Pay Attention To This Message From Your Smart Phone Maker!

“One thorn of experience is worth a whole wilderness of warning.”

~ James Russell Lowell

Articles are surfacing daily about the potential harm of cell phone radiation. There are doctors in various disciplines taking time to address this issue as well as discussions, bloggings, videos and posting of conducted studies. And now you have cell phone makers actually putting information in their products as a way to, in my opinion, protect themselves from the possibility of future litigation.

Here is what that information can look like on your smart phone. Fill in the BLANKS with YOUR high tech Smart Phone’s NAME. Do you think they know something that you should know too?

“ ________ has been tested and meets applicable limits for Radio Frequency Exposure.

SPECIFIC ABSORBTION RATE ( SAR) refers to the rate at which the body absorbs RF energies. SAR limits are 1.6 Watt per Kilogram ( over a volume containing a mass of 1 gram of tissue). In countries that follow the United States FCC limit and 2.0 W/Kg ( averaged over 10 grams of tissue) in countries that follow the Council of the European Union limit. During testing, __________ radios are set to their highest transmission levels and placed in positions that stimulate use against the head, with no separation, and near the body, with 10 mm separation.

To REDUCE EXPOSURE to RF energy, use a hands-free option, such as the built – in speakerphone, the supplied headphones, or other similar accessories. CARRY _________ at least 10 mm away from your body to ENDURE EXPOSURE LEVELS REMAIN AT OR BELOW the as-tested levels. Cases with metal parts at or below the as-tested levels. Cases with metal parts may change the RF performance of the device, including its compliance with RF exposure guidelines, in a manner that has not been tested or certified.

SAR values for this device are available at:

Although this device has been tested to determine [ Specific Absorption Rate ] SAR in each band of operation, not all bands are available in all areas. Bands are dependent on your service provider’s wireless and roaming networks.”

They are covering their butts. Shouldn’t you be covering yours? I MEAN YOUR PHONE?

Cieaura Safeguard Holographic Chip For Your EMF Emitting Devices.


Hopefully mine and other warnings in this wilderness will prevent you from ever having to experience that thorn!

Changing not only the way you think but the actions you take. Here’s to your health.
Chipsterhealth, September 22, 2013

READ more about Cieaura’s approach to Smart Phone Safety. START HERE:

You DON’T have time to read then LISTEN to Dr. Gupta

NOTE: Use Your Earbuds! You Do Not Want To Miss A Word Of What Dr. Gupta has to say.

MORE testimonials are available on my YouTube Channel, Chipsterhealth.

If you have questions concerning this product and how it might help you, feel free to email me at

Cieaura products do not diagnose, cure, mitigate treatment or prevent disease or any other medical condition.

Content published here is not read or approved by CieAura before it is posted and does not necessarily represent the views and opinions of CieAura.


Cell Phones: Are You Putting Your Child At Risk?


The ancient Mayans smoked tobacco. The first European settlers smoked tobacco and the ancestors of these first European settlers continued the practice into the settling of what was to become the United States. But none of the people of those time periods smoked it on a daily basis or in quantities sufficient enough to be either aware of its dangers or to actually be dangerous. Fast forward to the late 1800s where the ability to mass produce tobacco took place. Now it became big. Then by the mid 20th century it became really big business to the tune of more than 100 billion cigarettes being produced annually. By now the world population was “hooked”. But something else was happening at the same time. An increase in the incidents of lung cancers directly related to smoking was discovered by British researchers in the 1940s. This resulted in the push for public awareness from which a battle would ensue that would take on almost epic proportions as in the classic battle of David and Goliath. The Tobacco Industry was going to make every effort to prevent that from happening, so they thought. A better educated public would be better able to eliminate or at least reduce this very real health danger. The result of this information at best would put them out of business and at least might diminish their profits. Either way the Tobacco Industry was not going to have any of this. We the people were David, supposedly with no lobby, no money, little knowledge, no power became the thorn in the foot of the Goliath and we made it stumble. But it took time. This Goliath had millions, lobbyist, inside knowledge and tremendous political power. But, through dissemination of pertinent information, perseverance, becoming more informed, legislation began to be enacted to do just that. Legislation with HEALTH WARNINGS began being put on cigarette packages. First it was, “Cigarettes maybe harmful to your health” to “Cigarettes cause cancer, heart disease, emphysema and may complicate pregnancy.

