CellPhone Radiation: Formal Declaration of Danger

12. August 2008 by HealingMindN.

Cell phones can affect sperm quality, researcher says

(CNN) — Keeping a cell phone on talk mode in a pocket can decrease sperm quality, according to new research from the Cleveland Clinic.

“We believe that these devices are used because we consider them very safe, but it could cause harmful effects due to the proximity of the phones and the exposure that they are causing to the gonads,” says lead researcher Ashok Agarwal, the Director of the Center for Reproductive Medicine.

In the small study, Agarwal’s team took semen samples from 32 men and brought them to the lab. Each man’s sample was placed into small, conical tubes and divided into two parts: a test group and a control group. The control group was unexposed to cell phone emissions, but kept under the same conditions and temperature as the test group.

The semen in the test group was placed 2.5 centimeters from an 850 MHz cell phone in talk mode for 1 hour. Researchers say that 850 MHz is the most commonly used frequency. (There are two common frequency bands that all cell phone carriers use. The Cellular band commonly referred to as 1900 uses the frequencies 1850-1990 (MHz). The other band is PCS which is the 800 MHz band uses frequencies in the 824-894 (MHz) range. Most of our cellular phone signal products work on one or the other. See the frequency of your cellphone.)

They used the measurement of 2.5 centimeters to mimic the distance between the trouser pocket and the testes. Agarwal reasoned that many men keep their active cell phones in their pants pocket while talking on their headsets.

Overall, researchers found an increase in oxidative stress such as a significant increase in free radicals and oxidants and a decrease in antioxidants. Agarwal says that equals a decrease in sperm’s quality, including motility and viability. Evidence of oxidative stress can appear under other conditions, including exposure to certain environmental pollutants or infections in the urinary genital tract.

“On average, there was an 85 percent increase in the amount of free radicals for all the subjects in the study. Free radicals have been linked to a variety of diseases in humans including cancer,” said Agarwal. Free radicals have been linked to decreased sperm quality in previous studies.

However, the study does have major limitations, he acknowledged, such as the small sample size. It also was conducted in a lab and so cannot account for the protection a human body might offer, such as layers of skin, bone and tissue. Agarwal is in the early stages of further research that can model the human body’s role in protecting from radio-frequency electromagnetic waves emitted from cell phones. (Are they also taking the effects of cellphone radiation upon skin, bone and other tissues into consideration in this study?)

Agarwal also admits that there is no clear explanation of this demonstrated effect, but he shared some of his theories. “Perhaps the cell phone radiation is able to affect the gonads through a thermal effect thereby increasing the temperature of the testes and causing damaging effects in the sperm cell.” (Theorizing - where are your comparison clinical studies?)

In a previous study, Agarwal and his team found that men who used their cell phones more than four hours a day had significantly lower sperm quality than those who used their cell phones for less time. Those findings were based on self-reported data from 361 subjects.

While representatives from the cell phone industry had not yet reviewed the latest study, they were careful not to give this study much merit. “The weight of the published scientific evidence, in addition to the opinion of global health organizations, shows that there is no link between wireless usage and adverse health effects,” said Joe Farren, a spokesman for the CTIA-the Wireless Association. (Which scientific evidence are you considering? Which particular opinions of those global health organizations are you referring to? The ones you paid for?)

“We support good science and always have,” he said. “It’s important to look at studies that are peer-reviewed and published in leading journals and to listen to the experts.” (That’s a generalization that a 6th grade student could have made.)

Agarwal emphasized that it is far too early for men to start changing cell phone carrying habits, noting that his own cell phone was in his pocket as he talked to CNN. (Yeah, but when’s the last time he got a sperm count?)

“Our study has not provided proof that you should stop putting cell phones in your pocket. There are many things that need to be proven before we get to that stage,” he said. (What kind of damage do you have to see and how much damage to humanity before you decide?)

---

You don’t have to get rid of your cellphone or change your habits - You just need to make it safer:

---

Cancer doc urges cell phone precaution

A prominent cancer researcher’s warning to limit cell phone use has rekindled anew the longstanding question over mobile-phone health risks.

The media is abuzz with news of the memo from Dr. Ronald B. Herberman, director of the University of Pittsburgh Cancer Institute. He sent it to faculty and staff Wednesday, saying, among other things, that children should use cell phones only for emergencies, since their developing organs are the most likely to be sensitive to possible effects of exposure to electromagnetic fields.

