Resilience: Protect Yourself Against Radiation

We are exposed to exponentially more artificial radiation (non-native electromagnetic frequencies) than any previous generation. How do we protect ourselves? And what can we do to build resilience in the face of this phenomenon? Daniel DeBaun, the co-author of “Radiation Nation: The Fallout of Modern Technology” and the CEO of DefenderShield, has some practical tips for how to go about this.

He reviews studies that have been done that show the harm radiation can cause. He explains EHS, electromagnetic hypersensitivity and why this condition seems to afflict more women than men. He goes over why he’s not a fan of pendants or harmonizers for dealing with EMFs. Instead, he recommends simple switches with our devices and shoring up our health from the inside out.

Visit Daniel’s website DefenderShield.com

Get your free WAPF info pack

Check out our sponsors: Branch Basics, Paleo Valley, Optimal Carnivore

—

Listen to the podcast here

Episode Transcript

Within the below transcript the bolded text is Hilda Labrada Gore and the regular text is Daniel DeBaun.

We are exposed to exponentially more artificial radiation non-native electromagnetic frequencies than any previous generation. How on Earth do we protect ourselves? What can we do to build resilience in the face of this phenomenon? This is Episode 379. Our guest is Daniel DeBaun. He is an expert in EMF radiation and shielding. He is the coauthor of Radiation Nation: The Fallout of Modern Technology, and the CEO of DefenderShield.

Daniel offers sobering facts about our exposure to radiation. He talks about cellphones and how data has been ignored that shows the risks they pose to our health. He discusses the paucity of studies on 5G antennas and why he suggests that we protect ourselves as a precaution. His recommendations to mitigate radiation damage include simple switches with our devices, ensuring our health from the inside out. This is the fifth episode in our resilience track.

Before we dive into the conversation, I want to invite you to grab a free offering from the Weston A. Price Foundation. It’s an information pack that gives you background on WAPF along with our most popular brochure, Timeless Principles of Healthy Traditional Diets. The brochure has pictures that Dr. Price took of indigenous people around the world and gives an overview of our dietary principles. It’s awesome and free. Go to WestonAPrice.org and click on the Request Free Info Pack button.

—

Visit Daniel’s website DefenderShield.com.

Get your free WAPF info pack.

Check out our sponsors: Branch Basics, Paleo Valley, Optimal Carnivore.

—

Welcome to the show, Daniel.

Thank you very much for inviting me. I’m excited to have a chance to chat with you and your audience.

It’s so important for this information to get out about how non-native electromagnetic frequencies are affecting our health. I remember your telling me one time that when you first started your company, you were fielding all these phone calls of people calling with symptoms. Tell us a little bit about what happened back then.

What happened was my son and I started a company several years ago. It was a shielding company for electromagnetic radiation. We began getting calls about the products we sold and a whole bunch of other questions about the environment. We began seeing a pattern that there were a lot of people, it seemed, that when exposed to electromagnetic radiation, got a headache. Their eyes hurt, fingers tingled, and they had foggy thinking. They were saying, “What is going on?” That prompted me to begin looking into what the science knew about it.

It was funny. It turns out that there were lots of studies, particularly in Europe, that talked about electrohypersensitivity. There were studies that identified that roughly 15% to 20% of the population is electrohypersensitive. I began realizing that for them, it was even more important that they think about the environment they were in because they were the canaries in the coal mine, in a sense. By the way, 80% of that were females. No one knows why it’s more susceptible for females than males.

Some argue with different brain patterns or their hormones. There are a lot of arguments why, but there is no scientific evidence that I know of, of why. By the way, do you know that if you are electrohypersensitive, you are likely multiple chemically sensitive? I began asking the question, “When you smell perfume, do you get a headache?” They’d say, “Yes, I do.” That’s how I began, knowing that it was legitimate, that people did have a problem, and nobody was worried about it.

What’s interesting to me is, just as you said, some people are extremely sensitive and they are the canaries in the coal mine. Whether or not one feels a symptom, we’re still all being affected by this radiation, aren’t we?

In one form or another.

Why is it problematic, this non-native electromagnetic frequency radiation that we’re exposed to?

It’s a pretty easy answer. If we think about several years ago, there was nothing in our environment except AM radio and FM radio, which were far distanced away from us. All the sources of emission were far away from us. Now, your six-year-old child walks around with a cellphone. Your grandchild, at eight years old, is talking to grandma for hours at a time. It is so integrated into our use now, and it’s close. Our laptops, tablets, and cellphones are all emitting electromagnetic radiation.

