AddThis Feed Button "Frequently Copied, Never Duplicated"

Saturday, December 31, 2011

Hormone Disruption: Fluoride and Your Wireless Device

RE -

It shows that long term exposure (six years) to both cellphones and their base stations can alter human hormone profiles.

The most significant (which the authors describe as highly significant in the text) are their effects on the thyroid hormones, which show a marked reduction over this period. Although the authors do not say it (I suspect that they dare not if they want to get their work published) this would result in hypothyroidism, the most important symptoms of which are fatigue and obesity. 

WEEP reader comments:

If cellphone exposure is combined with a fluoridated water supply, the low thyroid outcome is even more likely.

See this history of the fluorine/iodine antagonism connection, and the use of fluorine-based drugs to treat overactive thyroid.

Please join the spreading campaign to remove fluoride (from toxic-waste source) out of drinking water.

'This water-based “wet scrubber” hydrofluorosilicic acid, containing the contaminants, is then taken out of the chimneys and stored in open-air cooling lakes, further exposed to airborne contaminants. Industry produces millions of gallons of this liquid hazardous waste. It costs thousands of dollars per ton to properly neutralize and dispose of hydrofluorosilicic acid, therefore, industry would rather just sell it to you as “product”.'

And then if you are exposed to mercury too... and then the EMF shuts down detox, well we have got to do something about the use of these toxic substances.  Martin Weatherall, WEEP.

The New View for 2012

For about two decades I have been writing and education about thermography as a better and safer screening method for breast cancer.  

The two best reasons are that it does not expose you to unnecessary radiation and it detects 10 years earlier than x-ray.

This article may help you have a better view and also worth getting a copy to your health care provider.

Sadly I have learned that in some radiology practices they will not allow ultrasound unless you have had a prior mammogram.

Get the facts and take a stand for your best health.

Excerpt from a clinical article highlighting the facts about thermography -

  • Breast thermography has undergone extensive research since the late 1950's.

  • Over 800 peer-reviewed studies on breast thermography exist in the index-medicus literature.

  • In this database, well over 300,000 women have been included as study participants.

  • The numbers of participants in many studies are very large -- 10K, 37K, 60K, 85K …

  • Some of these studies have followed patients up to 12 years.

  • Strict standardized interpretation protocols have been established for over 20 years.

  • Breast thermography has an average sensitivity and specificity of 90%.

  • An abnormal thermogram is 10 times more significant as a future risk indicator for breast cancer than a first order family history of the disease.

  • A persistent abnormal thermogram caries with it a 22x higher risk of future breast cancer.

  • An abnormal infrared image is the single most important marker of high risk for developing breast cancer.

  • Breast thermography has the ability to detect the first signs that a cancer may be forming up to 10 years before any other procedure can detect it.

  • Research has shown that breast thermography significantly augments the long-term survival rates of its recipients by as much as 61%.

  • When used as part of a multimodal approach (clinical examination + mammography + thermography) 95% of early stage cancers will be detected.
If you would like a complete copy of the article please contact us.


Breast Thermography

Mammography Risk

Not so pretty in pink

Selections from Natural Health News

Jun 12, 2011
Now - even though thermography has received FDA approval, it stands on its platform of mammography as the only approved screening system. And at the same time blocks any information that has been scientifically ...
May 21, 2010
A great boost for the benefits of thermography over breast-cancer-causing mammogram. It is more effective and better for women under 50. Yes! Thermography's accuracy rate is 90% versus mammogram's 50%. It is well past ...
Oct 23, 2009
Better to Screen You with Thermography, My Dear... "Rethink" of Cancer Screening Triggers Comments and Controversy By Nick Mulcahy October 23, 2009 — In a comment that has triggered widespread media coverage, the ...
Mar 02, 2009
I just know I have to drive 75 minutes to get thermography. With the 3 day Race and March coming soon (Women's Health Month) perhaps you'll like to send along your donation to get our report on mammography that we've ...

Friday, December 30, 2011

A Most Sensible Resolution for 2012


Yes, you've heard this cry many times I am sure.  But even in today's world it is extremely important to your health.  Its also not the truth, as so many in mainstream medicine tell you, that those 8 glasses a days aren't necessary. 

Well, I certainly agree that the 8 glasses are needed, and I have my surgeon father to thank for that.  When he was in med school in the 1920s this was the rule.

