RESEARCH ON ELECTROMAGNETIC WAVES CENSORED BY THE UNIVERSITY?

Marie-Claire Cammaerts, doctor now retired from the department of organism biology of the Université Libre de Bruxelles (ULB), explains the disastrous effects of electromagnetic waves on organisms highlighted in her research. But also how the university and some scientific journals tried to suppress his results.

When did you first become interested in the airwaves?

The starting point is that I love bees. At this time, CCD was being talked about⁽¹⁾. I thought it must be caused by electromagnetic waves, because the use of such waves and the bee mortality syndrome appear at the same time, after the regulation of insecticide use.

Your research starts with ants though?

I asked to have bees and was forbidden.

What does that mean?

I was forbidden to have bees. I asked why:  » It stings! If we stop at that… Rats bite then, bacteria are infectious, etc.!

You are summoned at the time?

The dean simply emailed me back that she would not allow me to have bees. I was called to the dean’s office afterwards when everything was published. The University puts antennas on its roofs and receives money to do so. She put wifi everywhere, in every auditorium and public place. Then to say that this technology is harmful, it cannot be done!

Do you know that there is a contract between ULB and Huawei⁽²⁾?

Yes, I learned that. Mr. André Fauteux sent it to me, saying:  » You probably know this, Madame?  » No « ⁽³⁾ I replied. It’s a contract to install 5G.

Do you mean that the university can no longer say what it wants as soon as it has economic interests with operators and producers of GSM?

Yes, that’s exactly it. You can’t say that these things are harmful.

Was this made clear to you?

Almost. The dean said to me, « There’s wifi here ma’am, and I don’t feel a thing ‚ » implying: that’s what you should say too.

In any case, we put obstacles in your way?

Yes, so I stopped my work on the air and focused my research on other things. After the electromagnetic waves, I studied the effects of a whole series of substances used by men, notably nicotine. Then I studied antidepressants: at that time, fluoxetine was used, a very harmful substance. All the ants died: they tore their nymphs apart, they attacked each other, and finally died. Indeed, finally, but after a long time and a lot of lawsuits about it, fluoxetine was removed from the market. I also studied quinine and showed that it protects the person from the effects of malaria, but increases its spread. I studied Xanax® (= alprazolam) which is highly addictive. I studied glutamate and showed that it is very harmful! All Asian products contain glutamate and some European products as well (e.g. Knorr, Royco…). I studied sweeteners: aspartame (which breaks down into harmful products), sucralose (which releases chlorine).

Let’s go back to the research on electromagnetic waves. You discover the effects on ants and you propose your publication?

Yes, it was hard, it took me 3 years to get there.

What was terrible?

Publish. I sent it to Myrmecological News. Answer: « We don’t publish that. Then to Biologica. Answer: « We don’t publish that ».

Without explanation?

None, the work was perfect. They had no complaints, but they did not want to publish the information that « the airwaves are harmful ». I sent to Belgium Journal of Zoology: it was accepted with revision. It then dragged on for a long time, and then the editor did what you can’t do: she sent it to Luc Verschaeve⁽⁴⁾ (Institute of Public Health), who at that time was destroying all the works showing the impact of waves. He even wrote an entire review in which he destroyed all the works, especially those of Panagopoulos, Balmori, Favre and myself, attacks to which we replied (see for this and the following quotations, the references at the end of the article).

Why is he doing this?

He was paid by Belgacom, among others

Do you have proof of this?

Yes, it is known. So finally someone told me about Henri Lai’s review. He is a physician who is also the editor of the journal Electromagnatic Biology and Medicine. He is an excellent publisher and has published my work. I then worked on paramecia, which allowed me to see the effect of waves on the cell membrane. In fact, waves act on everything that has electrical charges. The cell membrane, the mitochondria and chloroplasts membranes, the ATPase, the nerve impulse, the nucleus envelope, etc. The DNA strands are joined together by hydrogen bridges. A hydrogen bridge is a proton that constantly moves from one strand to the other; it is not a fixed bond, it is an electrical bond and the waves act on it, making it less stable. If, at that time, there is a mutagenic agent, a mutation can easily occur. The waves do not induce mutation but they promote it.

What are the risks for human beings, in concrete terms?

The nerve impulse will not function as well. Anything that works with membranes will work less well. This is the case, for example, of the cristae, located in the ear, comprising small ciliated cells allowing to have balance. At the level of the ears, there is also the organ of Corti, which will be affected by the waves (we will have tinnitus and other disorders). The mitochondria, which produce ATP, are also affected by the waves (so we will be tired).

The nerve impulse propagates along the cell membrane. Nerve cells subjected to electromagnetic waves must constantly try to repair their membranes to function properly. This is true for the nerves, but also for the brain, where many nerve impulses are constantly taking place. The waves cause headaches and tumors.

