Saturday, April 07, 2018

Better Call Saul: Is Chuck Really Crazy?

I have no doubt in my mind that at the present time the greatest polluting element in the earth’s environment is the proliferation of electromagnetic fields."  -- Dr Robert O. Becker, twice nominated for the Nobel Prize in Medicine

Like fish in water, so immersed in the substance they're oblivious to its content, we are mostly oblivious to the electronically pulsed and poisoned air that surrounds us...that is, oblivious unless you're part of the 4% of us that is electro-hypersensitive (EHS).  Then you literally feel the artificially hyped-up electromagnetic fields (EMF) that permeate every part of our environment today.  Therefore, the most important question should be: “What is the effect of EMFs on human health?”  Well, good luck in getting truthful answers to that question and many others.

In our profit-before-people milieu--and in this case, wireless profits before people-- the true answers to this question and many others  are often corrupted, suppressed, sabotaged, subverted, etc., in the interests of profit power and almighty "progress".

In Breaking Bad spinoff, Better Call Saul (BCS), Chuck McGill, Saul/Jimmy Goldman/McGill's successful attorney brother, is portrayed as crazy, because he claims to be allergic to electricity, allergic to electromagnetic fields: electromagnetic hypersensitivity (ESH). In the presence of objects with an electric pulse, Chuck suffers from painful symptoms such as heart palpitations, brain fog, headaches, insomnia. Everyone--viewers and fictional characters, alike-- believe Chuck's disease is psychosomatic, in his head.  In other words, Chuck is mentally ill, not physically ill. Naive viewers, many of whom never heard of this disorder, now believe that EHS isn't real, that it's a phony disorder, which, I guess, is the point of Chuck's somewhat despicable, somewhat pitiful character (in relation to his lovable brother, anyway)

Prior to the explosion of  cell phone use, in 2003, the British television series, Judge John Deed (season three, episode one, entitled, "Health Hazard") profiled a case against a mobile phone company. In this episode, a woman with grade 4 astrocytoma sued the phone company for causing her brain tumor.
Judge John Deed: If this cell phone case were to go against the company, it could prove difficult for you.
Sir Ian Rochester: Not me personally.
Judge John Deed: I mean, it could open a floodgate of litigation. Like with asbestos and tobacco.
Sir Ian Rochester: We’d regard it as a great favor if you were to let it go back to Monty Everard in the Strand.
Judge John Deed: The claimant is very poorly and she lives locally. It seems unkind to ask  her to go all the way up to London.  On the other hand, being owed a favor by your lot might be a very good position to put myself in. 
Sir Ian Rochester: We would be grateful.
Judge John Deed: Is Monty Everard amenable to pressure?
Sir Ian Rochester: Ah. Does that mean you're not interested in what we might offer you?
Judge John Deed: Just no convinced you could deliver.
Sir Ian Rochester: You'd have my word.
Judge John Deed: Then talk to me about my elevation to the Appellate Bench.
Sir Ian Rochester: The Lord Chancellor regrets not having a mind such as yours in the Appeals Court.
Judge John Deed: And this ridiculously unfair PCC hearing against Mrs. Mill being dropped.
Sir Ian Rochester: The Lord Chancellor's department had very little influence there.They're all reasonable men on the Disciplinary Tribunal.
Judge John Dee: Well, the only question remaining, then, Ian, is can we achieve all this within the next 20 minutes?
Sir Ian Rochester: I hardly think that practicable.
Judge John Dee: Because that’s when I’m hearing the arguments for directions in the mobile phone case.
Sir Ian Rochester: We respect the integrity and independence of the judiciary, Sir John. But there comes a point when its very existence depends upon a workable relationship with the Executive. Never more so then in the case you’re about to hear.
Judge John Deed: See, with the license revenue from the mobile phone companies at stake, well, what it, $22 billion; this workable relationship might easily deteriorate into a master-servant relationship.  Couldn't it, Ian?
After this discussion between the Judge and Sir Ian, they were evacuated from the court house because of a bomb scare.  Coincidence?  Judge John Deed didn't think so. Later in the episode, the following barristers argued about the evidence:
Barrister George Channing:They have in their possession erased emails sent by my clients and to my clients. These they obtained in contravention of the laws of procedure.
(After more discussion about procedure)
Barrister Jo Mills: The documents contain a report showing a causal link between the radiation in the form of microwaves produced by cell phones and scrambled patterns of electrical activity in the brain. This leads to the stripping of proteins from cells which can in turn lead to tumors
(After more discussion about procedure)
Barrister Jo Mills: One-Way (fictional cell phone company) was alerted to the problems, the health problems, their product posed. Now, instead of accepting the advice of independent scientists, they chose to erase both the paper and electronic trails We now have a situation where there is a floodgate waiting to burst open with claims, and a company whose sole economic imperative is to keep the gates firmly closed.
Barrister George Channing: My clients are an internationally quoted company with a reputation both in employment and social equity which they guard jealously. There is no question of their attempting to foist a deceit on the public. To do so would be counterproductive to their business and run counter to their ethos. Profit does not equate with social irresponsibility as my learned friend seems to be suggesting
Judge John Deed: The question a jury might reasonably ask is why did the company erase the emails?.
(Barrister George Channing argues about limited cyberspace)
Barrister Jo Mills: It wouldn't be unreasonable until you consider the content of the emails and who they were from. Independent scientists who One-Way employed to test their phones. Correspondence from whom they were happy to retain until they began receiving negative findings. which not longer supported their contention that their phones were safe..
Then later in the season: Episode 4: "Economic Imperative"
Barrister Jo Mills: (addressing the jury) I’d like you to consider, if you will, what single item has come to represent freedom, opportunity, and above all, convenience. I think you’ll agree it’s the mobile phone. For Diana Hulsey, a busy post-operative cancer counselor, with her own life and that of her young son to organize, her mobile phone was essential. To her, it was both the symbol and the instrument of freedom. But it was to become a dangerous, obsessive shackle. This little instrument (holding up the mobile phone) would not only burn into the brain of this young mother, causing a massive, inoperable tumor, it would do so with the fore-knowledge of the manufacturers.