The "Cool Morning Draught" was also a very popular and health promoting traditional naturopathic therapy, and my mother always started her day this way. One of her favorite songs was "Cool Water" as sung by the Sons of the Pioneers.  She was lucky enough to have come from the place that supplies artesian wells drinking water to New Orleans.

Seems too that forward thinking and health supporting doctors agree - one who I think offers trustworthy and practical advice about all aspects of healthy living.

DEHYDRATION CHECK:  If your tongue feels at all raspy 
or like sandpaper then you too aren't getting enough water.

from Dr. John Briffa -
I sat down two days ago with some ambition to write a blog post (or two). In the end I did not write a word. Why? As I explained to my girlfriend, ‘my brain wasn’t working’. Try as I might, I found the whole idea of writing anything cogent too much. I did a quick scan of things that might have caused this state. I was not short on sleep. Neither had I eaten any wheat (I’ve found from experience this tends to turn my brain off).
Then I wondered if I might be dehydrated. It was about 4.00 in the afternoon, and I could only remember passing water twice all day – not a good sign. Plus, there was no doubt in my mind that I had drunk only a small proportion of the water I would normally consume when, say, in my own home. I stepped up my water intake and felt quite quickly revived. It might have been a placebo response, but maybe not.
This morning I decided to see if there was any recent evidence on the impact of dehydration on mental functioning, and did indeed come across a relevant study [1]. In this research, 25 women were subjected to a variety of assessments of mood, mental functioning and wellbeing in a normally hydrated state, as well as a dehydrated state. On one occasion, dehydration was induced with intermittent exercise but not heat. On another occasion, dehydration was induced not just with exercise, but by administration of the diuretic drug frusemide (furosemide).
Overall, dehydration with or without frusemide led to an average of 1.36 per cent of body mass. Just to put this into perspective, for someone weighing 70 kg, this would equate to about 1 kg (or 1 litre) of dehydration. In other words, this extent of dehydration would be described as ‘mild’.
At this level of dehydration, basic cognitive (brain) function was not significantly affected. But other functions were, including the amount of perceived effort used by women to complete a task. My experience yesterday meant that I could totally relate to this.
In addition, the concentration and mood of the women were also adversely affected. The women were more fatigued too, and were more prone to headaches. All this, remember, was the result of relatively mild dehydration.
None of this actually proves my inertia yesterday was caused by something as simple and rectifiable as dehydration, but it is at least consistent with it. I’d say as far a New Year resolutions go, many of us could do a lot worse than just to ensure we’re decently hydrated. How much should we drink? I suggest enough to ensure our urine stays pale yellow in colour throughout the day.
References: 1. Armstrong LE, et al. Mild Dehydration Affects Mood in Healthy Young Women J Nutr January 1, 2012 jn.111.142000