Herberman notes that the precautions have been reviewed by UPCI experts in neuro-oncology, epidemiology, and neurosurgery, as well as the Center for Environmental Oncology.

The tumor immunologist’s words are grabbing widespread attention both because of his professional position and because they contradict numerous studies that don’t find a link between cancer and cell phone use.

Herberman said his warning was based on early findings from unpublished data (see PDF for more).

“Recently, I have become aware of the growing body of literature linking long-term cell phone use to possible adverse health effects including cancer,” he says. “Although the evidence is still controversial, I am convinced that there are sufficient data to warrant issuing an advisory to share some precautionary advice on cell phone use.”

For anyone concerned about possible health repercussions of cell phone use, many of Herberman’s suggestions are easy enough to implement and minimally disruptive at most. Still, the topic can prove daunting to consumers. My colleague, cell phone guru Kent German, says he usually tells concerned consumers the following:

“First off, choose a phone with a low SAR (Specific Absorption Rate, a measure of the strength of the magnetic field absorbed by the body rating). CNET lists the SARs for almost all current phones in our radiation charts. Secondly, use a headset or a speakerphone whenever possible in order to maximize the distance between the phone and your body. And lastly, limit cell phone use for very young children…”

Cancer Institute Warns of Cell Phone Risks

PITTSBURGH (AP) — The head of a prominent cancer research institute issued an unprecedented warning to his faculty and staff Wednesday: Limit cellphone use because of the possible risk of cancer.

The warning from Dr. Ronald B. Herberman, director of the University of Pittsburgh Cancer Institute, is contrary to numerous studies that don’t find a link between cancer and cellphone use, and a public lack of worry by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration.

Herberman is basing his alarm on early unpublished data. He says it takes too long to get answers from science and he believes people should take action now — especially when it comes to children.

“Really at the heart of my concern is that we shouldn’t wait for a definitive study to come out, but err on the side of being safe rather than sorry later,” Herberman said.

No other major academic cancer research institutions have sounded such an alarm about cellphone use. But Herberman’s advice is sure to raise concern among many cellphone users and especially parents.

In the memo he sent to about 3,000 faculty and staff Wednesday, he says children should use cellphones only for emergencies because their brains are still developing.

Adults should keep the phone away from the head and use the speakerphone or a wireless headset, he says. He even warns against using cellphones in public places like a bus because it exposes others to the phone’s electromagnetic fields.

The issue that concerns some scientists — though nowhere near a consensus — is electromagnetic radiation, especially its possible effects on children. It is not a major topic in conferences of brain specialists…

“By all means, if a person feels compelled that they should take precautions in reducing the amount of electromagnetic radio waves through their bodies, by all means they should do so,” said Dan Catena, a spokesman for the American Cancer Society. “But at the same time, we have to remember there’s no conclusive evidence that links cellphones to cancer, whether it’s brain tumors or other forms of cancer…”

---

Related Articles:

How Cellphone Radiation Affects Your Cells

Radiation from cell phones is too weak to heat biological tissue or break chemical bonds in cells, but the radio waves they emit may still change cell behavior.

Scientists exposed 10 female volunteers to radiation at 900 megahertz from GSM phones to simulate an hour-long phone call.

They screened 580 different proteins in their skin cells and found that the numbers of two proteins were altered in all of the volunteers: one protein increased by 89 percent, the other decreased by 32 percent.

This study shows that even without heating, molecular level changes take place in response to exposure to cell phone frequency electromagnetic radiation.

Cellphone use potentially risky for kids, teens: health agency

Toronto’s department of public health has advised teenagers and young children to limit their use of cell phones, in order to avoid potential health risks. The advisory is the first of its kind in Canada.

Officials have warned that because of possible side effects from radio frequency radiation, children under eight should only use a cell phone in emergencies, and teenagers should limit calls to less than 10 minutes.

For many years, most government health agencies were dismissive of any risk. But with more studies, a pattern is emerging that suggests people who have used their cell phones for a long period of time are at greater risk of certain kinds of brain tumors.

***

Dial back cellphone use, city officials tell parents

“..While scientists were pretty dismissive of any risk years ago, with the accumulation of studies, it appears people who have been using their phones for a long period of time are at greater risk of certain kinds of brain tumours. There is a pattern emerging,” said Loren Vanderlinden, a Toronto Public Health supervisor and the report’s author.