There was success but it took time. A lot of time. The public was very slow to respond. There were a number of things that contributed to that. The obvious was that people supposedly enjoyed smoking or they thought they needed to. It was “cool”. The public did not really know that they were addicted. (Though addiction was a known component, it was vigorously denied by the tobacco industry.) The influence of the media and their campaigns through advertisements, TV and movies had tremendous impact. Add to this that there were no immediate detrimental affects to individuals. (One could see the affects that breathing smoke did to our lungs on a more immediate basis either by looking what it did to a white handkerchief or at x-rays of a smoker’s lungs. ) Because the affects of tobacco smoking or inhaling as in second hand smoke is cumulative, the devastating affects of cancer, heart disease and emphysema usually only rear their ugly heads much later in a person’s life. It took many years for the public to positively respond with actions that would benefit the individual and the masses from a health standpoint. Keeping these points in mind let’s move into the latter quarter of the 20th century and into the beginning of 21st century.

I opened up this blog with this encapsulated history of the tobacco industry because by now it is a familiar one for many people. A similar story is unfolding today on multiple fronts. I am concentrating on the cell phone industry though and that of radio frequencies (EMF) as they pertain to cell phone usage and the potential harm they maybe doing to us all but, especially our CHILDREN. There are a lot of parallels taking place right this moment in this industry much like that which occurred within the tobacco industry. (No, as far as I know the Mayans were not using cell phones.) This may not be a familiar story to you yet, but it will be soon.

The wireless phone idea goes as far back as 1918 or slightly before that period. Its actual implementation came around the 1940s and 1950s but they were known as MOBILE phones. They were huge and cumbersome by today’s standards. These early products were hindered by their high cost and the technology of the day. To give you a better picture of what that might have been like, take 5000 to 40,000 people waiting to get on the 405 freeway in Los Angeles, 2013. ( actually we could even use the Pasadena Freeway of the 1940s and 50s) Now let’s say that those 5000 to 40,000 people could only get on or off either freeway at a very few selected on-ramps at a rate of approximately 3 every 30 minutes. Then those waiting had to wait until another group of 3 got off before they could get on. This is over simplified but I think that you get the idea.

The number of people using these mobile devices was minuscule until the last quarter of the 20th century. Until the latter part of that century they used them sporadically. People then DID NOT keep them to their ears for any real length of time nor CARRY them around on their persons in bras and in pockets. It was not until 1973 that the first true cell phone was developed by Martin Cooper. That device was still too big and expensive to be used by the general public though the bottle neck of 3 calls every 30 minutes had been eclipsed by a wide margin by 1973 there was still a ways to go to truly have high transmission traffic. That would change though at an unprecedented accelerated rate. The cell phone shrunk, the technology vastly improved, the transmission of data became much more efficient, and the phones became more affordable. 1% of the US population used cell phones in 1985. 10 years later that number jumped to a little more than 10%. 2005, another 10 years 75% of the US population had a cell phone! Explosive growth? You bet you. The next 5 years, 2010 100% plus U.S. saturation. (1) By 2012 there are virtually as many cell phones as their are people on the planet. (2) Heck, there maybe more cell phones than toilets.

So, what is the crux of this blog, are you putting your children at risk? Glad you asked.

Just as with smoking, it took a large enough population of smokers with a subset of affected smokers experiencing serious health issues to begin questioning if there was some correlation between the product and the effects of the product. And as was suggested earlier, the fact that such health issues did not occur immediately nor at any significant levels and were cumulative over time, resulted in slow responses. Besides the tobacco industry had the world already hooked making it more difficult for many to make a drastic or dramatic change. For us humans to make an immediate change the problem has to be one of imminent danger. And the effects of smoking were, well in the future and not everyone would be affected.