We’re surrounded by it in a way that several years ago, we were not. Is this why 5G networks are so alarming because they have to put the antennas closer to the homes?

WT 379 Daniel | Radiation Protection — Radiation Protection: If you are electric-hypersensitive, you are likely multiple chemically sensitive.

Yes. There are a few things that concern us. When we talk about a cellphone, we talk about it being in about 1 gigahertz transmission. When we talk about Wi-Fi, it’s 2.4 or 5.0 emissions that are coming from the Wi-Fi, but they’re all below 10 gigahertz. All of a sudden, we have a lot of this Wi-Fi being transmitted. A lot of that stuff you hear about now and advertise is below 10 gigahertz. It’s in a similar range where everything begins. That’s where it ends and the 5G you worry about begins. What we know is with the 5G, they typically are going to be transmitting at over 20 gigahertz, typically 23 gigahertz or 60 gigahertz. It’s very high speed.

Are you saying that the greater the gigahertz, the more harmful to us?

Potentially. If a scientist said to you, “You’re going to be hurt by a 20 gigahertz signal,” I would say to them they don’t know their science. Why? It’s because there are no real evaluations at 20 gigahertz. What we can speculate about is that it is maybe different in a way that’s negative. We know it’s worse than what we see in our environment.

Let me tell you why. When they have the 23 gigahertz and above, as you were saying before, they got to bring the antenna and the transmitters close to the house, 750 feet from your home or your business. They send two beams of electromagnetic radiation or RF signals to one unit. That’s twice as much as a cellphone now. A cellphone, if you may remember, is 1.6 watts per kilogram.

It’s fairly low. With these transmitters, to go 750 feet, they’re at 40 to 60 watts. That’s ten times magnitude more than a cellphone. If you are 10 or 20 feet away, which is going to be normal, and the kids are playing in the yard, they are being exposed to 10 watts of power constantly. We don’t know what the impact is, but we can tell you for sure from the research we know that if you speculate and extrapolate, it potentially becomes a problem even more so than the RF.

You said that early on, you found a lot of studies showing the damage of this radiation that people were unaware of related to cellphones, but have they not done many studies showing the damage of 5G? If not, why not?

They have done none. I know this is not the story you want to hear, but here’s a story. It turns out that Robert Kennedy and several other leading experts in a sense in this space against the 5G trend brought the FCC to court. They said to the court, “You have not looked at all the study work that exists and the potential dangers.” Long story short, the FCC lost. They’ve been told by the court that they need to evaluate the standards and all the studies before they conclude whether the transmitted rates approved by the FCC for 5G is dangerous or not. It was pushed back in court.

The fact is, as you may know, there is no research because the US doesn’t fund this research and hasn’t for years. Most of it that we hear about is independent study work. I don’t know if you remember I mentioned the National Toxicology Program study. That was a $30,000 study by the US Federal government. They were asked to evaluate cellphones and their implications. They set up an epidemiology study. They had large populations of subjects exposed, which were rats, mice, and stuff. They found a statistically significant increase in frontal lobe cancer and heart cancers.

That was reinforced by the Ramazzini Institute, roughly around the same time, a few years ago. They came up with the same conclusion with the large populations they studied. We’re getting to learn more, but in the 5G space, there is nothing. I don’t know if you remember I talk about 1.6 watts mucks around with the immune system and that your gut likes the RF signal and bacteria flourishes. It’s the bad bacteria that flourish. We know that’s even more accelerated at 20 gigahertz. I’ve seen a study that talks about a similar pattern of impact, but that’s about all I’ve seen that I accept as real study work.

Since there is so little information out there, what gives you the impression that we should do our best to protect ourselves from the rollout of 5G?

It’s an abundance of caution. Before we were talking, we talked about trans fats. They use trans fats and somebody wants to make your French fries better. They had no study work. It went on for over 30 years and everyone was blaming eggs. It wasn’t eggs. It was trans fats. Ultimately, they got banned a few years ago in the US and worldwide even sooner. We know that it’s not unusual for us to introduce technologies into our environment and not have a good understanding of what that impact is going to be. Oftentimes, it’s after the fact that we do so.

It’s not unusual for us to introduce technologies into our environment and not have a good understanding of what that impact will be. Often, it’s after the fact that we do so.