“We think it’s responsible to limit children’s exposure,” said Vanderlinden, a mother of two boys, aged 9 and 5, neither of whom carries a cellphone. “Generally, calls should be limited to five or 10 minutes.”

Children have smaller heads and thinner skulls than adults. Some studies, using computer image modelling, show signals radiate farther into children’s heads than adults. And because children today begin using cellphones at an earlier age than any other generation, exposure will be far greater over their lifetimes…

***

Cellphone radiation affects cells in living humans

RADIATION from cellphones is too weak to heat biological tissue or break chemical bonds in cells, but the radio waves they emit may still affect cell behaviour.

“Our study suggests that it is possible that mobile phone radiation alters the expression of some proteins in living humans,” says Dariusz Leszczynski at the Finnish Radiation and Nuclear Safety Authority, in Helsinki.

Leszczynski exposed 10 female volunteers to radiation at 900 megahertz from GSM phones to simulate an hour-long phone call. He screened 580 different proteins in their skin cells and found that the numbers of two proteins were altered in all of the volunteers: one protein increased by 89 per cent, the other decreased by 32 per cent (BMC Genomics, DOI: 10.1186/1471-2164-9-77).

Although similar effects have been observed in cultured cells, this is the first study to show molecular effects of phone radiation on humans…

***

Mobile phone radiation might alter protein expression in human skin

Abstract:

Background

Earlier we have shown that the mobile phone radiation (radiofrequency modulated electromagnetic fields; RF-EMF) alters protein expression in human endothelial cell line. This does not mean that similar response will take place in human body exposed to this radiation. Therefore, in this pilot human volunteer study, using proteomics approach, we have examined whether a local exposure of human skin to RF-EMF will cause changes in protein expression in living people.

Results

Small area of forearm’s skin in 10 female volunteers was exposed to RF-EMF (specific absorption rate SAR = 1.3 W/kg) and punch biopsies were collected from exposed and non-exposed areas of skin. Proteins extracted from biopsies were separated using 2-DE and protein expression changes were analyzed using PDQuest software. Analysis has identified 8 proteins that were statistically significantly affected (Anova and Wilcoxon tests). Two of the proteins were present in all 10 volunteers.

This suggests that protein expression in human skin might be affected by the exposure to RF-EMF. The number of affected proteins was similar to the number of affected proteins observed in our earlier in vitro studies.

Conclusion

This is the first study showing that molecular level changes might take place in human volunteers in response to exposure to RF-EMF. Our study confirms that proteomics screening approach can identify protein targets of RF-EMF in human volunteers… (continues)

***

Experts Revive Debate Over Cellphones and Cancer

What do brain surgeons know about cellphone safety that the rest of us don’t?

Last week (of 3 June 2008), three prominent neurosurgeons told the CNN interviewer Larry King that they did not hold cellphones next to their ears. “I think the safe practice,” said Dr. Keith Black, a surgeon at Cedars-Sinai Medical Center in Los Angeles, “ is to use an earpiece so you keep the microwave antenna away from your brain.”

Dr. Vini Khurana, an associate professor of neurosurgery at the Australian National University who is an outspoken critic of cellphones, said: “I use it on the speaker-phone mode. I do not hold it to my ear.” And CNN’s chief medical correspondent, Dr. Sanjay Gupta, a neurosurgeon at Emory University Hospital, said that like Dr. Black he used an earpiece.

Along with Senator Edward M. Kennedy’s recent diagnosis of a glioma, a type of tumor that critics have long associated with cellphone use, the doctors’ remarks have helped reignite a long-simmering debate about cellphones and cancer…

***

New Form of Electronic Test Helps Show
Early Signs of Energetic Health Imbalances.

These Energetic Imbalances May Be Showing The Future of Your Health…

One thing you’ll be weary of is keeping your cellphone in your pocket all the time once you see these videos about this cutting edge testing method. Click Here >> Electro-Dermal Screening and the Cell Phone Test.

You may have heard mixed reviews of whether cell phones are harmful or not and I want to explain why you should expect this…

You see there is a huge multi-billion dollar industry that has been setup whose revenue depends on your confidence in wanting to use your cell phone without hesitation.

As word gets out that there may be potential health issues resulting from cell phone use there are huge press campaigns broadcast distractions of the real news!