This same scenario in 2013 applies to the cell phone industry with its cell phone/smart phones. The whole world is now “hooked” on being in touch with each other through the use of these devices. Though admittedly there are definite benefits to having instant communication, Other than ESP (which is such a some time proposition so far) we all now have the ability to stay in touch with virtually any person on the planet, 24/7! And as it turns out there is another push for public awareness as to the possible health concerns for all of us. (Health notices are beginning to show up on cell phone lately) The battle is just beginning. It centers around the highly probable effects of EMF (Electro Magnetic Fields) upon our cells and DNA. There is research popping up globally that there is a higher risk of developing various types of cancers conditional upon how long we use these devices, the signal strength of these devices (or lack thereof), and the places where we either store them and use them on our persons. Many of you already know where you put your phone, women your bras, men and women your pockets. We put the phones to our ears to talk over extensive periods of time. In each of these cases two things are working against us, the length of time on our persons and the strength of or lack of strength of RF (radio frequency signals). There is even speculation that there maybe a correlation between children’s behavioral issues deriving from prolonged exposure of the fetus while in the womb. Other studies are pointing to possible increased neurological problems such as headaches, dizziness and more. Is it conclusive? Not yet. But, these issues were not even on the radar 40 years ago. Just as the effects of smoking was not initially either.

For now, the emphasis here are the topics relating to CHILDREN because they are at the greatest risk. Reports and studies surfacing globally are attempting to give the public pertinent information in this regard that RF frequencies penetrate farther into a child’s brain because of physiological reasons which the diagram below shows.


(A) Children absorb more energy than adults from the same phone.
(B) Tumors in mid-brain are more deadly than those in the temporal lobe.
(C) Children’s cells are producing more quickly than adults.
(D) Children’s immune system is not as well developed as adults.
(E) Longer potential for life time exposure for children than adults.

Pregnant women would also be wise to avoid cell phones as much as possible. In 2008, researchers analyzed data from nearly 13,000 children and found that exposure to cell phones while in the womb, and also during childhood, were linked to behavioral difficulties. Using handsets just two or three times a day during pregnancy was enough to raise the risk of their babies developing hyperactivity and difficulties with conduct, emotions, and relationships by the time they reached school age — and the risk became even greater if the children also used the phones themselves before the age of seven. (4)

Doctors are seeing an increase in these areas listed below.

• parotid gland tumors
• brain tumors
• non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma
• leukemia
• eye cancer
• salivary gland tumors

What you have seen above or are about to read below should not be taken lightly as if it were Ripley’s Believe It Or Not.

‘… it is more prudent to take seriously the reports by multiple investigators that radiofrequency can damage DNA and increase the risk for brain tumors, and for industry-independent agencies to provide needed funding for detailed research to ascertain the molecular basis for such effects.” Dr. Ronald B. Herberman suggests this as “the precautionary principle”.

• Ronald B. Herberman, MD, Director Emeritus of the University of Pittsburgh Cancer Institute (3)


“Science has shown increased risk of brain tumors from use of cell phones, as well as increased risk of eye cancer, salivary gland tumors, testicular cancer, non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma and leukemia.”

• Lloyd Morgan, lead author and member of the Bioelectromagnetics Society.

“The scientific data show, with a high degree of confidence, that mobile phone exposure is associated with an increased brain tumor risk.

“The age group below 20 years is facing the greatest risk, which for malignant (deadly) brain tumors is about 400 percent, compared to non-exposed.”
‘….some of the industry’s own research found that cell phones caused brain tumors, and subsequent industry-funded studies from 2000 to 2002 also showed an elevated risk of brain cancer.”

“One such study reportedly found a 20 percent increased risk of brain tumor for every year of cell phone use!”