Barrister Jo Mills: Professor, are you the head of neurology at Oxford University?
Professor: You know I am
Barrister Jo Mills: Have you become the foremost expert on astrocytomas, the type of brain tumor Diana Hulsey has?
Professor: Let us say, I know a lot about such tumors.
Barrister Jo Mills: As such, can you tell us why this sort of tumor is on the increase, Professor?
Professor: In my opinion, it’s due to the frequent and persistent interruption of molecular activity in the brain by microwaves.
Barrister Jo Mills: Do we know what’s brought about this increase?
Professor: The increased use of television, microwave ovens, computers, the single biggest cause is mobile telephones used against the side of the head. The create heating. They interrupt the molecular connections. They heat, in particular, the cortical surface of the brain. Due to the angle which the phone is held at, most microwaves are directed to the parietal lobe
Judge: Is there any way to avoid this?
Professor: Yes. Don’t use mobile phones.
Barrister Jo Mills: How long does this sort of tumor that Ms. Hulsey has taken to develop?
Professor: The time is infinitely variable. These tests haven’t been done in humans, only animals. But brain tumors are the fastest growing cancers. Three to six months from the breakdown of cells to detection would be usual.
Barrister Jo Mills: Did you draw any conclusion to the cause of her tumor?
Professor: In my opinion, the persistent use of her mobile phone was the cause. ..exposed to pulsed 900 megahertz radiation for one hour a day for three months, mice show a significant doubling of B-cell lymphomas.
Barrister George Channing: Why doesn’t everyone who uses a mobile phone develop a tumor?
Professor: For the same reason that all people who smoke don’t develop lung cancer or develop breast cancer from pesticides.

Barrister Jo Mills: With your leave, My Lord, I’d like to call my next witness, Dr. Angus Whitten. Dr. Whitten is a partner in the research unit that did the initial safety tests on the ZP-9 phone. He’s here on a witness summons.
Barrister Jo Mills: Dr. Whitten, how long did your lab do research for One-Way?
Dr. Whitten: We were 15 months into our second two-year contract.
Barrister Jo Mills: Who terminated your services?
Dr. Whitten: the marketing director, Max Solveigh, on 12th of December, 2000.
Barrister Jo Mills: Do you know why your contract was terminated?
Dr. Whitten: The reason given was sloppy work.
Barrister Jo Mills: Had it been sloppy
Dr. Whitten: If they say so
Barrister Jo Mills: Was not one of the so-called mistakes your daring to show your client high levels of heat-shock proteins in the brain cells of mice? Mice that had been exposed to microwave levels as those from the ZP-9 phone?
Dr. Whitten: I don’t recall.
Barrister Jo Mills: Are the heat-shock proteins you discovered in test mice so called because of their response to considerable rise in temperature in the cells?
Dr. Whitten: Yes, of course.
Barrister Jo Mills: Ordinarily, a rise of at least 20 degrees centigrade is needed, but you were recording damage to the protein structure in DNA and RNA cells at much lower temperatures.
(Doctor claims he doesn’t recall so barrister refers him to evidence bundle)
Barrister Jo Mills: You discover that exposing cells to microwaves from the ZP-9 cell phone heated cells of the brain in such a way as to damage protein structure.
Dr. Whitten: That appeared to be a conclusion.
Judge John Deed: Have you since changed your mind?
Dr. Whitten: We were taken off the case before reaching further conclusions.
Barrister Jo Mills: Would you read, please, email 39A to the court?
Dr. Whitten: “Max, unless you drastically modify this one, you could be marketing a time-bomb.