This has happened time and time again and it crosses over into the Scientific Studies. It’s fairly common knowledge that these days scientific studies about anything can be bought and sold. If a company’s got enough money they can fund a study and skew the results to their desired result.

Review the scientific literature on cell phone safety and you’ll see just that - a hung jury.

If these devices were truly safe I think all the studies would have verified this. The situation can be simplified:

1. Many people, yourself possibly included, find that they get headaches and discomfort when talking on a cell phone - for some folks it is only on long calls while others get reactions from even a quick call.

2. Many heavy cell phone users have openly complained that their newly formed brain tumors are (1) positioned right where their cell phone were held next to their ear (same side of the face) and (2) shaped very consistently with the antenna of a cell phone (see George Carlo’s book ‘Cell Phones Invisible Hazard of the Wireless Age‘).

3. Cell phone towers have been documented to affect bird migration. While industry execs and their scientific advisory boards seem to insist that this is a result of blinking lights on these towers, this is unlikely. There are all forms of blinking lights in nature like twinkling stars and fire flies. Migration patterns, like that of whales versus sonar signals, have never been thrown off until the installation of microwave infrastructures.

Maybe you’ll agree with me that you should be concerned with this issue - and that while many people are asking ‘Are there health dangers from using a cell phone?’ the more appropriate question to ask is ‘What are the health dangers from using a cellphone?‘

Learn more on this topic by reading my entire Radiation Report. Get Your Copy, Today!

Learn the Truth

Further related article:

Colony Collapse Disorder Honey Bee Research

Please see this video discussion with a neurosurgeon on the tumors in people’s heads he has diagnosed due to cell phone radiation and the fears he has for his own young daughter who just got a cellphone:

Dr. Charlie Tia, a preeminent Australian neurosurgeon discusses what he believes is a contributing factor to this exponential increase in brain tumors among children: excessive exposure to electromagnetic fields (EMF), and electromagnetic radiation (EMR) from mobile phones and other electrical and electronic equipment and appliances.

Posted in Poison Spectrum, Bioenergetic Spectrum | Print | No Comments »

NCCAM spin on “Tie Chee” vs Real Taijiquan

5. August 2008 by HealingMindN.

Normally, I don’t mind anyone else’s take on martial arts for therapeutic and health purposes. But when I examined the page on “tie - chee” through the National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine website, I had to stop and take notice.

This page on “tie - chee” passed before the eyes of highly degreed health professionals: Gloria Yeh, M.D., M.P.H., Harvard Medical School; Laura Redwine, Ph.D., VA San Diego Healthcare System; Dan Halpain, A.B.T./H.H.P.; Chenchen Wang, M.D., M.Sc., Tufts-New England Medical Center; Adeline Ge, M.D., NIH Clinical Center; and Shan Wong, Ph.D., and Patrick Mansky, M.D.

And, I’m sorry to say, that the treatment of Taijiquan here as an internal martial art is careless. Don’t get me wrong. I appreciate the fact that so many notables respect the healing potentials of this practice, therefore, “tie - chee” is now a verifiable method of complementary alternative medicine. I am completely thankful to the above doctors for this achievement.

On the other hand, I thought that being a degreed health professional meant being detail oriented. That paper on “tie - chee” is far from it. With the high page rank of Tai Chi for Health Purposes on the web, this page would be among the first that people would find during a search - And this page belongs to a highly respected organisation. Therefore, this page would shape public opinion and their perspective of Taijiquan.

I’m sure these are very busy people which is why they allowed so many misconceptions to stand out; they’re just too busy to really look into the history and root of internal martial arts. That’s OK. I’m here to help.

But Rather than start my own taijiquan encyclopedia here, I’m just going over a few errors that stick out like a sore thumb at NCCAM, then I’m going to direct you to one of the true martial arts masters on this planet, my favourite sifu on the subject of Taijiquan, Dr. Yang Jwing-Ming.

First the statement: Tai chi (pronounced “tie chee” and also known by some other names and spellings) is a mind-body practice that originated in China as a martial art…

I used Taijiquan and Tai Chi Chuan interchangeably because they come from different dialects, but mean the same thing: Grand Ultimate Fist. They both sound the same when Dr. Yang pronounces it. What matters are the phonetics - as in the pinyin system of Chinese Patent Herbal Remedies, so it doesn’t really matter how you spell it in english.

