July/August 2018 Issue  https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2018/07/the-dangers-of-distracted-parenting/561752/

Excerpts:

Smartphones have by now been implicated in so many crummy outcomes—car fatalities, sleep disturbances, empathy loss, relationship problems, failure to notice a clown on a unicycle—that it almost seems easier to list the things they don’t mess up than the things they do. Our society may be reaching peak criticism of digital devices.

Even so, emerging research suggests that a key problem remains underappreciated. It involves kids’ development, but it’s probably not what you think. More than screen-obsessed young children, we should be concerned about tuned-out parents.

Parents are constantly present in their children’s lives physically, but they are less emotionally attuned.

To argue that parents’ use of screens is an underappreciated problem isn’t to discount the direct risks screens pose to children: Substantial evidence suggests that many types of screen time (especially those involving fast-paced or violent imagery) are damaging to young brains.

Time spent on devices is time not spent actively exploring the world and relating to other human beings.

Yet for all the talk about children’s screen time, surprisingly little attention is paid to screen use by parents themselves, who now suffer from what the technology expert Linda Stone more than 20 years ago called “continuous partial attention.”

Child-development experts have different names for the dyadic signaling system between adult and child, which builds the basic architecture of the brain. Jack P. Shonkoff, a pediatrician and the director of Harvard’s Center on the Developing Child, calls it the “serve and return” style of communication; the psychologists Kathy Hirsh-Pasek and Roberta Michnick Golinkoff describe a “conversational duet.” The vocal patterns parents everywhere tend to adopt during  exchanges with infants and toddlers are marked by a higher-pitched tone, simplified grammar, and engaged, exaggerated enthusiasm. Though this talk is cloying to adult observers, babies can’t get enough of it. Not only that: One study showed that infants exposed to this interactive, emotionally responsive speech style at 11 months and 14 months knew twice as many words at age 2 as ones who weren’t exposed to it.

A problem therefore arises when the emotionally resonant adult–child cueing system so essential to early learning is interrupted—by a text, for example, or a quick check-in on Instagram. Anyone who’s been mowed down by a smartphone-impaired stroller operator can attest to the ubiquity of the phenomenon.

Occasional parental inattention is not catastrophic (and may even build resilience), but chronic distraction is another story. Smartphone use has been associated with a familiar sign of addiction: Distracted adults grow irritable when their phone use is interrupted; they not only miss emotional cues but actually misread them.

We seem to have stumbled into the worst model of parenting imaginable—always present physically, thereby blocking children’s autonomy, yet only fitfully present emotionally.

If we can get a grip on our “technoference,” as some psychologists have called it, we are likely to find that we can do much more for our children simply by doing less—regardless of the quality of their schooling and quite apart from the number of hours we devote to them. Parents should give themselves permission to back off from the suffocating pressure to be all things to all people. Put your kid in a playpen, already! Ditch that soccer-game appearance if you feel like it. Your kid will be fine. But when you are with your child, put down your damned phone.

The post Recommended Article – The Dangers of Distracted Parenting appeared first on EMFSA.

Malikova MA

DOI: 10.15761/SCRR.1000104

Abstract

Objective : This is a study to assess the impact of the global system for mobile communication (GSM) mobile phone electromagnetic radiation on the main vessels of the brain.

Material and methods: This was a cross sectional study which included 55 volunteers between 18-66 years old, who were examined by stationary device Philips HD 11 expert class phased sectoral sensor with a frequency of 2-4MHz at the Ultrasonic and Functional Diagnostics Department of the Mirotvortseva hospital, which is affiliated with Saratov State Medical University (SSMU) and in the clinic ” Stroygrad Medical Center ” in Kirsanov city, Tambov region.

Results: The study included 55 volunteers between 18-66 years old (average age was 38.95 years) with permeable trans-temporal acoustic windows and without chronic diseases such as hypertension, diabetes mellitus, chronic cerebral ischemia, coronary heart disease and no initial spasm in middle cerebral artery (MCA). The study was conducted in the supine position with enabled mobile phone in talk mode for 7 minutes. The blood flow velocity (BFV) and resistive index (RI) in the MCA (middle cerebral artery) were measured on both sides at baseline and after 7 minutes of talking on a mobile phone. Cerebral vasospasm was considered if detected RI was 0.65 and above.

In order to minimize the measurement error, the same modern mobile phone was utilized for all studied subjects. The analysis of the data revealed an initial increase in the BFV and RI in the MCA in all patients by the end of 7 minutes of conversation.  Unilateral spasm of various degree was detected by ultrasound in the middle cerebral artery of 27 out of 55 examined patients (50%) after 7 minutes of them talking on a mobile phone. Average RI value was 0.66 ± 0.04 on the ipsilateral side of MCA with range of a minimum RI detected at 0.59, and maximum value of 0.75. On the contralateral side of MCA an average RI value was detected as 0.66 ± 0.04, with range of 0.60-0.74. Therefore, interaction with mobile phone for period of time up to 7 minutes in most cases gave rise to moderately expressed spasm on both sides. The results were independent of gender and blood pressure.