Barrister Jo Mills: Dr. Goodfellow, were you until June of last year employed by Crighton Industries of Pennyslvania?
Dr. Goodfellow: Indeed I was.
Barrister Jo Mills: Can you tell us what you did?
Dr. Goodfellow: I was helping to develop microwave components for industry.
Barrister Jo Mills: Was that for the mobile phone industry?
Dr. Goodfellow: A huge part of it was. We were involved into trying to make ever smaller circuits for phones
Barrister Jo Mills: Why did you leave Crighton Industries?
Dr. Goodfellow: Essentially, I was unhappy with the way the products were being tested by so-called independent testers. They would fund research units at universities to the testing. The would even loan employees to the EPA in order to get the research passed. That person would then return to the company
Judge John Deed: You’re saying they cheat?
Dr. Goodfellow: It’s not called cheating. It’s the politics of science.
Barrister Jo Mills: Did you see problems in the results you were getting back?
Dr. Goodfellow: I did. The smaller the microprocessors, the more they heated the tissue…You pass microwaves through ever smaller gateways, they heat the brain rather like a magnifying glass concentrates the sun
Barrister Jo Mills: Did Crighton Industries know these concentrated microwaves were damaging tissue in the brain?
Dr. Goodfellow: I told them, again and again.
(after much cross-examination accusing him of being an imposter and a thief)
Dr. Goodfellow: That’s the dirty tricks they used because I threatened to expose them…You take these cheap shots. Well, let’s see you feel in five or ten years’ time for your part in this deceit when there are tens of thousands of people with brain tumors! (cancers do not form overnight. In almost all cases, cancerous tumors take many years to form and metastasize.)
However, unfortunately, TV shows like Judge John Deed, and perhaps even more so, The Wire--which allow its viewers a peak around the Oz-like curtain, partially exposing  the machinery or behind-the-scenes systemic corruption--are few and far between.

Mainstream media, mainstream academia, mainstream medical industry, not to mention institutions like the World Health Organization allege EHS is a nonexistent medical condition that allegedly does not present any health hazards, and in the mocking portrayal of EHS in BCS, the public is being conditioned to accept dangerous establishment disinformation once again, when, in fact, the reality is even darker than merely painful and irritating symptoms. The 4% of the population who suffer from symptoms caused by electromagnetic pulse are only the tip of a very iniquitously immense iceberg. In other words, just because you don't display symptoms of EHS doesn't mean you are not affected by our ever increasing electronically pulsed environment that harm our bodies and minds:  damages and potentially hijacks the nervous system,  the immune, nervous, cardiovascular and reproductive systems, and causes cancer.

Take South Florida Attorney, Jimmy Gonzales, who testified in front of the Pembroke Pines Fl Commission regarding the dangers of cell phone use. According to Gonzales, by using his cellphone for a period of 10 years for well over 30 minutes a day, cancer manifested in the exact locations where his cell phone was heavily used. When you learn his true story of how wireless microwave radiation took his life, how he lost his battle with three different cell phone induced cancers on November 27, 2014, Chuck McGill doesn’t sound so crazy anymore.



The the American Academy of Environmental Medicine (AAEM) called for a moratorium on smart meters (2012) and continues to veto them today. In a nutshell, they advised that smart meters should not be located in or next to the homes of those with cardiac or neurological conditions, including Parkinson’s, dementia, electrosensitivity, cancer and/or, wait for it...children!
“Wireless RF radiation … effects accumulate over time which is an important consideration given the chronic nature of exposure to ‘smart meters’. The current medical literature raises credible questions about genetic and cellular effects, hormonal effects … blood/brain barrier damage, and increased risks of certain types of cancers from RF and ELF levels similar to those emitted by ‘smart meters’. Children are placed at particular risk.”
More and more research is starting to show potential health risks from mobile and cordless phones, WiFi and other electromagnetic fields, yet the institutions like World Health Organization, Cancer Research UK, and the NHS all say that there is no good evidence that the sort of electromagnetic radiation (EMR) given off by phones and Wi-Fi routers is in any way dangerous..

Some would say this is the largest human biological experiment in the history of civilization. However, "experiment" is defined as "an act or operation for the purpose of discovering something unknown." In the case of cell phones, there is plenty of evidence to suggest the results were known long before the act or operation even began.

Links:

Florida Attorney Dies From 3 Different Cell Phone Induced Cancers

A Charity Could Face Investigation Over Its Adverts That Claim W-iFi And Mobile Phones Make People Ill

New Study Links Cellphone Radiation to Heart and Brain Tumors


Long-term Cell Phone Use Linked to Brain Tumor Risk

Cancer: Strong Signal for Cell Phone Effects


Risk for Glioma Triples With Long-Term Cell Phone Use


The Precautionary Principle in the Information Society Effects of Pervasive Computing on Health and Environment
(Swiss Original)

Research Institute for Applied Bioenergetics

44 Reasons To Believe Cell Phones Can Cause Cancer

Electric Sense

0 comments:

Petitions by Change.org|Start a Petition »

  © Blogger templates The Professional Template by Ourblogtemplates.com 2008

Back to TOP