Tai Chi and Tai Chi Chuan are not interchangeable. Tai Chi is the philosophy from whence the fist form or “chuan” was created. Taijiquan has only been around for about 1000 years as opposed to about 4000 years for the philosophy. Imagine putting 4000 years of wisdom on yin yang within the flow of nature into a martial art form. The manifestation of Tai Chi into a “fist” form has far more implications than health and self defense. The “fist” form was created to train the practitioner in controlling energy flow, within himself and the world around him.

Now, we are traversing into those esoteric areas of the bioenergetic spectrum. When I talk about psychoenergetics at HealingMindN Power Circle and bioenergetics here at this blog, there is no separation between them. I have both sites at HealingMindN.com and BioenergeticSpectrum.com because there is always a careful balance between Mind and Body energies; they are inseparable.

The real goal of Taijiquan is for the mind to control the body. You’re going to have to leave your decadent western perspectives of the world behind when I say this. Remember, there is an intense 4000 year old philosophy behind that martial art.

As Dr. Yang might say about the basic concept of Tai Chi, “The Mind can go anywhere in the universe at any time and accomplish anything…” Tai Chi Chuan trains the practitioner to actually manifest that philosophy in the real world.

I know this is sounding like HealingMindN concepts, so I’ll pull out a few notes from Dr. Yang’s lecture on Taijiquan. You will notice that Dr. Yang applies electrical engineering concepts to the body, the same as Nikola Tesla did back in his day (Tesla also worked on all kinds of therapeutic energy medicine devices including the first ozone machine); this makes perfect sense because, in the living body, we have all kinds of tissues that have electrical characteristics of resistance, capacitance, inductance, and beyond depending on the bioenergetic functions that need fulfilling.

Resistance (of the body as during muscular tension) = R

Current flux (of the bioenergy {chi} within the body as controlled by breath) = I

Power (overall expression of speed, strength, bioenergy of the body {jing}) = P

P = I² × R

This equation applies to the human body for all the martial arts. Of course, this is only an analogy, not a detailed study of biophysics, but the concept remains the same. As Dr. Yang would say, “No matter if you start with internal martial arts or external martial arts, we all take these different pathes towards the same goal…”

In the case of Taijiquan, we want to decrease (muscular) resistance, R, of the body while increasing the current flow or chi of the body. Since the focus is on internal energy, we can look at the equation from this POV:

P/R = I²

The less resistance there is in the body, the more power we have by focusing on the chi, or internal energy. This is why Tai Chi Kung and Tai Chi Kung meditation are of vital importance to the martial art.

As you are probably already asking yourself, “why can’t we increase both current and resistance for maximum power?” Once again, this is a different path as that equation applies to other martial arts in different ways.

There are two other roots of internal martial arts that have also branched into different styles in the same fashion as Taijiquan: Baquazhang and Xingiquan.

I cannot express my disappointment enough for the NCCAM site by their neglect of other soft martial art styles; it’s like those restaurants that only serve half a sandwich. “Where’s the other half?”

I have to assume that the MD’s and PhD’s at NCCAM are not THAT interested in oriental sports training. That’s OK. They have a lot on their plates. That’s why I’m here.

Here’s a small treatise to help you understand the difference between these popular internal martial arts:

Tai Chi Chuan: When Jing (power) is emitted for an attack, it’s like a whip. Have you seen those MLB players who throw 100mph fast balls? That’s a whip. They would be totally wicked at Taijiquan. During the real martial art as opposed to the slow moving meditative practice, a Taijiquan practitioner can expect to explode on their opponent in much the same way if not more so.

Hsing Yi Chuan: (translates literally as “mind shape fist”) In the beginning of both attacking and defensive movements, the body remains soft so that Chi can be led to the limbs. the body is then stiffened for an instant upon striking to manifest the Jing, so it’s like rattan: Soft at the beginning, hard at the end. You’ve watched pro tennis, right? The players have to stay loose while dodging and shifting, changing direction at any given moment until they actually hit the ball with everything they’ve got. Pro tennis players would be amazing at Xingiquan.

In the power equation as it applies to Xingiquan:

P = I² × R

We have maximum current (Chi) and maximum resistance (muscular tension) to manifest maximum Jing (power). Xingiquan has branched into the more esoteric styles of kung fu like Dragon Style.