Conclusions: MCA spasm recorded as a result of prolonged mobile phone call (about 7 minutes), was detected in 60% of examined subjects, which may indicate the importance of this potential risk factor in causing headaches and other negative psychological factors (i.e. lack of attention, sleep disturbances, irritability etc.).

Introduction

The 21st century is the time of high level technology. There are a lot of gadgets of telecommunications in everyday use. The most popular gadgets are cell or mobile phones and smartphones. The dramatic worldwide increase in use of cellular phones has prompted concerns regarding potential harmful effects of exposure to radiofrequency-modulated electromagnetic fields (RF-EMFs). Of a particular concern has been the potential carcinogenic effects from the RF-EMF emissions of cell phones. [1] However, the results of epidemiologic studies, which examined association between the cell phone use and prevalence of brain tumors, have been inconsistent. Some studies showed increased risk, but the issue remains unresolved. [2]. RF-EMFs emitted by cell phones are absorbed in the brain within a range that could influence neuronal activity. [3] Thermal effects from RF-EMFs have also been invoked as a mechanism that could affect neuronal activity, although temperature changes produced by current cell phone technology are likely minimal. [4] Numerous studies have examined the effect of RF-EMR on a persons’ psychological status, the correlation between the duration of a call, and the development of cancer disease, etc. We found no results in current publications that demonstrated RF-EMR effect on brain vessels. It is well-established fact that persistent cerebral vasospasm causes persistent headaches, reduces efficiency, causes irritation, fatigue and disturbed sleep patterns. [5-8]

Discussion

When analyzing the data obtained, an increase in BFV and RI in the MCA was found in all 55 examined subjects (100%) after 7 minutes of exposure to electromagnetic radiation emitted by mobile phone device.

The spasm of various degree was detected bilaterally in the MCA in 22 examined subjects by the end of a long conversation on a mobile phone (40 %). The moderately expressed unilateral spasm (mean RI value 0.72) was observed in 11 subjects out of 55 studied in total (20 %), including men with average age of 23.3 years old and women with average age 36.6 years. We noted a trend that patients who were 45 years old and above were less affected by EMR. This observation can be attributed to the more rigid arterial walls in older patients.

The spasm with mild to severe degree was detected in the younger group of subjects (18-45 years old). The artery walls are more elastic and probably more prone to be affected by EMR at a younger age. Thus, ultrasound exam allowed to see changes in the brain artery in majority of patients bilaterally after 7 minutes of interaction with EMR emitted by the mobile phone.

Conclusions

In this pilot study the talk for more than 7 minutes on a cell phone in most cases (60%) led to the spasm of the main cerebral artery in the assessed subjects, which indicates the high importance of EMR as a potential risk factor for headaches and other negative psychological factors (i.e. lack of attention, disturbance of the structure of sleep, irritability, memory impairment, etc.). When comparing the occurrence of spasm between ipsilateral and contralateral sides of MCA, it was noted that in most cases the ipsilateral side of the MCA got affected mostly. However, in some patient’s unilateral changes of RI and BFV were observed in either ipsilateral or contralateral side of the MCA. This is a pilot study which requires further prospective, randomized, controlled investigations to fully understand the degree of the effect of electromagnetic radiation emitted by the cell phones on the blood vessels of the brain.

http://www.oatext.com/the-effect-of-mobile-phone-electromagnetic-radiation-on-brain-vessels.php#Article

References

1. Volkow N.D, Tomasi D, Wang G.J, Vaska P, Joanna S. Fowler J.S (2011) Effects of cell phone radiofrequency signal exposure on brain glucose metabolism. JAMA 305: 808–813 [Crossref]
2. Dubey RB1, Hanmandlu M, Gupta SK (2010) Risk of brain tumours from wireless phone use. J Comput Assist Tomogr 34: 799-807 [Crossref]
3. Kleinlogel H, Dierks T, Koenig T, Lehmann H, Minder A (2008) Effects of weak mobile phone–electromagnetic fields (GSM, UMTS) on event related potentials and cognitive functions. Bioelectromagnetics. 29: 488–497 [Crossref]
4. Wainwright P1 (2000) Thermal effects of radiation from cellular telephones. Phys Med Biol 45: 2363-2372 [Crossref]
5. Logg C.R, Tai C.K, Log A, Anderson W.F, Kasahara N (2001) A uniquely stable replication-competent vector achieves efficient gene delivery in vitro and in solid tumours. Human Gene Therapy. 12: 921-932 [Crossref]
6. Benson V.S, Pirie K, Schuz J, Reeves G.K, Beral V, Green J (2013) Mobile phone use and risk of brain neoplasms and other cancers: prospective study. Int J Epidemiol 42: 792-802 [Crossref]
7. Frei P, Poulsen A.H, Johansen C, Olsen J, Steding-Jessen M (2011) Use of mobile phones and risk of brain tumours: update of Danish cohort study. BMJ 11: 343

The post The effect of mobile phone electromagnetic radiation on brain vessels appeared first on EMFSA.