Advanced Care Chiropractic offers this short report -

Just because it is winter and it is cold and rainy, doesn’t mean you can’t get dehydrated!  During these months we are inside more, with heaters going, and we don’t have that natural thirst mechanism.  So most of the patients I see ARE dehydrated.
Water is your body’s principal chemical component, comprising 60-70% of your weight. Every system in your body depends on water.  Even mild dehydration can sap your energy and make you tired. 
Lack of water increases fibrosis and cross-linking in collagen, resulting in advanced wrinkling,  stiff and easily injured joints, and degeneration of joints and discs.  
It also makes chiropractic adjustments more difficult, more painful, and less effective. 
Every day you lose water through your breath, perspiration, urine and bowel movements. For your body to function properly, you must replenish its water supply by consuming beverages and foods that contain water.
1) How Much?  The US National Research Council recommends 1 mL of water for every Calorie you eat.  So if you eat 2000 Calories you should be drinking 2000 mL (2 liters or 2.1 quarts).  My guideline is ½ oz of water for every pound of weight.  So for a 150 lb man or woman, you need 75 oz of water (over 2 quarts).
You may need to modify your total fluid intake depending on how active you are, the environment or weather you are in, your health status, and if you’re pregnant or breast-feeding.
  • Exercise. The more you exercise, the more fluid you’ll need to keep your body hydrated. An extra 1 or 2 cups of water should suffice for short bouts of exercise, but intense exercise lasting more than an hour (for example, running a marathon) requires additional fluid. During long bouts of intense exercise, it’s best to use a sports drink that contains sodium and electrolytes to help replace sodium lost in sweat. Fluid also should be replaced after exercise.
  • Environment. Hot or humid weather can make you sweat and requires additional intake of fluid. Heated indoor air also can cause your skin to lose moisture during wintertime. Further, high altitudes may trigger increased urination and more rapid breathing, which use up more of your fluid reserves.
  • Illnesses or health conditions. Fever, vomiting and diarrhea cause your body to lose additional fluids. In these cases you should drink more water and may even need oral rehydration solutions, such as Gatorade.  Certain conditions such as heart failure and some types of kidney, liver and adrenal diseases may impair excretion of water and even require that you limit your fluid intake.
  • Pregnancy or breast-feeding. Women who are expecting or breast-feeding need additional fluids to stay hydrated. Large amounts of fluid are lost especially when nursing.  It is recommended that pregnant women drink 2.4 liters (about 10 cups) of fluids daily and women who breast-feed 3.0 liters (about 12.5 cups).
2) Don’t wait until you are thirsty!   It’s generally not a good idea to use thirst alone as a guide for when to drink. By the time you becomes thirsty, it is possible to be already dehydrated.  Be aware that as you get older your body is less able to sense dehydration and send your brain signals of thirst. 
3) Avoid drinking at night! Don’t try to catch up for not drinking during the day by drinking too much in the evening.  Avoid drinking 2 hours before bedtime.  Unless you LIKE waking up in the middle of the night!
4) Water filters, spring water, bottled waterIf you drink water from a bottle, thoroughly clean or replace the bottle often. Refill only bottles that are designed for reuse.  In general spring water from a tested source is best, then filtered water.  Don’t drink distilled water. 
5) Drink Warm or Room Temperature Water  You wouldn’t put ice water in a baby’s water bottle, a pet dish or a house plant would you?  Then avoid it for yourself too.  Traditional Chinese Medicine declares that cold drinks “shock” the body and blocks the normal flow of energy. 
6) Can You Drink Too Much?  Though rare, it is possible to drink too much water. When your kidneys are unable to excrete the excess water, the electrolyte content of the blood is diluted, resulting in a condition called hyponatremia.   Endurance athletes such as marathon runners who drink large amounts of water are at higher risk of hyponatremia.  In general, though, drinking too much water is rare in healthy adults who consume an average American diet. 

Selections from Natural Health News

Dec 26, 2007
Lose weight with water. Water is essential for everybody - it is also the key to losing weight. If you haven't been drinking enough water, your body has developed a pattern of storing water. This water retention equals extra ...

Apr 03, 2008
The hot topic in current news seems to be water, and how much you don't need. This topic has made the news several times in the past few years, sometimes to the chagrin of health advocates who believe water is life giving. 

Aug 24, 2010
Drinking water with meals has always been a point of discussion in natural health care. We have learned, and educate others about water and how important it is for health. We also always have suggested to drink water ...

Tuesday, December 27, 2011

How big is the bang from osteoporosis drugs?

From Susan Brown, PhD

Answering the question “how big is the bang from osteoporosis drugs?” can be quite challenging.
One reason is that the statistical calculations are complex and highly manipulated making them difficult to understand. Another is that the subjects included in the drug studies are generally highly-selected and may not represent “real-world” populations.
Recently scientists took an important step to help us separate hype from reality in regard to the benefits of bone drugs.
Researchers asked if “real-world” patients taking bone drugs received the same fracture-reduction benefits seen in the clinical trials. After analysis of hundreds of studies, they found that highly compliant, “real world” patients on osteoporosis drugs experienced a 21% reduction in all clinical fractures. This compares to the 24% overall clinical fracture reduction experienced by subjects in osteoporosis drug clinical trials.
What a different messages than we often hear — such as how bone drugs reduce your chance of fracture by 50%! Or have you ever been told that the fracture reduction on bone drugs is really more like 21-24%? That is — if you use the drug faithfully.
Now compare this 21-24% fracture-reduction benefit from bone drugs to the studies documenting that those taking vitamin D in any dose (much less a therapeutic dose) experience a 23-26% reduction in fractures. It seems to me that the bang from osteoporosis drugs isn’t quite as big as we’ve been led to believe.
As your bone health advocate, I congratulate these researchers on the enormous effort to analyze and synthesize data from hundreds of studies. I also congratulate the drug company which funded this study for clarifying the real fracture/reduction benefit of today’s bone drugs.