• Dr. Gerd Oberfeld, M.D., the Speaker for
 Environmental Medicine for the Austrian Medical Association in Vienna. (3)

In 2005, the British-based National Radiological Protection Board suggested children younger than age 8 should not be given a cell phone as it risks exposing their young bodies to harmful radiation.
Last year Toronto’s department of public health followed suit, warning that because of possible side effects from radio frequency radiation, children under 8 should only use a cell phone in emergencies, and teenagers should limit calls to less than 10 minutes. (3)

Few people realize this, but brain cancer has surpassed leukemia as the number one cancer killer in children, and many scientists believe this is directly linked to the exponential increase in cell phone use and other wireless devices.(3)

Australia has seen an increase in pediatric brain cancers of 21 percent in just one decade. This is consistent with studies showing a 40 percent brain tumor increase across the board in Europe and the U.K. over the last 20 years. (3)

Experts Adamantly Claim Harmful Effects are Now Provable

Experts in the area of the biological effects of electromagnetic frequencies (EMF) and wireless technologies believe there’s virtually no doubt that cell phones and related gadgets are capable of causing not only cancer but contributing to a wide variety of other conditions, from depression and diabetes to heart irregularities and impaired fertility. Researchers have now identified numerous mechanisms of harm, which explain how electromagnetic fields impact your cells and damages your DNA. (4)

Dr. Devra Davis, author of “Disconnect – The Truth About Cellphone Radiation,” has been researching the safety hazards of radiation emanating from your cell phone. Like many people, Dr. Davis just didn’t believe the possibility of cell phones being dangerous―until she studied it. And now, with the toxicological and epidemiological evidence to back up her claims, she’s trying to get the word out that cell phone radiation is not only dangerous, but can be downright lethal.(4)

‘…. Your cell phone is not necessarily a safe device,’

“The other thing to be aware of is that we haven’t had any good studies in the pediatric population. A child’s skull is much thinner. The scalp is much thinner. And the amount of radiation that goes into the pediatric brain is much higher than in the adult. So, we should be cautious with how we allow our children to use a cell phone. They’re going to be the ones not only using it at a much younger age, but using it over a much longer duration. (5)

‘But what’s important to recognize is that, if you do develop BRAIN CANCER, it’s one of the most DEVASTING illnesses that you can have. So, if you WANT to take PRECAUTIONS, at least you’re aware that your cell phone is not NECCESARILY a SAFE DEVICE, ’

• Dr. Keith Black, Keith L. Black, Chairman of the Department of Neurosurgery at Cedar Sinai Hospital is an internationally renowned neurosurgeon and scientist.

So, are you able to answer the question, are you putting your child at risk?

I hope that I have gotten you to seriously delve into the information here. This is one of those times that it will be good to talk to oneself and come up with a satisfactory reply.

READ more about Cieaura’s approach to protecting your children and you from cell phone EMF. START HERE:

You DON’T have time to read then go HERE:

Changing not only the way you think but the actions you take. Here’s to your health.
Chipsterhealth, Aug. 08, 2013



Cieaura products do not diagnose, cure, mitigate treatment or prevent disease or any other medical condition.

Content published here is not read or approved by CieAura before it is posted and does not necessarily represent the views and opinions of CieAura.

(1) Wikipedia
History of Mobile Phones – Early services – 0G

(2) Huff ington Post – Per the United Nations telecom agency.

(3) Dr. Mercola article

(4) Dr. Mercola article

(5) Dr. Keith Black

“Let Them Eat Cake” and Cell Phone Radiation

“LET THEM EAT CAKE”. (Qu’ils mangent de la brioche)
(incorrectly attributed to Marie Attoinette and not quite the correct translation)*

Though the above quote has been incorrectly attributed to Marie Attoinette as well as the translation not being spot on, this quote was used back in the 1700s to convey how the rich and powerful were perceived to think of the common man of that day. It is believed this was one of the catalyst that led to the French Revolution of July 14, 1789.

History has shown us that kingdoms, religious entities, and governments kept their flocks in ignorance for what these entities believed were for the good of us. They believed that the masses preferred to be led. They must have been right to a large extent. We know this because for eons only the elite of society had access to knowledge from reading and writing and with it they controlled us. In actuality it was for the benefit of those in power and authority. In actuality, we allowed them to lead us at first because of ignorance and then because we were conditioned to be led. Old habits are hard to quit let alone change on either side of the coin.

