Posted on Leave a comment

Electromagnetic Radiation From Cellphones And WI-FI Is Harmful To Insects

Technology is quite literally destroying nature, with a yet another report further confirming that electromagnetic radiation from power lines and cell towers can disorientate birds and insects and destroy plant health. The paper warns that as nations switch to 5G, this threat could increase.

In the analysis, EKLIPSE, an EU-funded review body dedicated to policy that may impact biodiversity and the ecosystem, looked over 97 studies on how electromagnetic radiation may affect the environment. It concluded this radiation could indeed pose a potential risk to bird and insect orientation and plant health, The Telegraph reported.

This is not a new finding, as studies dating back for years have come to the same conclusion. In fact, one study from 2010 even suggested that this electromagnetic radiation may be playing a role in the decline of certain animal and insect populations.

However the charity Buglife warned that despite good evidence of the harms there was little research ongoing to assess the impact, or apply pollution limits.

The charity said ‘serious impacts on the environment could not be ruled out’ and called for 5G transmitters to be placed away from street lights, which attract insects, or areas where they could harm wildlife.

Studies also show electromagnetic radiation could be seriously affecting human health.

The total number of insects has decreased by 76% in the last 37 years

Insects, which comprise two thirds of all species on Earth, have been dying off at alarming rates — with disastrous impacts on food chains and habitats.

This warning comes from German entomology enthusiasts, or bug catchers, who have collected 80 million insects in the Rhine countryside over the last 37 years.

‘It is our greatest fear that a point of no return will be reached, which will lead to a permanent loss of diversity.’

To demonstrate the rapid decline, a lab technician held up two bottles: one from 1994 contains 1,400 grammes of trapped insects, the newest one just 300 grammes.

We only became aware of the seriousness of this decline in 2011, and every year since then we have seen it get worse,’ says Dr Sorg.

Although the exact roots of the die-off is not yet clear, ‘the cause is anthropogenic, there’s no doubt about it,’ he said.

In February, they published the first synthesis of 73 studies on entomological fauna around the world over the past 40 years, covering places from Costa Rica to southern France.

They calculated that over 40 per cent of insect species are threatened with extinction and each year another one per cent is added to this list.

Although pesticides and modern farming play a huge role, electromagnetic radiation could also be a factor.

Posted on Leave a comment

3 out of 4 mobile apps downloaded last year lets hackers steal passwords and other sensitive data

Three quarters of mobile applications have vulnerabilities relating to insecure data storage, leaving both Android and Apple iOS users open to cyber attacks that could allow hackers to steal sensitive information.

After extensive testing of apps on both Android and iOS, new research from Positive Technologies has revealed that insecure data storage is the most common security flaw in all mobile apps.

“But this difference is not significant, and the overall security level of mobile application clients for Android and iOS is roughly the same. About a third of all vulnerabilities on the client side for both platforms are high-risk ones,” according to the annual report Vulnerabilities and Threats in Mobile Applications, 2019.

Researchers analyzed mobile apps tested last year and found that 76% of mobile apps store data insecurely. While insecure data storage was the most common vulnerability, 89% of the vulnerabilities discovered could be exploited by malware.

“We recommend that users take a close look when applications request access to phone functions or data. If you doubt that an application needs access to perform its job correctly, decline the request. Users can also protect themselves by being vigilant on not opening unknown links in SMS and chat apps, and not downloading apps from third party app stores. It’s better to be safe than sorry.”

Whether the risk is high, medium, or low, 89% of the security weaknesses in apps can be exploited remotely, meaning a hacker doesn’t need physical access to a device to install malware. The report also didn’t mention whether these vulnerabilities have led to any data breaches so far.

Posted on Leave a comment

(UPDATED)Humans are evolving a bone spike at the back of the head

Young adults are more likely to have a spike-like growth on their skull, and a scientific study has linked the phenomenon to the rise in use of smartphones and tablets from a young age.

The bony skull bump — known as an external occipital protuberance — is sometimes so large, you can feel it by pressing your fingers on the base of your skull.

The feature used to be so rare that in 1885 a French scientist called Paul Broca complained that it had been given a name,according to the BBC.

