Add a PERSON to the List
|Illness||EHS => Suicide|
|Date: (if known)||2012-06-03|
|Company||Violinist, a gifted musician|
|Industry||Violinist / Musician|
|References||‘Zapping in head’ from mobiles led son to kill himself|
Talented musician zapped to death by cell phone radiation
Wednesday, December 19, 2012 by: Lloyd Burrell
(NaturalNews) Violinist Michael Nield, tragically committed suicide because of an allergy to cell phone radiation. Nield, 36, was an educated man, a graduate of Oxford, and a victim of what could be called an allergy or extreme sensitivity to the radiation which emits from all cell phones.
Nield took his own life. Why? Nield believed it was the only way out. Suicide was seen as a relief from the agony he lived with on a daily basis. Electrical sensitivity, a condition associated with exposure to electromagnetic fields from sources, including cell phones, cell phone towers, WiFi, cordless phones, etc. affects increasing numbers of people around the world.
Nield took extreme measures to stop his pain; ones he thought were possible solutions to his dilemma. These measures included relocating over 100 miles away, living in a body suit constructed of microfiber because of an allergy to cell phone radiation, and sleeping in a microfiber tent by night. Extreme as these solutions might seem, they were clearly ineffective at eliminating the never ending "zapping" Nield experienced on a daily basis.
Validation in the courtroom
Even though electrosensitivity is not recognized as a "real" condition by the medical community, many people, just like Nield, claim they suffer from it. The Supreme Court in Italy recently vindicated these claims by awarding Innocente Marcolini, a financial manager, worker's compensation for a tumor that was proven to stem from Marcolini's cell phone usage at work. Marcolini's tumor, while benign, was located on the fifth cranial nerve; the nerve which dictates sensation in the face and is responsible for specific crucial functions, e.g., biting, and masticating.
After an initial rejection and then an appeal process in his favor, Marcolini was finally vindicated by the Italian Supreme Court as they stood by the appellate court's ruling. The ruling is final and therefore, untouchable. This ruling sets a real precedent for others and their health concerns which are associated with using cell phones and the radiation that emanates from them.
Radiation exposures exceed guidelines
Dr. Devra Davis, PhD, MPH, author, and founder and leader of the Environmental Health Trust since 2007 asks the question, "Did you know that cell phones come with warnings?" The warning (in fine print), which Dr. Davis is referring to, tells us the radiation from the phone may exceed the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) exposure guidelines for body worn operation if positioned fewer than 15 mm from the body, e.g. carrying the phone in a pocket.
While living with a constant barrage of obvious electrosensitivity complications like the "zapping," what Michael Nield had to endure was tragic, is it any less tragic to live with exposure you are unaware of? Exposure which may ultimately dictate your demise? This is exactly what consumers are doing when they practice dangerous behaviors, (i.e., keeping a cell phone close to the body), which seem harmless.
A 39-year-old woman with invasive multiple primary tumors in her breast wore her cell phone in her bra four hours a day, every day, for seven years. A coincidence? Dr. Davis isn't sure; however, Dr. Davis is sure electromagnetic radiation damages DNA, disrupts the blood-brain barrier, weakens and damages sperm, and changes brain metabolism.
Further concerns arise when a BlackBerry is held against a pregnant woman's abdomen and the radiation exposure is measurable. Research in Motion, the manufacturer, sells the smartphone with the warning, "Do not keep near the pregnant abdomen."
Whether painfully aware or blissfully ignorant, cell phone users have a wake-up call and they need to answer it right away.
Sources for this article include:
About the author:
Since falling prey to a violent reaction to his cell phone in 2002 Lloyd Burrell has spent more than 10 years researching the effects of electromagnetic fields (EMFs) on health. He is the author of an eBook entitled "How To Beat Electrical Sensitivity" which offers a solution to the growing number of people whose health is being compromised by exposure to wireless and similar technologies.
A university graduate committed suicide after a lengthy battle with a sensitivity to mobile phones, an inquest heard.
Oxford graduate Michael Nield suffered with electro sensitivity – the term used to describe someone who has an unhealthy sensitivity to a particular source of electricity.
In Michael’s case it was mobile phones and phone masts. He had to sleep with a microfibre tent over his bed to reduce the radiation.
He sometimes even had to wear a micromesh body suit when he was out, and his parents, Clive and Barbara, had to move from their home in Herefordshire to the small village of Wardy Hill, near Ely, where there was less exposure to mobiles and phone masts.
Barbara too suffers with the same sensitivity, although it is not as extreme.
On Sunday, June 3, 36-year-old Michael, who was living with his parents in Main Street, Wardy Hill, took his own life, William Morris, coroner for North and East Cambridgeshire, has ruled at an inquest.
Michael’s father found his body inside a car parked on a grass track near their home.
Michael, a gifted musician, had drunk a bottle of vodka and taken an overdose of tablets.
Speaking at the inquest, his mother, a volunteer at Ely Cathedral, said her son had “tried everything” to improve his quality of life.
She said: “Unless people have electro sensitivity they just don’t realise what sort of effects it has. He tried everything to get better. He sought help, he ate a specific diet and he tried so hard.”
She said he sometimes wore a micromesh suit or a hat with mesh to cover his face in a bid to keep phone radiation away.
She said: “He would just get constant zapping in his head. I know the feeling as I get it myself, although not on the level that Michael did.
“That’s why we moved to Wardy Hill as it’s so remote. He did still sleep with a microfibre tent over his bed though, which did help.
“We saw it as a positive step but looking back it was his way of making a last-ditch attempt to be normal and put his illness aside. But that was obviously something he couldn’t do.”
Sarah Dacre, a trustee of ElectroSensitivity UK, said: “It’s extremely upsetting to hear of Michael’s death. I knew him, having received a number of emails from him.
“Sadly the condition is not recognised by the NHS, but it is very real, and we get an average of one suicide a year among those on our books.”
Mystery over condition
The World Health Organisation (WHO) defines electrosensitivity and similar conditions as ‘symptoms that are experienced in proximity to, or during the use of, electrical equipment, and that result in varying degrees of discomfort or ill health in the individual and that an individual attributes to activation of electrical equipment”.
But the organisation adds that while patients suffer from real health problems “there is no known biological marker or any diagnostic test” for it.
Who has also warned about using commercial products which claim to help reduce symptoms and against home measurement of signals, and says added psychological issues such as stress caused by the introduction of new technologies could be a causative factor.
Research into electrical sensitivity has been increasing in the past five years.
A spokesman for the charity ElectroSensitivity UK said its objective was to get ES recognised and find the best ways of easing it.