To answer your question, abundance of caution because we know below 10 gigahertz or so, there’s a preponderance of the evidence that talks about the implications to the body. There can be many. We were starting with electrohypersensitivity, but that can be serious. There is an argument on which we don’t have statistical significance on, but we know the frontal lobe is the most concerning. That’s because it’s soft tissue like the heart. When you put a cellphone for more than an hour a day for ten years, you’re three times more likely to get frontal lobe cancer of a cell. These are facts we know. There’s not sufficient evidence to substantiate those claims, but there’s a lot of it out there that if you look at it at the metadata, it is real.

In fact, there is enough information out there that is causing all kinds of doctors and scientists to raise an alarm bell. Hasn’t there been a group of scientists who suggested that we halt this rollout of 5G to study it further before we proceed with something that may be difficult to stop? We can’t go backwards. It’s like the ship has left the port. If we don’t halt it now, it’s going to get too far out and will be unstoppable.

In fact, hundreds of worldwide independent experts in this field have gathered together and petitioned the FCC. They said, “You can’t do what you’re doing because evidence already is clear of what we currently have. We’re concerned without study work that we’re going to see even a worst case of what we see now.” Several hundred experts in the world got together and have been vocal about it.

—

Coming up, Daniel weighs in on the topic of harmonizers and pendants for protection from EMF. He also offers sound advice for defending our bodies from artificial radiation based on our natural circadian rhythm.

—

Order yours at Paleovalley.com and use the code WISE for 15% off at checkout.

Go to Amazon.com/OptimalCarnivore and use the code WESTON10 to receive 10% off all products.

—

I have seen so many harmonizers and pendants and such. I’m wondering, do these things work? Do they offer any measure of protection against man-made or artificial radiation?

That’s a tough question to answer. I’m an engineer. I look at it from an engineering perspective, which is if I have a transmit source and something that interferes with that transmit source, I should be able to measure it. For most of the pendants or these devices, there are no studies that substantiate the claims by independent third-party studies. If it’s true that you do what you say you do, you should be able to find a laboratory that can test and establish that claim or not. That’s what I did. In fact, I probably knew more about the testing that the laboratories I send the products to because this is what I did for a living. For me, it’s measurable facts. In many of these products, I can’t find any evidence of independent claim and substantiation. I’m always iffy about it.

We’ve talked to some owners of some different companies. They’ve said it is difficult to measure. I’m not sure why. They’ve said, “We can’t measure this exactly scientifically.” Maybe because it goes beyond the realm of science as we understand it.

Possibly, but engineering is engineering. If you say there’s a signal that’s gone, there should be no signal. If it’s still there, it is hitting yourself and your body. I don’t want to get into details, but there are some that say, “I’m protected completely if I’m using this thing.” If you have a cellphone to your head and this device on your foot, how is it protecting the frontal lobe cells of your head? It’s got constant transmission. The simple engineering facts that somehow, I get confused about their story and what I know is engineering.

What do you recommend? Perhaps you have an idea of what might be effective.

I always talk about this. If you know your environment and are aware of the ambient within your room and the sources of emissions, simply by being precautionary about the devices you use and where you put them brings safety to you by managing those devices. For example, if you have a cellphone and Bluetooth, Wi-Fi, and cell tower transmission, you have three transmitters in that cell phone. You can take two of them off and have it just work as a cell phone. You’ve eliminated 2/3 of the transmission into your environment

It’s by going to the settings and clicking on the Bluetooth one and the Wi-Fi one, right?

As simple as that. You reduce the ambient in the room by simply turning them off. I don’t know if you remember, I always talk about distance. If it’s right against your head, the most power levels go into your brain. When you’re 4 feet away, over 80% of that signal danger to the cell is gone. Simply by moving it 5 to 6 feet away from you, you’re generally pretty safe. If you’re on the phone for five minutes a day, I wouldn’t worry about you. You’re fine. If you’re on it for hours at a day, that’s when you should think about alternative ways of using technology because there could be potential dangers there.

I personally am hardly on the phone at all, but if I am, I either have it on the speaker phone, or I use the air tube earbuds so that the signal isn’t coming directly into my brain. I have friends who think, “If I use regular earbuds, then it’s fine.” A dear friend of mine, Kim Schuette, told me, “No, because those are still sending the signal to your brain.” I’m not even talking about AirPods, Daniel. I’m talking about regular earbuds.