Wilkes, et al. 2010. “Bisphosphonates and osteoporotic fractures: a cross-design synthesis of results among compliant/persistent postmenopausal women in clinical practice versus randomized controlled trials.” Osteoporosis International 21:679-688
Bischoff-Ferrari, HA et al. 2005. Fracture prevention with vitamin D supplementation: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. JAMA, 293(18): 2257-2264

The Week in Bone Health | How big is the bang from osteoporosis drugs?

Selections from Natural Health News

Sep 06, 2011
The osteoporosis drug zoledronic acid (Reclast) should not be used in patients with significant renal impairment, and physicians should screen patients for kidney dysfunction before starting them on the drug, the FDA said. ...
Aug 16, 2009
Another Big PhARMA fiasco, as all the current osteoporosis drugs seem to be. Of course you don't hear too much about their fluoride content and how this damages the thyroid and bone health, but then how would they mask ...
Oct 02, 2009
Osteoporosis drug Forteo linked with bone cancer. BLACK BOX WARNING FOR FORTEO, a gentically engineered pharmaceutical. POTENTIAL RISK OF OSTEOSARCOMA: In male and female rats, teriparatide caused an ...
Jan 24, 2009
***Just remember that as bone density leads to brittle bones and fracture, so do the prescription osteoporosis drugs. ... Part of this missing link is the bone-damaging impact from many non-osteoporosis drugs. Another is that ...

Thursday, December 22, 2011

Creeping Diseases

How we're fooled into using more medicine than we need.

This is a guest post from independent medical investigative journalist Jeanne Lenzer. She is a former Knight Science Journalism Fellow and a frequent contributor to BMJ, and has published works in  The Atlantic, The New York Times Magazine, Discover, The New Republic, and other outlets.
When doctors recommend tests, drugs or surgeries to prevent bad outcomes (think cholesterol-lowering agents to prevent strokes or cardiac stents to prevent heart attacks) they tap into our deepest sense of what constitutes commonsense: An ounce of prevention. Catch it early. A stitch in time.
It can’t be a bad thing to catch problems early, can it?
Unfortunately, one of the toughest things to explain is why detecting some illnesses at their earliest stages can cause more harm than good. Take this example: Since elevated cholesterol is associated with a higher risk of cardiovascular disease, doctors often prescribe drugs known as statins to people with elevated cholesterol levels in the hopes of reducing their risk of a heart attack or stroke.
Here comes the part that’s tough to explain – because it is so counterintuitive: Statins only help individuals who already have had a heart attack or stroke (with a few exceptions, and more on that later).
Of course, this makes no sense to most people. Isn’t the whole point of taking cholesterol-lowering agents to prevent a heart attack? Why should anyone wait until after a heart attack or stroke to begin taking a drug designed to prevent a heart attack or stroke?
The answer rests with disease creep and the simple statistical quirks that come with it. In the past, doctors treated diseases that caused symptoms. But now we have tests and imaging machines that can detect risk factors and illnesses in their earliest stages. Like cholesterol. Elevated cholesterol is not a disease. It doesn’t cause symptoms. It is a risk factor. People with high cholesterol levels are somewhat more likely to develop a heart attack or stroke, but they are at far less risk than individuals who already have cardiovascular disease. This is the definition of disease creep: when pre-conditions or risk factors are treated as if they are the same as the actual disease state.
Here’s a thought experiment (with purposefully exaggerated numbers) to help understand this puzzle: Imagine a group of people who have the rare but awful Disease A, which is so terrible that all of its victims will die. Now imagine the discovery of Wonder Drug X, which cures half of the patients with Disease A. Unfortunately, Wonder Drug X does have a pretty bad side effect profile – it’s a very powerful drug, after all – and 10 percent of people who take it will die from liver failure. Despite this worrisome side effect, Wonder Drug X is truly an advance for patients with Disease A: For every 200 patients with the disease who are treated, 100 will now survive and only 10 of the 100 survivors will die of the drug’s side effects. That means 90 more people out of 200 will survive thanks to Wonder Drug X.
But now imagine a different group of 200 people, who don’t actually have disease A, but instead have a genetic marker which “is associated with” Disease A. In this scenario only 1 in a million people in the general population will get disease A. If you have the genetic marker, the risk ismuch higher, such that 2 of these 200 people will develop the disease at some time in the future. The genetic test gets highly promoted – “find out your risk early, because we now have a treatment that works, and the sooner you’re treated, the better!” There is a tiny grain of truth to this – of the 2 people identified by the genetic test, 1 (50%) will now be saved by Wonder Drug A.   This might sound just as good as before; here’s a group of people with 10,000 times (!) the risk of the general population to develop a uniformly fatal disease. Surely it’s worth taking a drug that can cure that disease in half the cases, isn’t it?
Read the complete article here

Support for Healthy Fats

For years I have been educating about the need for healthy fat in your diet, and for the sake of your health.