But a study published in the Journal of Anatomy found that the growth was becoming more frequent — especially among 18 to 30-year-olds. About a quarter of 18-30-year-olds in the study had an external occipital protuberance.

David Shahar, the Australian health scientists who conducted the research, believes the development was triggered by the modern obsession with smartphones. Shahar believes that the spikes will keep getting bigger as people keep hunching over their handheld devices. But the growth on its own should not be dangerous, he said.

No, Your Kids’ Evil Cellphone Won’t Give Them Horns

A study published a couple years ago on a cranial growth has recently gotten new life as the media discovered it and has pitched it as “horns” or “bone spurs” created by cellphone use. Anthropologists and other scientists, however, have been thoroughly debunking the study this week and calling journalists out on their lack of research into the topic.

The “enlarged EOP” studies have gotten new life this past week particularly because of Shahar and Sayers’s interpretations of their data. In concluding their 2018 paper, they write, “We hypothesise that the use of modern technologies and hand-held devices may be primarily responsible for these postures and subsequent development of adaptive robust cranial features in our sample. An important question is what the future holds for the young adult populations in our study, when development of a degenerative process is evident in such an early stage of their lives?”

This interpretation, of course, has wildly spun out of control and landed in the form of headlines like this one from today’s Washington Post: “Horns are growing on young people’s skulls. Phone use is to blame, research suggests.” And anthropologists are not happy. Here’s why:

1. The study ignores anthropological research over many decades.

John Hawks, a palaeoanthropologist at the University of Wisconsin, took to Twitter this morning in a thread about the Washington Post‘s piece. He notes that the finding would be interesting if true, “but there are many warning flags with this study. The external occipital protuberance is a well-studied trait in anthropology, and we know a lot about its frequency in different populations. This paper cites none of that.”

“I’ve seen plenty of enlarged EOPs in the early Medieval skulls I’ve studied — male ones, mostly,” Nivien Speith of the University of Derby tells me. “It could be genetic, or even just a simple bony outgrowth that has unknown etiology. Often, they can occur through trauma to the area as well.”

Shahar and Sayers also call the enlarged EOP a “degenerative process,” and the news media has reported it as a “bone spur.” These are problematic terms, scientists asserts, because “in this case, they’re referring to bone growths that could be due to bone building from increased musculature and movement, not degeneration.”

2. The Nature article contains multiple errors. 

Other researchers on Twitter also had issues with the study methodology. Nsikan Akpan, who holds a PhD in pathobiology, asked his followers to spot how Shahar and Sayers’s methods don’t match their conclusions. He then quote-tweeted a response from a user named Dhari who suggests he’d like to see quadratic age and that it “would’ve been helpful to see the actual logistical model. Given how extremely parsimonious the model is, it seems many possible confounders are absorbed in the error.”

3. The interpretation of “phone bone” far over-reaches the study parameters.

Suggesting that large EOPs may be related to strong neck muscles is not an outlandish suggestion at all, and in fact has been known and proven time and time again. But attributing this change to looking at cellphones smacks of “kids these days” complaints.

Shahar and Sayers actually explain that they found only one published study on the topic of EOP changes, which may have led them to think that EOP changes are a new topic and therefore worth pathologizing. They cite this 2017 BMJ Case Report on an “occipital spur” that the study authors Eby Varghese and colleagues recognize is a normal variant but that was also symptomatic.

In order to figure out if adolescents and children are at greater risk of developing EOP, then, it would appear that Shahar and Sayers need to design a study that examines these age groups. Although more difficult in terms of ethics and permissions, this sort of study would reveal whether EOP expression is happening at younger ages. However, the study would also need to use individuals who were not otherwise symptomatic, if the goal were to understand the prevalence of enlarged EOP within a population. Shahar and Sayers took their sample from, presumably, chiropractic patients and therefore not a random sample. Because of this, they cannot fairly conclude that there is a direct connection between enlarged EOP and neck issues.

Will your kid’s “evil” cellphone give him “horns”? No. But if your neck hurts after hours of looking down at it, you might want to lie down on a pillow for a bit.