Environmental Working Group/Cell Phone Protection Standards

The EWG – Environmental Working Group – just published it’s cell phone radiation study, report and guide to reducing cell phone radiation. What about protective products? Do they work? Should they be certified by a standards agency?

The latest on cell phone radiation health risks is coming out of the Environmental Working Group.

This is an independent organization whose purpose you can read about on their site. I find this site to be an excellent resource and use it to research the safety of household and cosmetic products. I highly recommend you visit the site, bookmark it, and refer to it often.

EWG has just released the results of a 10-year study.
See the entire report here.

Long-term studies give us valid and reliable information. I welcome the publication of the EWG study as it will encourage consumers to become more proactive regarding their cell phone radiation exposure by 1) taking personal precautions; and 2) urging legislators to establish a truly protective standard and create a standard for products claiming to provide cell phone radiation protection.

As founder and CEO of SafeCell Ltd. (Israel), I have approached our Standards Institute through many channels, including scientists who have worked there, as well as the Ministry of Health, and neither body is willing to look at the SafeCell or any other cell phone radiation protection product. Why? Because they don’t have to. There is no law requiring them to do so in order to evaluate whether a product is safe and effective to a particular standard because NO STANDARD HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED.

We need to approach concerned lawmakers to make this issue a priority.
Due to the high percentage of people who use cell phones and the potential harm, there needs to be a standard set for mobile phone radiation protection products. Without a standard, it is possible for anyone to market a product with any claim and sell it to unsuspecting consumers. When using a cell phone with one of these bogus products, one has a false sense of security that will inevitably lead them to using their phone MORE, because they now feel safe to do so. Which, of course, puts them in greater danger due to the increase in exposure.

No product should be allowed on the market without proof of its efficacy.

We have tested several products through the MSAS BioMeridian Testing System
with a certified and experienced diagnostician, Naturopath Dr. Susan Wolff, N.D.

I will give the general results for the different products we’ve tested
ranging from totally ineffective in strengthening the body against the effects of cell phone radiation (F), to some effect (C), to very effective (A)

EMF Blues [link] ceramic bead ($20)  F rating
BioPro Cell Phone Chip ($40)         C rating
this product also loses effectiveness
over time – a fact the distributor may be unaware of, or
not share with you

SarShield      ($20)    C rating

IIREC/Zone030 sticker ($20) C rating
and this product also has an expiration date, so you need to replace it at least every 2 – 3 years, depending on when you purchased it.

SafeCell ($29.95) A rating

The SafeCell never needs replacing.
It is the advanced version of the same product that BioPro Technologies used to market before they switched to the inferior technology they currently use. If you have one of these chips, return it and demand a full refund to the distributor you bought it from.

The manufacturer of SafeCell has been developing the product over the last 10 years and using the same technology to create other products for EMF and cell phone radiation protection. For more information please visit our website or contact me, Esti: 866-820-3431 (toll-free).

Please feel free to leave your comments on this blog: what do you think about the need for legislation? Should the issue be treated the same as cigarette smoking with government mandated safety warnings, etc?
Let your voice be heard!