Archive for August, 2015

Every country’s neurological deaths rose relative to the controls, especially in the USA, which is a cause for concern and suggests possible environmental influences. The Gompertzian explanation appears limited, not least because it does not explain the USA position, but we avoid the temptation to speculate but point toward a number of studies indicating possible epigenetic factors influencing neurological morbidity suggesting that possible nongenetic influences on gene expression, may be entertained.

The nature of any environmental factors are uncertain but there have been major environmental changes; including increased population, economic activity, substantial rises in road and air travel; increased home technology involving background electromagnetic fields (mobile phones, microwave ovens, computers), which are unique to these later years and these possible environmental factors cannot be ignored, especially as they probably interact. This list of possible features might be described as “modern living” and the USA is the epitome of “modern living.”

Colin Pritchard, Emily Rosenorn-Lanng

As noted above everyone has ideas and alleged suspects supposedly responsible for these disturbing statistics in neurological deaths in the U.S and Western countries. In noting the comments under this article I observe that Dr. S. Prokop and Professor Calderon-Garciduenas suspect air pollution as the culprit, and supporting data is provided to that effect. Dr. Priyanka Bandara attributes the problem to man-made ionization radiation, both low-frequency and high frequency electromagnetic fields, and also cites circumstantial evidence and valuable data. Drs. Anthony Samsel and Stephanie Seneff in a study also published in SNI are blaming and (already are very prematurely) calling for the banning of the herbicide glyphosate! They not only believe their culprit is responsible for degenerative neurological diseases but for every conceivable disease process, from anxiety disorders and autism to environmental catastrophes. –Miguel A. Faria, M.D.



As ComEd rolls out 4,000,000 Smart Meters in an effort to “modernize the electricity grid,” many Illinois residents are pushing for a no-cost or at least low-cost option to keep their existing analog meters. Instead of benefits to the consumer, these residents see risks and increased electricity bills associated with digital Smart Meters. They are not alone.

The National Institute for Science, Law & Public Policy report calls Smart Meters “a canard—a story or hoax based on specious claims about energy benefits.” It goes on to say, “Congress, state, local governments, and ratepayers, have been misled about the potential energy and cost saving benefits paid for in large part with taxpayer and ratepayer dollars.”

Lisa Madigan, Illinois Attorney General writes, “Utilities have shown no evidence of billions of dollars in benefits to consumers from these new meters. The utilities want to experiment with expensive and unproven technology, yet all the risk will lie with consumers. The pitch is that smart meters will allow consumers to monitor their electrical usage, helping them to reduce consumption and save money. Consumers do not need to be forced to pay billions for smart technology to know how to reduce their utility bills. We know how to turn down the heat and shut off the lights.”

Judge O’Connell of the Michigan Appellate Court writes in an opinion on an opt-out-rate case, “The Public Service Commission and Consumers Energy advance the notion that smart meters will save the public money on their utility bills.  Unfortunately, this argument is inherently illogical:  how can smart meters save money when Consumers seeks to add millions of dollars to the base rate to fund the AMI [Smart Meter] program?  It appears, as the Attorney General argues and as in other states, that the smart meter program actually increases rates.” ComEd promotes the same illogical reasoning.