In fact, I work with clinics. There was one clinic I worked within which the owner is electrohypersensitive. He cannot wire the earphones in his ears because of the small electrical fields that are being generated in the ear. It influences the body. Whether you feel it or not is a debate about your sensitivity, but it’s clearly there. Conservatively, as you suggested, find an acoustical tube that eliminates the electronics because it’s going towards the sensitive part of the head.

I have a question that’s like a little bone of contention between my husband and I. I call him the accidental biohacker because he’s coming into this field, kicking and screaming. Whenever we’re in the car, I’m like, “Please, put your phone on airplane mode.” It’s because being enclosed with the windows rolled up and the phones pinging back and forth from nearby cell towers is worse for us than if we had our phones on airplane mode and the windows down. Do you agree with my assessment of the situation?

Yes. Let me tell you why. Let’s say you look outside your door and 500 feet away, you have a cell tower. When you pick up your phone and go to dial, you’ll notice all the bars are there. When all the bars are there, only 1/3 of the power of the cellphone is being transmitted. Rather than 1.6 watts, it’s roughly 0.5 watts. It easily getting to the cell tower.

Eat right and sleep right. This is important because it helps your body deal with this stuff.

When you’re inside a car, it goes close to zero bars. The reason why is because it can’t transmit out of the car. It’s been grounded from the car itself. It’s transmitting at 1.6 watts constantly all the time. It’s less than 4 feet away from you. It is, in that sense, why you want to try to turn it off or put it in airplane mode. It is because it will modulate the power level to the max if you don’t. Think of this. You have your whole family with a bunch of kids and adults all have these cellphones on.

It’s like we’re frying ourselves. We put a study in one of our journals that was done at a modest level, mind you. It was Beverly Rubik who did it. It showed that if the cellphone is not on airplane mode and it’s on your person, of course, you’re exposed to more radiation than if it’s in your backpack or what have you but no matter the case, it still affects your blood. It affects the clumping of the cells. It can cause this clumping that isn’t healthy. You want everything flowing in your body, not clumped up. Seeing that made an impact on me.

There’s no question about it. There’s a transient body response where the red blood cells congest. When you move your device away, it stops that coagulation that’s occurring on the red blood cells, but that’s a symptom of exposure. The problem is it can still damage the cell far beyond the blood. Blood is an important thing. You asked me what you should do. I’ll try to explain a simple thing. When you have exposures and your immune is being suppressed, Dr. Ali Johansen’s studies show that when you use these RF signals, they suppress your immune. What’s important is that you eat and sleep right. You eat within the right windows. The circadian rhythm, believe it or not, I know you know this is, is pretty important because it helps your body deal with this stuff.

It’s like you’re fortifying your body in the best way possible so that your body can withstand, if not thrive, amidst this bombardment of the enemy.

You do want to work on your body’s resilience. It is important to make sure that that 24-hour cycle is as healthy as it can be because that is a precautionary measure, believe it or not, for the environment we’re moving into.

I love that you mentioned that because you’re right. Diet, sunshine, movement, and all the things we can do to build our physical resilience will help us in the face of this onslaught of man-made radiation.

You don’t need any devices to help you protect yourself again if you know your environment and are maintaining a healthy 24-hour cycle. It’s important stuff.

Speaking of health from the inside out, I understand that you are developing a product at DefenderShield that will somehow help us from the inside out. Talk to us about that.

It turns out I got pretty frustrated with the medical community when I began this company because there were real people that were suffering from exposure. There didn’t seem to be much mainstream understanding of what it was from any part of the medical community, including the supplement space. Years ago, I began working with a biochemist. I have several physicians and researchers that are a coach for us. They’re a supervisory council for us that we have. We began thinking like we know the hearts of the problems. We know the gut. We know that it’s Dev-C that typically is increased when you have exposure from an RF signal. We know these things from all these years of work. We begin bringing products to market. The first product we brought to market was Omega-3.

I don’t know how much you know about the process of mega, but I can’t find many, if any, in the marketplace that is cold pressed and not using chemicals in preprocessing techniques. If you take a capsule of a typical omega product and you put it into a foam cup, it burns the foam cup in the bottom of it. The chemical residue is that hard. The processes and the amount that you get typically, we found that wasn’t the right levels. We came out with the omega. It systemically brings the right kind of fatty acids to the cells and begins protecting the cells. At that point, we know. For example, with eyes. When you look at a laptop, you have blue light coming in and mucking around with your retina.