Today, these same attitudes exist but knowledge is much more readily available and more difficult to prevent access. But, our conditioning is still intact from centuries of conditioning. The following statement probably summarizes this point — ‘Because the government (king, religious authority) says it is, it must be true. They would not allow product or services to be offered if it would harm us’. Think again!

Let me give one poignant example. The process of getting acknowledgement of LEAD’S TOXICITY and stopping the use of IT in paints and products in the United States was arduous and lengthy. Lead is toxic to all of us, but again more so for our children at the developing stage of life. Lead acts like a mineral to our bodies, so when it enters our bloodstreams it is distributed throughout our entire bodies lessening the ability of our blood cells to carry oxygen because the cells are damaged. And if it gets into our bones, which it eventually will contingent upon toxicity levels, then it will even hamper the production of blood cells. What are some of the effects? Speech problems, nervous system damage, seizures, slower development, kidney problems and more. Yet for decades parents were being blamed by individuals and the paint industry at large for the problems that were surfacing with their children after extended exposure to lead based products. Beginning around the early part of the 20th century paints contained up to 70% lead. Children were dying from it, having convulsions for “unknown reasons”. As far back as the 1920s the industry knew that lead was harmful and lethal however that same industry ferociously fought its regulation and it removal from products. In the 1970s, some 50 plus years later even a major TV station was being threatened with lawsuits for airing this issue on their popular shows before meaningful action took place in 1978.

Here is the point of this particular blog. Where excessive money, profit and power are concerned this idea of “ First, Do No Harm”, tends to break down. I just gave an example of lead in paint. But there are others products such as lead in gasoline, emissions from cars, DDT, the cancer causing aspect of smoking, dumping contaminants into our water networks, asbestos, GMO (Genetically Modified Organisms) and, you guessed it now cell phone radiation, where the “INDUSTRY” lobby is so strong and so intent that [it appears that] profit and power trumps the overall well being of our human family.

So, what does “LET THEM EAT CAKE” and the emissions of EMF have to do with what I have just talked about?

Two things. Is there legitimate reason to think that the industry is oblivious to the public’s concerns or could it care less about the effects EMF [ may have upon] has upon us, even if it may at present [seem to] only affect a few. Or I am using this term wrongly to demonize an otherwise innocuous product or industry?

The second thing is, have any of you reading this looked into the possible effects of Cell Phone Radiation upon us all or more so upon our children? Is it legitimate to think that the Cell Phone Industry is doing what most big industry does – that is hide the genuine health issues from the masses? Are our concerns valid in this regard? Or are those of us concerned or affected by EMF just conjuring up a problem where none exists? I think past history gives one cause to be at least a little cynical. Tending to err on the side of caution in this regard should be the order of the day, don’t you think?**

** Read about Cieaura’s approach to protecting yourself and family members from EMF.:

Here’s to your health and changing not only the way you think but the actions you take.
Chipsterhealth, April 24, 2013

Cieaura products do not diagnose, cure, mitigate treatment or prevent disease or any other medical condition.

Content published here is not read or approved by CieAura before it is posted and does not necessarily represent the views and opinions of CieAura.

* Wikipedia.
There is no evidence that Marie Antoinette ever said that starving peasants should “eat cake” if they had no bread. In fact, the story of a fatuous noblewoman who said “Let them eat cake!” appears in the philosopher Jean-Jacques Rousseau’s Confessions, which was written around 1766 (when Marie Antoinette was just 11 years old).
What Marie Antoinette was actually like was beside the point; the image of the queen was far more influential than the woman herself.

Using the speaker phone reduces radiation to the head as do headsets which emit significantly less radiation than cell phones. Text instead of talk; it takes less power to send a text message than to send a voice message (talk) which means less radiation. Also, texting keeps radiation away from your head. Fewer signal bars on your phone means that it omits more radiation trying to get the signal to the tower. Take or make calls when your phone has a strong signal. If you have a poor signal, stay off the phone or keep it away from your head, out of your bras, and away from your pockets.

