Oklahoma City NewsChannel 4 traveled to Dallas, Texas, to speak with Dr. William Rea, one of the foremost experts in the country for Electromagnetic Hypersensitivity (EHS).
“I think it’s the coming disaster of the 21st century,” Dr. Rea says.
“If you have problems with things like the smart meter, you may be getting the wrong impulses, … electrical impulses that come into the body and cause disruption of that synchronous movement that you are supposed to have from electrical impulse[s],” Dr. Rea explains.
He says our cells are protected by membranes which have characteristics that are electromagnetic in nature. The membranes allow crucial materials like calcium, sodium, and potassium to pass through.
Dr. Rea believes the radiofrequency emissions from various devices, like smart meters, interrupts this process and causes health problems.
Oklahoma City NewsChannel 4 actually did a series of recent reports dealing with smart meters over the period of July 23 to 24, 2013. To see all three videos, refer to the link below. The second video on this web page features Dr. William Rea.
William J. Rea, M.D. is a thoracic, cardiovascular and general surgeon with an added interest in the environmental aspects of health and disease. Founder of the Environmental Health Center – Dallas (EHC-D) in 1974, Dr. Rea is currently director of this highly specialized Dallas-based medical facility. Dr. Rea was awarded the Jonathan Forman Gold Medal Award in 1987 for outstanding research in environmental medicine, The Herbert J. Rinkle Award in 1993 for outstanding teaching, and the 1998 Service Award, all by the American Academy of Environmental Medicine. He is a past president of the American Academy of Environmental Medicine and the Pan American Allergy Society. He has also served on the Science Advisory Board for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Dr. Rea is a fellow of the American College of Surgeons, the American Academy of Environmental Medicine, and the Royal Society of Medicine.
Dr. Rea is the primary author of a published article on the subject of EHS that dates back to 1991. The article was published in the Journal of Bioelectricity, and was entitled, “Electromagnetic Field Sensitivity.” A portion of the abstract for this article is as follows:
“A multiphase study was performed to find an effective method to evaluate electromagnetic field (EMF) sensitivity of patients. … [One phase of the study] involved a single-blind challenge of 100 patients who complained of EMF sensitivity to a series of fields ranging from 0 to 5 MHz in frequency, plus 5 blank challenges. Twenty-five patients were found who were sensitive to the fields, but did not react to the blanks. These were compared in the third phase to 25 healthy naive volunteer controls. None of the volunteers reacted to any challenge, active or blank, but 16 of the EMF-sensitive patients (64%) had positive signs and symptoms scores, plus autonomic nervous system changes. In [another phase of the study], the 16 EMF sensitive patients were rechallenged twice to the frequencies to which they were most sensitive during the previous challenge. The active frequency was found to be positive in 100% of the challenges, while all of the placebo tests were negative.”
In one portion of the actual published article, it states, “The principal signs and symptoms produced were neurological (tingling, sleepiness, headache, dizziness, unconsciousness), musculoskeletal (pain, tightness, spasm, fibrillation), cardiovascular (palpitation, flushing, tachycardia, edema), oral/respiratory (pressure in ears, tooth pain, tightness in chest, dyspnea), gastrointestinal (nausea, belching), ocular (burning), and dermal (itching, burning, prickling pain) … Most reactions were neurological.”
Additionally, the report stated, “In these studies, the preponderance of reactions occurred at one to 10 Hz, which accords well with their observations. However, many reactions also occurred at 50 and 60 Hz, as well as some up to 5 MHz. We conclude that in any given individual, susceptibility may develop to any frequency, and produce reactions.”
The conclusion of the article, again dating back to 1991, was the following:
“We concluded that this study gives strong evidence that electromagnetic field sensitivity exists, and can be elicited under environmentally controlled conditions.”