We have an eye product now that is beefing up premature macular degeneration, which we know for a fact from science that it is a danger to the back of the eye. We began bringing products that target that and then, of course, the gut. We have this line of products all targeting the modern environment we live in now. We haven’t seen others doing it, but our team has been trying to figure out what we can do to help particularly those who want to be resilient in this modern life in which we’re being bombarded with electromagnetic radiation.

We appreciate that so much. I want to remind the readers that one of our favorite foods here at the foundation is Cod liver oil because Cod liver oil is replete with Omega-3. We need more of that in our diet. It’s a food that Dr. Price even said wasn’t a supplement. He considered it a food.

It’s that important and it’s a simple thing. It’s not this complicated stuff. It’s back to basics, essentially.

Take us back to basics here as we start to wrap up. Tell us, if the reader could do one thing to improve their health or maybe boost their resilience, what would you recommend that they do?

Focus on the 24-hour cycle. Make sure you’re eating right within the framework of where you should be eating and sleeping right. Make sure you have sanctuaries where you sleep and that you don’t have toxins like electromagnetic radiation routers or cellphones in that environment. That allows your body to heal. Occurring resilience is the basic form. I would suggest if you can do anything through that because that helps you in all the spatial living.

Daniel, thank you so much. I love this advice. I already do a lot of these things. I get up with the sunrise. I protect my sleep. I’m doing these things because you’re right, we want to be as strong and resilient as possible for as long as we may live.

Before you go to bed, don’t look at a tablet. Why? It has blue light and you have a cryptochrome protein in the back of your eye. That’s a little switch. It turns the melatonin on and off. If you’re looking at this screen and at 11:00 you decide to go to sleep, you won’t be able to go to sleep because the switch hasn’t turned on the melatonin. It’s already disrupting the cycle of sleep. You want to make sure that you have principles about what it is you should abide by. Those simple principles are pretty effective in helping us be resilient.

Thank you for your time. Thank you for helping encourage us to boost our resilience. We are so grateful for you.

Thank you so much.

—

Our guest was Daniel DeBaun. You can visit his website, DefenderShield.com, for more information and resources. You can find me at HolisticHilda.com. Now for a Letter To The Editor from a journal. Death by Hospital this one is called. “My father passed away on January 7th, 2022. He was killed at the hospital, in the same way, I described in my article, Questioning COVID, in the summer of 2021. The only difference is that he was not sick to start with. Although he had no symptoms, he tested positive to a swab test and was no longer allowed to stay at the nursing home. At the hospital, they started to give him sleeping pills of various kinds. They would not let him, or he was unable to perhaps, drink and eat alone, but worse, they left uncovered and without clothing.”

“He complained of being cold and then got a fever. One lung showed signs of pneumonia, but they thought it was a urinary tract infection and did not recognize it was a lung issue because they do not visit the patients hardly at all anymore. He died 22 hours after he was admitted. The autopsy was done to cover up everything. Now the judge has not decided what to do. My father was one of the most intelligent people in the world. Now I feel lost as he can no longer give me the wise advice. I know he must be in some sort of paradise for all the good deeds he did in his lifetime. He was so generous and always concerned to help others.”

This is a letter from Ilona from Italy. Ilona, we’re so sorry for your loss. Thank you so much for writing this letter to the editors that other people can avoid having this happen to loved ones. If you would care to write a Letter To The Editor on any subject, please write us at Info@WestonAPrice.org. Write Letter To The Editor in the subject line. Perhaps we’ll include your testimony, your story, or something that you’d like to bring to our attention in an upcoming journal. Thank you so much for reading, my friend. Stay well. Remember that all shall be well and all shall be well and all manner of things shall be well.

About Daniel DeBaun

Daniel DeBaun is an internationally recognized expert in EMF radiation, EMF shielding, and EMF-related health issues with special focus on the effect of exposure from mobile devices such as laptops, tablets, and cell phones. Daniel’s concern regarding the health impact of EMF emissions grew from over thirty years of engineering experience in the telecommunications industry, where he held a variety of executive positions at SAIC, Telcordia, AT&T, and Bell Labs. He is the co-author of Radiation Nation: The Fallout of Modern Technology, and the CEO of DefenderShield, the world leader in EMF radiation protection solutions.