I haven't been alone in this effort as you may know if you follow Weston A. Price and others who know the real benefits of fat.  And yes, lard counts.

And remember that canola is not considered a healthy fat and it is a trans fat, even if the following article suggests it is not.  Canola is also toxic to your liver and too monounsaturated for health as well as being for the most part a GMO substance. Please read our articles about canola or request the mot recent issue of our newsletter fmi.
submitted by Emily Main   -    Olive oil is sooooo five minutes ago. People who are into healthy cooking oils and fats have moved on to duck fat, real lard, goose renderings, and coconut oil, according to a new report published by the market research firm Packaged Facts and the food trend spotters at the Center for Culinary Development.
Interest in these long-forgotten, more traditional fats is all part of the back-to-the-land movement that has triggered the growth of farmer's markets and reconnected people to whole fruits and vegetables, grass-fed dairy products, and pasture-raised meats, the report's authors note. It's no longer enough for top-line chefs and adventurous home cooks to eat grass-fed steaks; those steaks need to be finished with duck fat or real butter.
And it's not just the fact that these fats are traditional or come with a sense of nostalgia. Nutrition science is beginning to turn the idea that all fat is bad for you on its head, with high-profile nutritionists like Walter Willett, professor of epidemiology and nutrition at Harvard School of Public Health and a professor of medicine at the Harvard Medical School, working to debunk the idea that low-fat diets are healthier. Many of the recommendations that we all follow regarding fat, he's found, are based on rather weak science that has been repeatedly questioned over the decades. That type of diet is also depriving people of a variety of nutrients found only in the animal fats and other cooking oils that have been demonized under the assumption that saturated fat is bad for you.
As a general rule, whatever kinds of fat you buy, keep your chemical exposures to a minimum by buying certified-organic plant oils and pastured or grass-fed animal fats.
Olive oil remains one of the healthiest oils you can drizzle over a plate of veggies, but if you're interested in branching out, here are 6 other healthy varieties of cooking oil now gaining traction in the culinary world:• Ghee. Also known as "Indian clarified butter" or "drawn butter," ghee is butter that has been melted over a low temperature so that all the water content has boiled away and the milk fats have been skimmed off (check out our instructions on how to make your own ghee). What remains is a nutty, intensely flavored fat that withstands higher cooking temperatures than butter and can even be stored in your cabinets, rather than in the fridge (it won't go rancid). Indians believe it has healing qualities. And it's even more nutritious than butter: The process of creating ghee concentrates the conjugated linoleic acid—a healthy cancer-fighter that also prevents atherosclerosis (hardening of the heart's arteries)—found in the butter.
• Rice bran oil. Rice bran oil is quickly becoming the "go-to oil for fried food," the report found, particularly in high-end, independent, and ethnic restaurants. It tolerates a much higher cooking heat than canola or peanut oil, and like both of those, it's trans fat free. Health-wise, animal studies have shown that rice bran oil (which is made from the inner husks and germ of rice) can lower LDL ("bad") cholesterol levels, but it contains high levels of polyunsaturated fat, which go rancid quickly and need to be refrigerated to maintain shelf life.
• Lard & schmaltz. The prime example of fats we all thought were bad for us, lard and schmaltz (rendered chicken, pork, or goose fat) may have been wrongly demonized for years. The main fat in lard—oleic acid—is a monounsaturated fat linked to decreased risk of depression, says Drew Ramsey, MD, coauthor of The Happiness Diet (Rodale, 2010). Those same monounsaturated fats, which make up 45 percent of the fat in lard, are responsible for lowering LDL levels while leaving HDL ("good") cholesterol levels alone. Lard and schmaltz also tolerate high cooking temperatures—they're often recommended for frying—and have long shelf lives.
• Duck fat. Like lard, duck fat is high in monounsaturated fats, which make up 50 percent of its total fat content, with saturated fat making up just 14 percent (less than butter). Most of that fat is healthy linoleic acid, an essential fatty acid that keeps cells healthy, boosts calcium absorption, and aids in kidney function. Though it's still used mostly in high-end restaurants, it's showing up on specialty food store shelves and even some bigger retailers, such as Williams Sonoma. It can tolerate high cooking temperatures and has a long shelf life, but, like ghee, it has an intense flavor, so it's not a great all-purpose fat (and, considering the prices it goes for, you wouldn't want to use it every day, anyway!).
• Coconut oil. As with the other fats here, coconut oil's high saturated fat content (92 percent) has earned it an—undeserved—bad reputation over the years. "But there are a lot of health benefits that go beyond just what kind of fat it is," says Trevor Holly Cates, ND, a naturopathic physician with a practice in the Golden Door Spa at the Waldorf Astoria in Park City, Utah, and a board member of the American Association of Naturopathic Physicians. For instance, coconut oil is high in lauric acid, a nutrient our bodies need to help our immune systems. One of the only other major dietary sources for lauric acid is breast milk. Coconut oils are very common now in regular and specialty grocery stores, so keep an eye out for them.
• Nut & seed oils. Rounding out the report's trendy fats are nut and seed oils, such as walnut, avocado, pecan, and pumpkin seed oils, which are showing up not just in regular grocery stores, but in chain and fast-food restaurants, as well. Each different nut or seed oil has its own unique chemical makeup, but most of them, with the exception of avocado oil, have high levels of polyunsaturated fats compared to the healthier monounsaturated fats. They're good for salad dressings, but they do go rancid quickly and shouldn't be used for cooking.
Source: Sustainable Food News (16 Dec. 2011).

