



During the recent breast cancer  Awareness Week  in NSW Australia,  it was noted that while better treatments are now available for breast cancer there is no decline but  in fact an increase in the number of incidents of breast cancer. We are no closer to finding the cause/causes of this devastating disease.  

A great deal has been published regarding the possible causes of breast cancer, a disease  the effects of which affect the primary patient AND her family.  Environmental factors  such as the toxic chemical and less known electromagnetic radiation (EMR) exposure  are all but ignored in the patient’s  home and work environment.   We need to revisit and study  the many   published works linking environmental factors with  cancer to appreciate their worth in the  mounting struggle to curb the increase in breast cancer  cases among both men and our women.   Rachel Carson,  Don Maisch’s paper presented to Parliament  by Senator Lynn Allison ( 50-60 Hertz Electromagnetic Fields and Breast Cancer An Australian Senate discussion Paper, 27 October 1997 (published in Hansard) Don Maisch, EMFacts ... - 32k - Cached - Similar pages
[ More results from and a publication  by Rachel’s Newsletter (USA)


Breast Cancer and  Environment Factors  In 1997, a feature film  released in the USA, related the activities of a group of six women living with breast cancer who were  seeking answers about the cause of the disease. The women interviewed  scientists and researchers across the country.

The film, titled Rachel’s Daughters was inspired by the experiences of several women who met while visiting their daughters,  hospitalised for treatment for breast cancer. These mothers  remarked at the prevalence of breast cancer among young women and the tragedy and  oddity of  women, in some instances  burying their daughters – when in the normal  course of life events,  the reverse would be the case.

The title ‘Rachel’s Daughters’ is seen to reflect on Rachel Carson’s work,  a pioneer scientist who alerted the world to the health dangers of pesticides in her book ‘Silent Spring’ in 1962.  Carson found evidence of the lethal impact of certain chemicals  on bird and other wildlife  and could see a clear indication of a similar impact occurring on the human population. Rachel Carson herself died of cancer.

The attitude of rejection and denial  which  surrounded Carson’s work and later,  the asbestos and tobacco  health issues,   is also  evident in  the more recent reports of  cancer  clusters   deemed to be  associated with exposure to electromagnetic field radiation (EMF).  

There are now a significant number of studies linking breast cancer with electromagnetic field (EMF) exposure.  It is imperative that the EMF pollution issue, in all its complexity, is  addressed.    In those cases where EMF may not be the primary cause of illness it most certainly can be deduced as a promoter.  There are studies which reveal a greater growth rate of established malignancies  when EMF/R has been applied.   Dr William Ross Adey’s work on the combined effects of chemical  and electrical pollution demands our attention::


“….  epidemilogic and laboratory studies emphasise the growing impact of environmental chemical pollution and  the rapidly increasing deployment of an almost infinite  variety of environmental electromagnetic fields as  possible joint factors in the promotion of cancer.  As we move toward the 21st century elucidation of mechanisms underlying  these interactions at the cellular and molecular level will become matters of urgency.  At the same time, implementation of public policies that would mitigate  risks from these exposures  may impact heavily on existing industrial practices. And on important aspects of environmental planning and housing and urban development.  At this stage,  it is of paramount importance  that  the significance of these  issues is no longer ignored.”   

See:  and  www.emfacts.

It must be noted that the official guidelines, adhered to by our Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety  Agency (ARPANSA), grossly  inadequate and  outdated¸ are   in need of serious review given the more recent scientific findings and the increasing reports of  clusters and singly located events of EMF related ill health in the community.

It is these same  outdated guidelines  to which  investigators refer while attempting  to identify  EMF health risk zones, their  reports  thus unwittingly conveying a false sense of security to the public.      

Many health  warnings go unheeded or  are denied,  to our detriment.   We need to revisit Rachel Carson’s work to remind us of our chemical pollution history and  we need to revisit the film ‘Rachel’s Daughters’ in which environmental factors including electromagnetic field radiation (EMF/R) are noted.

Though some uncertainty may  remain as to HOW environmental factors impact on health.  There exists sufficient evidence  both scientific and empirical, to prompt  due diligence in avoiding  any environmental agent deemed to be a health risk. This  includes   EMF radiation,  known to causes  adverse biological  effects which   may reasonably be seen to lead to ill health.  All  environmental   factors should thus be seriously  considered firstly in the establishment of  realistic health and safety guidelines and secondly in the patient’s treatment regime and thirdly the general publics’ exposure as an occupational and domestic health and safety measure. 

For further information regarding the film ‘Rachel’s Daughters’ refer to http// and http//

This comment provided by a breast cancer patient.