A “C _ _ _ _ m” For Your Mobile Phone?!

A “C _ _ _ _ m” For Your Mobile Phone?

Ah! Did that pique your interest? I sure the hell hope so! Especially, pregnant women and parents with children in the developing stages of life. Listen up! No [carefully] peruse the contents of this blog to the end. You won’t be able to say that you didn’t know. You just might decide to take action. And, you will find the missing letters.

First a very brief history of wireless. Way back around the very early 20th century AT&T was thinking about bringing wireless communication to the public. It was shelved because they felt it would cannabalize their monopoly on wired communication hardware and services. Also, given the infancy of wireless technology of that time you can imagine the size of the equipment,

Three quarters of a century later the first mobile device used extensively by Captain James T. Kirk made its debut on American television, well almost. Actually the time frame is about right but not the actual inventor nor place it debuted. American Martin Cooper was the inventor and this first mobile device was introduced to the world in Japan. The cost was quite prohibited, $3,500.00US. Then in 1996 Nokia introduced the precursor to our modern day smart phones. Though mobile devices have grown tremendously throughout the world “smartphone” growth was much slower until very recently. It has been estimated that from 1996 until 2011 “smartphone” growth was about three quarters of a billion users. By 2014 another 1 billion people will be using these! 1 billion new users inside of 3 years instead of almost 15 years! 2 billion of us of the 7 billion plus people will be walking around with these devices! More people than ever will be tied to these devices as if it were a life giving umbilical cord. We will use them for communication by all the means currently available of course and maybe some not seen. They will continue to be fashion statements, status symbols, they are thought to be will sexy. We will continue to bling bling them (see I made that into a verb) and add all the personal individuality to them as — well there are people. We are now, and will continue giving them to our very young progeny (as baby sitting devices). And, we will continue putting them next to our ears and talk incessantly (business people and kids), in our front pockets (men), in our back pockets and bras (women). We continue sleeping with them next to our heads while on (kids and teenagers). We will continue to be tethered, physically or wirelessly by our headsets and bluetooth connectors.

BUT, the one thing we 2 billion plus people are not doing is PROTECTING ourselves from the very thing we find such a necessary part of our lives! These devices emit Radio Frequencies that are considered low level micro waves. Supposedly, not at a level to cause biological harm to humans.(1)

I used the word supposedly for this very reason — almost all manufacturer’s of cell phones print somewhere in their manuals a warning of sorts. It is not explicit like saying WARNING. But, it is written in a way that definitely will draw minimal attention to this very important issue that — caution should be taken as to how close such devices should be placed to the body. So, by now a QUESTION should be moving through your brain, WHY? Many in the cell phone industry might answer with this response – ‘Do not worry because our products meet FCC (Federal Communication Commission) & radiation emission guidelines on SAR (Specific Absorbtion Rate)’. Well, these guidelines are just that – guidelines. According to their own statements a ‘single SAR value does not provide sufficient information about the amount of RF exposure under typical usage conditions to reliably compare individual cell phone models.'(2)

I could definitely go into a more detailed discussion of what is beginning to be brought to light as to the possible adverse physiological affects of this burgeoning new technology upon us. I could also could get into a more technical discussion, but for now I will reserve that for another blog. The purpose of this blog is to create an awareness that will allow you to take some type of action to PROTECT yourselves and especially your progeny. (Just in case)

Before I leave you to ponder what I have written, here are some statements by two individuals looking into this topic. Dr. Nora Volkow, the lead author of the JAMA study, said modeling studies have shown that a child’s brain would absorb more radiation than those of adults. ( Some studies have shown that radiation absorbtion rate for children’s brains is twice as much compared to adults because of children’s thinner skulls and because their brains have higher water content). But Volkow said she’s unaware of studies that have looked at the different developmental effects. Some studies have suggested that the radiation can cross or affect the entire brain of children, who are still developing, versus a particular area in adults,” said Dr. Stephanie Wagner, co-medical director of the neuro-oncology program at Indiana University Health and the IU Simon Cancer Center in Indianapolis. But studies looking at the effects of electromagnetic radiation in children and the risk of epilepsy and behavioral problems such as attention deficit disorder and aggressive behavior showed conflicting results, Wagner said. Still, why take a chance, Volkow said. She suggested that parents “teach their children to use their cell phones with a wired earphone and/or use the speakerphone mode and to avoid putting their cell phones directly on their ear.” (3)