To the novice, it might seem that Xingiquan is the superior form to practice. Not exactly. As Dr. Yang would say, “it all depends on the situation.” Taijiquan has a circular attack approach within short and middle ranges. Xingiquan has a more linear approach most effective within a short fighting range.

Ba Kua Chang: (Eight Diagram Palm) The movements of Baguazhang are not as soft as Taijiquan, yet not as hard as Xingiquan and effective at all ranges. Internal Chi and footwork are the main focus of the training. The Jing. How to explain the Jing of Baguazhang: Have you ever seen professional ballroom dancers like on Dancing with the Stars? Pro ballroom dancers would be phenomenal at Baguazhang because it’s pretty much the ballroom dancing of martial arts which is just as fluid and beautiful.

“Where’s the Jing?” You ask? For those of you who caught the performance with Cheryl Burke and Christian de le Fuente where his bicep got detached, you observed “baguazhang” type manuever of Cheryl Burke expressing her “Jing.” If those same pro ballroom dancers focused their energies along martial aspects, they could easily break arms, legs, and who knows what else on their partners.

You know, that power equation, P = I² × R, is an integral of energy flux or electromotive force with respect to the current. If we go back to the original equation:

(delta) emf = I x R

We see that the “Jing” is expressed through the constant flux of electromotive force. This equation most correctly applies to Baquazhang since the Jing is expressed through complex footwork and consistent circular movements. Now you know how pro ballroom dancers can be dangerous.

Two more points I’d like to cover from that NCCAM paper. I’ll just go ahead and copy it here for your inspection:

Some Points of Controversy

As with other CAM approaches, there are aspects of tai chi on which not everyone agrees. For example:

• Since little is known scientifically about tai chi, accepting its teachings is a matter of belief or faith rather than evidence-based science.
• In addition to more traditional styles, some offshoots and blends of tai chi styles have also evolved. There are differences of opinion over which styles represent the “truest” tai chi.

I looked at the rest of the NCCAM site to see what they might be classing Taijiquan with as a belief system. I found 39 references to prayer. I found nothing about law of attraction.

The problem with the western medical perspective of saying that a method is based in belief or faith is that they’re saying the problem never really existed, that it’s psychosomatic, “all in your head.”

This is the regular motis operandi of mechanistic mind patterns: If they don’t get it, and it doesn’t fit into their paradigm of science, then it must be make believe. The problem is that this make believe Taijiquan CAM practice has real results of increasing health. According to the mechanistic mind set, there was never really a physical ailment, that Taijiquan was a great “placebo.”

Do you like that? Those are the kind of attitudes I have to deal with every day.

If you want some hardcore scientific theories to help you understand the workings of internal martial arts, look up precursor engineering on the web. Amazing subject, but difficult to understand, especially for mechanistic mind patterns. You’re an expert in applied physics? Good for you. You should half way understand the subject as long as you don’t cling to Maxwell’s Equations like a baby to his bottle.

As far as “truest” tai chi. I’m not sure what that means. I know Wu Style came first, then Chen, then Yang. I heard that Sun Style is loads a fun because it combines hard and soft styles and I think it’s the newest. But what does “truest” mean?

Think of internal martial arts style like a car. Learning the basic mechanics of driving the car is like learning proper breathing patterns during your exercise. Remember, just because we all have different cars doesn’t mean we all follow different rules. We all have to follow the same rules of the road.

By the same token, your instructor must teach you the “rules of the road” regarding the cultivation of Chi and expressing it as Jing through disciplined practice. Even the hard styles are using the same road, but they’re coming from the other direction by focusing on physical prowness first, then internal energy later. They all follow a true path as long as they include martial morality.

Martial Morality is the intent or “mindfulness” that is trained into the student. (OK, now we’re going back to HealingMindN concepts.) Martial Morality instills purpose and intent in the mind of the practitioner on exactly what he/she wants to accomplish with that art. Those accomplishments must be encompassed by the facets of Morality:

Martial Morality is called Wude. Teachers have long considered Wude to be the most important criterion for judging students, and they have made it the most important part of the training in the traditional Chinese Martial Arts. Wude includes two aspects: Morality of Deed and Morality of Mind. Morality of Deed includes: Humility, Respect, Righteousness, trust, and Loyalty. Morality of Mind consists of: Will, Endurance, Perseverance, Patience, and Courage… (Martial Morality, p.9, Ch.1, Baguazhang - Emei Baguazhang, theory and applications, by Liang, Shou-Yu, Yang, Jwing-Ming, Wen-Ching, 1994)

These important human aspects within martial arts practitioners allow them to transcend beyond any emotional difficulties which may serve as a basis for their chronic ailments; it depends on the person. A sickly person tends to lose one or more of these human aspects. The martial arts instructor is there to help you regain what you’ve lost due to sickness and stress related ailments through physical and mental discipline.