Communication Key in Health Care

DURHAM, N.H., Dec. 22 (UPI) -- Efforts to increase physician-nurse communication and build teamwork help reduce surgery-related complications such as blood clots, U.S. researchers say.
Implementation of the Medical Team Training Program and Surgical Morbidity involved the surgical team taking a cue from aviation and having the surgical team use a checklist before surgery, as well as debriefings afterward, as pilots and co-pilots do.
The study, published in the journal Archives of Surgery, said the communication-boosting program resulted in 15 percent fewer complications such as blood clots and infections.
Yinong Young-Xu of EpiPatterns, a New Hampshire data analysis firm, and colleagues at the National Center for Patient Safety, Department of Veterans Affairs, White River Junction, Dartmouth Medical School, Baylor College of Medicine, Michael E. DeBakey VA Medical Center and the University of Michigan used data from the Veterans Health Administration Surgical Quality Improvement Program.
The analysis involved 119,383 sampled procedures from 74 Veterans Health Administration facilities that provide care to veterans.
© 2011 United Press International, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Read more:

Long Term Mobile Exposure and Hormones

How does long term exposure to base stations and mobile phones affect human hormone profiles?

Emad F. Eskandera, Selim F. Estefana, Ahmed A. Abd-Raboua
aHormones Department, Medical Research Division, National Research Centre, Cairo, Egypt
Received 9 December 2010; revised 2 November 2011; Accepted 6 November 2011. Available online 26 November 2011.



This study is concerned with assessing the role of exposure to radio frequency radiation (RFR) emitted either from mobiles or base stations and its relations with human's hormone profiles.

Design and methods

All volunteers' samples were collected for hormonal analysis.


This study showed significant decrease in volunteers' ACTH, cortisol, thyroid hormones, prolactin for young females, and testosterone levels.


The present study revealed that high RFR effects on pituitary–adrenal axis.


► This study is concerned with assessing the role of long-term exposure to high radio frequency radiation emitted either from mobile phones or from base stations and its relations with human's hormone profiles. ► All volunteers are followed for 6 years and blood samples were collected regularly every 3 years for time intervals of 1 year, 3 years and 6 years for hormonal analysis and the blood samples were taken at 8.0 a.m. ► This study showed reduction in volunteers' plasma ACTH, serum cortisol levels. Also, they showed decrease in the release of the thyroid hormones especially T3. In addition, each of their serum prolactin in young females (14–22 years), and testosterone levels significantly dropped due to long-term exposure to radio frequency radiation. Conversely, serum prolactin levels for adult females (25–60 years) significantly rose with increasing exposure time. ► In conclusion, the present study revealed that high radio frequency radiation effects on pituitary–adrenal axis represented in the reduction of ACTH, cortisol, thyroid hormones, prolactin in young females, and testosterone levels.
Keywords: Mobiles; Base stations; Radio frequency radiation; Hormone profiles

Article Outline

Corresponding Author Contact InformationCorresponding author at: Hormones Department, Medical Research Division, National Research Centre, Cairo, 12622, Egypt. Fax: + 20 2 33370931.