We parents, educators, and adults today no longer talk of sex with our youth in terms of “the birds and bees”. We openly discuss sex and the responsibilities that can go along with that including protection. The “c _ _ _ _ m” (4) is one device that can afford protection. So too in this area of cell phone EMF ( electro magnetic frequencies), we should be openly educating as well as taking precautionary measures for ourselves and our children now and not later. Is there a “c _ _ _ _ m” (4) for your mobile device? I don’t know and maybe not in the literal sense of the word. However various precautionary means are available now that we can all do as we see, hear and discover more information bearing light on this topic concerning our health.

You can read more about one type of protection at:

Here’s To Your Health, Chipsterhealth
March 20, 2013

If you have questions concerning this product and how it might help you, feel free to email me at:

You can also watch some testimonials on how Cieaura is helping others at my YouTube channel. Just type Chipsterhealth in the search window when you are on YouTube.


Cieaura products do not diagnose, cure, mitigate treatment or prevent disease or any other medical condition.

Content published here is not read or approved by CieAura before it is posted and does not necessarily represent the views and opinions of CieAura.


(1). FDA. Food & Drug Administration:

(2) FCC (Federal Communication Commission)

(3). The Chicago Tribune article by Judy Deardorf

(4) condom

Cell Phone Radiation. A Cause for Alarm or Concern?

Good Day Everyone! Since almost every human being on the planet capable of talking has a cell phone I thought it more appropriate to put this in your hands for thought and discussion.

This is a small list of agencies and organization that are either studying or reporting on this topic. They should help you decide how you will continue cell phone usage in your daily lives.

~ Chipsterhealth

The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), a component of the World Health Organization, has recently classified radiofrequency fields as “possibly carcinogenic to humans,” based on limited evidence from human studies, limited evidence from studies of radiofrequency energy and cancer in rodents, and weak mechanistic evidence (from studies of genotoxicity, effects on immune system function, gene and protein expression, cell signaling, oxidative stress, and apoptosis, along with studies of the possible effects of radiofrequency energy on the blood-brain barrier).

The American Cancer Society (ACS) states that the IARC classification means that there could be some risk associated with cancer, but the evidence is not strong enough to be considered causal and needs to be investigated further. Individuals who are concerned about radiofrequency exposure can limit their exposure, including using an ear piece and limiting cell phone use, particularly among children.

The National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS) states that the weight of the current scientific evidence has not conclusively linked cell phone use with any adverse health problems, but more research is needed.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), which is responsible for regulating the safety of machines and devices that emit radiation (including cell phones), notes that studies reporting biological changes associated with radiofrequency energy have failed to be replicated and that the majority of human epidemiologic studies have failed to show a relationship between exposure to radiofrequency energy from cell phones and health problems.

The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) states that, although some studies have raised concerns about the possible risks of cell phone use, scientific research as a whole does not support a statistically significant association between cell phone use and health effects.

The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) concludes that there is no scientific evidence that proves that wireless phone use can lead to cancer or to other health problems, including headaches, dizziness, or memory loss.

There is an aid available for those concerned enough. You can read about it at:

To Your Health, Chipsterhealth
Jan. 14, 2013

If you have questions concerning this product and how it might help you, feel free to email me at:

You can also watch some testimonials on how Cieaura is helping others at my YouTube channel. Just type Chipsterhealth in the search window when you are on YouTube.


Cieaura products do not diagnosis, cure, mitigate treatment or prevent disease or any other medical condition.

Content published here is not read or approved by CieAura before it is posted and does not necessarily represent the views and opinions of CieAura.