The martial arts instructor is there to help you regain any humanity that you may have lost. What could be “truer” than that?

You know a good instructor by observing their own morality. This is your measure of the “truest” form of Taijiquan or any other martial art: The Instructor.

Thanks for your time,

Randolph, HealingMindN Medicine Man

Posted in Bioenergy, Healing Science | Print | 2 Comments »

Bacterial Bioenergy Economy eats Your Trash

2. August 2008 by HealingMindN.

Thermotoga maritima (green/yellow rods) growing in co-culture with Methanococcus jannaschii (red spheres). T. maritima ferments sugars to hydrogen and M. jannaschii converts hydrogen to methane.

These new strains of bacteria that eat trash while producing hydrogen and methane has been like a shot heard round the world recently. I thought I would cover a few of the finer points that could help heal our crude oil/coal dependent economy and help boost into the space age.

First, here are excerts from Engineer Taps Heat-Loving Bacteria for Hydrogen from physorg.com:

A North Carolina State University engineer has been awarded a $1.6 million grant from the U.S. Department of Energy to learn more about the microbiology, genetics and genomics behind how and why heat-loving bacteria called thermotogales produce large amounts of hydrogen with unusually high efficiencies. These microorganisms are found all over the globe in areas which are naturally hot – including volcanic sediments, hot springs and brines from deep oil wells.

The findings could help propel the use of hydrogen for many energy applications, including a new era of automobile travel. Hydrogen-powered cars, which exist in limited and expensive supply, are considered by many to be the holy grail of future vehicle travel…

“These organisms produce copious amounts of hydrogen as a waste product of their metabolism, even though hydrogen ultimately inhibits their growth,” Kelly says. “We’d like to learn more about the connection between sugar consumption and hydrogen yields and how to take advantage of their unique bioenergetics at high temperatures…”

That’s right; these bacteria are extremophiles who enjoy hot environments. Imagine your own bioreactor in your backyard which produces all the fuel you need from your trash. This concept is eons ahead of producing your own ethanol from corn which requires a certain amount of finesse in biochemistry.

Imagine your own bioreactor where you thrown in your own food waste, then you have a special tank that retrieves the gas to pump for your hydrogen/methane converted car. Naturally, you would have your backyard barbeque conveniently powered by your own bioreactor tank. Of course, we can also “pass that gas” through a reformer to create electricity. Here’s an earlier article from physorg.com, Fuel from food waste: bacteria provide power:

Researchers have combined the efforts of two kinds of bacteria to produce hydrogen in a bioreactor, with the product from one providing food for the other. According to an article in the August issue of Microbiology Today, this technology has an added bonus: leftover enzymes can be used to scavenge precious metals from spent automotive catalysts to help make fuel cells that convert hydrogen into energy…

We throw away a third of our food in the UK, wasting 7 million tonnes a year. The majority of this is currently sent to landfill where it produces gases like methane, which is a greenhouse gas 25 more potent than carbon dioxide. Following some major advances in the technology used to make “biohydrogen,” this waste can now be turned into valuable energy…

With a more advanced pre-treatment, biohydrogen can even be produced from the waste from food-crop cultivation, such as corn stalks and husks. Tens of millions of tonnes of this waste is produced every year in the UK. Diverting it from landfill into biohydrogen production addresses both climate change and energy security…

The difference is the article refers to centralised power doing the dirty work while I’m talking about your energy independence. It’s up to you. Either way, bacterial bioenergy defeats our trash problem. We just have to endure biochemistry expert’s “understanding” of the process for them to design the most efficient bioreactors.

It seems to me they should emulate the same environment where they originated, so the bioreactor would have to remain hot: Go Solar! How about a peltier junction that keeps the bioreactor hot while it’s powered by a methane gas reformer which is powered by the bioreactor? The possibilities are endless!

related research tools:

Hydrogen Fuel Cell Model Car

Build a Working Model 1&1 Blog - powered by WordPress