For what I understand, the article considers possible changes in bee behaviour with a DECT transmitter ON the beehive. I would say this is not a typical situation, and the exposure due to a base station at a legal distance is several orders of magnitude lower. As the effects of RF radiation on biologic systems is strongly dose dependent, one situation does not tell anything about the other.

Is the same difference between USING a cellphone (unlike to be risky, but worth considering it) and living near a base station (risk so unlikely real that if we are worried about it we must worry about ANYTHING).

It is not true that RF interfers with magnetic field detection: try ringing a cellphone near a compass. The tiny loudspeaker magnet will likely affect it much more. And if we add the “RF EM fields” among the possible culprits for CCD, we should list many many other possible candidates. Including noise from mechanical agricultural devices, light pollution, contrails from airplanes, and the body deodorant used by the farmer.

For Roger: Cellphone radiations do not have VLF harmonics.

The Titanic was Safe Too.

About as Safe as putting you Head in a Microwave oven.

Cell phones “Do” interfere with the Human Brain (Brain Damaged Humans)
————————————————-
FCC Says ‘No’ to Cell Phones on Planes
http://www.cnn.com/2007/…airplanes.ap/index.html

The Wings of Atoms in the Human Brain must change from the Cell Phone Base Transmitter(Tower).
———————————————-
OBSERVING THE “WINGS” OF ATOMS
http://www.hpcwire.com/h…WWW/03/0606/105194.html
———————————————-
Observing The ‘Wings” Of Atoms: Study Indicates It Is Possible To See Electrons’ Orbital Paths Around Atoms http://www.sciencedaily….003/06/030603083525.htm
————————————————–

Researchers measure a fundamental magnetic property of a single atom — the energy required to flip its magnetic orientation

http://domino.research.i…news.20040909_samm.html
————————————————–

Controlling Brain Waves
http://www.aip.org/pnu/2005/split/718-3.html
————————————————–
Read this post from guiding_light
http://lofi.forum.physor…/very-neat…_6583.html

Re:
guiding_light5th June 2006 – 03:26 PM
Oh I get it, use the electric field to modify the neural activity. Aligning/pulling ions, makes sense to me.

I was aware of a collabortion to build silicon-on-insulator circuits with neurons directly attached. I don’t know what became of it.

Ironically almost, the big issue at the time was how to align the neurons with the pads.
————————————————
The B.S. $$$$$$$$$$$$$$ can make.

HOWTO, Cook an Egg With Your Cell Phone
http://slashdot.org/articles/06/02/06/156236.shtml

x(),y(),z()=Three-dimensional axis

———————————————–
And just for the HELL of it:

On the Effectiveness of Aluminium Foil Helmets
http://people.csail.mit.edu/rahimi/helmet/
————————————————
P.S.
Security

I have a copy of your card on my Cell phone and i can guess your PIN number.
——————————————–
News
3.5GHz frequency interfering with Measat-2

http://www.hackinthebox….amp;order=0&thold=0

Bye
Neurohacker

The team’s 2004 exploratory study on non-thermal effects on learning did not find any change in behavior due to RF exposure from the DECT base station operating at 1.9 GHz.

Cellular phones were in fact not covered in either study. Also, neither study suggested a link to CCD. Both of these claims were invented by the Independent article “”Are mobile phones wiping out our bees?” (2007-04-15).

Please read the studies yourself:
Harst, W., Kuhn, J., Stever, H. (2006) Can Electromagnetic Exposure Cause a Change in Behaviour? Studying Possible Non-Thermal Influences on Honey Bees – An Approach within the Framework of Educational Informatics. Acta Systemica 6(1): 1-6.
Stever, H. J., Kuhn, (2004). “How Electromagnetic Exposure can influence Learning Process – Modelling Effects of Electromagnetic Exposure on Learning Processes”.

I have translated your article into Spanish and published on my blog about the global warming tale.
http://elcuentoclimatico.blogspot.com/
Thanks for your clear contribution.

So far I have seen the following hypotheses presented as possibilities:

[1] Stress due to transporting bee hives over long distances (a practice that is much more common in the US than here in the UK);

[2] Exposure to neonicotinoid insecticides (given their neurotoxicity, this one remains plausible);

[3] Toxins in pollen gathered from genetically modified organisms (I believe there was some controversy over this being cited as the reason for Monarch butterfly population crashes);

[4] Diseases introduced into honey bee colonies by Varroa destructor that had not been previously present in those colonies (again, fairly plausible);

[5] Mobile phone radiation (covered at some length here);

I suspect that all those paid bee researchers will home in on the culprit in due course, publish findings in Nature and other similar places, and the issue will be resolved in a manner that does not require one to engage in too fanciful a degree of speculation. I’m tempted at this stage to run with a combination of [1], [2] and [4] above, but of course I’m always open to some other suggestion, especially if that is backed by solid peer review and experimental work.

CCD is not necessarily a new problem — just a new name. The same set of “symptoms” was once called (among other things) fall dwindle disease, and has been around since at least the early part of the 20th century.

http://maarec.cas.psu.edu/pressReleases/FallDwindleDisTalkAustin.pdf

What did work was turning the machine’s power off. It was like magic – suddenly, the bee would lose all interest in the detector, and fly away. Turn the machine back on again, and it would – if in the immediate vicinty – return.

I thought the phenomenon significant enough to contact a researcher whose work regarding earthquake prediction by animals had been noted in Scientific American. When I suggested to him that the effect may have been caused by the VLF radiation of my Fisher 1260-X detector (somewhere in the range of 3 kHz to 50 kHz), he he brushed off the idea, suggesting that it was some postulated “mechanical” buzz or vibration of my detector that was attracting the bees.

A fairly closed mind, I think, resenting (I would guess) a hypothesis that disturbed his own. Of course, this was a number of years ago, and since then, bee research has advanced.

Might it not be worth looking at, that VLF harmonics generated by cell phones might be the culprit in the “bee disappearance” phenomenon? As mentioned, “my” bees would not desist from hovering around the detector until it was shut off. Perhaps the currently missing bees will be found in large groups, dead, around cell phone masts.