Contemporary Mobile Technology and Child and Adolescent Development,
edited by Zheng Yan and Lennart Hardell, May 15, 2017

Article by
Cindy Sage and Ernesto Burgio

Abstract

Mobile phones and other wireless devices that produce electromagnetic fields (EMF) and pulsed radiofrequency radiation (RFR) are widely documented to cause potentially harmful health impacts that can be detrimental to young people. New epigenetic studies are profiled in this review to account for some neurodevelopmental and neurobehavioral changes due to exposure to wireless technologies. Symptoms of retarded memory, learning, cognition, attention, and behavioral problems have been reported in numerous studies and are similarly manifested in autism and attention deficit hyperactivity disorders, as a result of EMF and RFR exposures where both epigenetic drivers and genetic (DNA) damage are likely contributors. Technology benefits can be realized by adopting wired devices for education to avoid health risk and promote academic achievement.

Citation Sage, C. and Burgio, E. (2017), Electromagnetic Fields, Pulsed Radiofrequency Radiation, and Epigenetics: How Wireless Technologies May Affect Childhood Development. Child Dev. doi:10.1111/cdev.12824

Contact Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Cindy Sage, Sage Associates,
1396 Danielson Road, Santa Barbara, CA 93108. Electronic mail may be sent to sage@silcom.com.

Discussion

The wide array of pathophysiological effects of EMF and RFR exposures from wireless sources do not require “the breaking of molecular bonds” as done by ionizing radiation in order for physiologically damaging effects to occur. Epigenetic mechanisms alone can change fetal development in profound ways, disrupting health by causing changes in gene activation and expression without change in gene sequences. Environmental epigenetic influences in the fetal and neonatal development (i.e., epigenetic regulation of genes rather than direct genetic effects by gene mutation) have been plausibly established to cause pathophysiological changes that can result in altered neurological development. Symptoms of neurodevelopmental problems in children like retarded memory, impaired learning, cognition, attention, and behavioral aberrations that are similarly expressed in autism and ADHD have been reported in numerous scientific studies to occur as a result of EMF and RFR exposures. Epigenetic drivers are the most likely causes, and persistent exposures contribute to chronic dysfunction and addiction that can overwhelm adaptive biological responses.

Epigenetics provides an under-recognized mechanism for the cell phone radiation damage seen in epidemiological studies on humans, and in animal toxicity studies. Epigenetics is redefining the traditional interpretations of ‘Mendelian genes and genetic inheritance’, and legitimizing mechanisms that account for health effects that are already epidemiologically visible.

Epigenetic mechanisms rebut the outdated thinking for experts like David Savitz, a leading US epidemiologist to argue that ” (C)ell phones (and to a lesser extent cordless phones) give off non-ionizing radiation, which unlike ionizing radiation such as X-rays, CT scans and radon do not have the potential to damage DNA. “There is no known pathway for any adverse health effects,” http://www.cnn.com/2015/07/28/health/cell-phones- brain-tumor- risk-berkeley/

Global saturation by wireless device emissions is our largest modifiable and preventable childhood contaminant. It may exacerbate health harm from chemical toxins such as environmental tobacco, mercury, lead and pthalate toxicity that already burden the developing child. We should think first of reducing the body-burden of wireless emissions which cause epigenetic changes leading to cognitive and behavioral issues in the young child, as well as the underlying neurodevelopmental problems of the fetus, before widely prescribing chemical and/or behavioral interventions.

Public health experts, educators and psychologists have gained a strong new tool to argue against pulsed radiofrequency radiation saturation by wireless devices and infrastructure. Wireless exposures are modifiable and largely avoidable by choosing wired for technology access. This may hold the largest potential for global preventative health action we have. In comparison to chemical toxicants and other neurotoxins and neurodevelopmental contaminants, we have a clear and immediate choice to avoid wireless technologies in favor of wired connectivity. Prevention of environmental exposures that can lead to disease and developmental disabilities is within reach, now that we are coming to understand how epigenetic mechanisms can modify the expression of the human genome. http://www.bioinitiative.org/how-wireless-technologies-may-affect-childhood-development/

The post Electromagnetic Fields, Pulsed Radiofrequency Radiation, and Epigenetics: How Wireless Technologies May Affect Childhood Development appeared first on EMFSA.