Do you think that the waves have profoundly changed the way people’s brains work?

No, it doesn’t change brain function, it damages it. You drive your car, you hit someone, you haven’t changed your car but it is damaged and you need to repair it.

But then, it can cause premature aging and especially early Alzheimer’s disease, as Dr. Did Belpomme show it? Memory problems? Children who enter a room and don’t know which way to go out…

Yes.

So, if you had to take political action after discovering all this, what would you do?

Wires should be put back in the houses, whenever possible. It is important not to use « smart » meters.

But they are putting wifi everywhere, in the schools, in the nurseries…

You don’t have to do it, you’ll leave the school exhausted. It’s no use. If it’s necessary for teaching, install wifi in one room of the school and not in every classroom. One leaves the Thalys exhausted, because they put the wifi in all the cars. We should put them in one car for people who absolutely need to work with their computer.

One could even ask the question of « imperative need »?

Yes, it is not necessary.

Can the waves cause necrosis, cell death?

I’m not sure, but they’re going to promote something else that could lead to fragility. You imagine a house where you weaken the walls, you weaken the appliances… You don’t destroy the house but if there is an earthquake, it will be destroyed while the others, not weakened, will be only slightly damaged.

Would you call it a health scandal worse than asbestos?

It’s like asbestos. Except that asbestos is present in a building. In the street, there are no more. The waves are now present everywhere: in homes, public places, schools, universities, trains, etc.

Moreover, there is an addiction to wifi and mobile phones…

Yes. We put wifi everywhere, in the means of transport… we make our home appliances work with wifi. People are addicted to their devices and more and more sophisticated gadgets are invented to keep them consuming. Someone was once asked,  » Why are you doing this? Didn’t it go well before? « . His answer:  » Yes, it is. But if we keep the same device as before, we won’t sell any more… So we have to make a new one, a little bit different, with extra gadgets, so that people will buy it again. « . It’s business, it must be lucrative! And this is at the expense of health⁽⁵⁾.

How do you feel about that, as a researcher, the fact that you scientifically discover the harmfulness of these devices, but it never or almost never has any effect on reality?

It may take a long time, but the truth always comes out in the end. Finally it is accepted, it is venerated. We finally accept it. The movement of the Earth around the sun, at first it was not accepted. We had to accept that the Earth is at the center and that the stars revolve around the Earth. Before we accepted the solar system as it is, it took a long time.

I understand what you’re saying, but can you stand to be on a postponed truth all the time?

Yes, it’s very hard. I tap my foot like Galileo. This will not change, it is inherent in the way humanity progresses. For everything: when you find something that is contrary to normal belief, that goes against a lucrative sale, you have to hide the truth. This exists in all fields: health (drugs), science, politics, and even everyday life… For example, expiration dates are wrong. When you read them, you throw away a product that is said to be out of date and you buy it again, when in fact it is still good.

You say:  » We hide the truth  » but who hides the truth?

The producers.

Those who have the power not to tell?

Yes.

But if people knew about it, do you think they would accept it? The waves, if they really knew their effects…

It is the same as for nicotine. Many smokers, because of the nicotine in their brain, have become addicted. They smoke and they know very well that it is harmful, that they risk cancer, that they destroy their lungs, etc. They know it and they smoke anyway. If we explain to a young person who is addicted to his phone, his tablet, and that he can no longer do without it, that this technology is harmful, he will understand but will continue to abuse it. In fact, we wait until people are hooked before we start telling the truth. That way, even if we say it, it doesn’t have an impact on a part of the population. This will only have an impact on those who are the most reasonable.

Is there more and more control over information?

Yes. Some do not dare to reveal the results of their research, or if they do, someone else destroys those results. We act on you, we do not publish you, we prevent you from doing so. The first one who showed the impact of the waves (on tomato plants, by highlighting the impact on enzymes and the fact that the plant then produces substances as it would do in a state of stress) could not publish his work. We destroyed his lab, he couldn’t continue. It was afterwards that his students, who believed in him, rebuilt the whole lab and published the article.

You say we destroyed his lab?

Yes. He found his lab destroyed. Professor Johansson also could not continue. I then published two small works with this professor.

You have stopped your research on electromagnetic waves.

Yes, but I had found it. I was done.

You should continue.

No, I was done. I wanted bees, I couldn’t. I took some paramecia and used my phone to finish. I then, much later, wrote a little text about bees.

Because you couldn’t get a wave generator anymore?

They told me that they could not lend the generator again because they needed it for students. I went to see the room where they put the generators: there were 4 of them in addition to the ones used by the students. And for the bees I couldn’t get any. So I drew my plan: I used my phone and paramecia (which we study with the students) and I said,  » I don’t work on waves, I work on the paramecia used in the practical work.  »

So you had to lie?

Yes. My husband and I then wrote the article at home.

When someone like that who is not high up denies you the wave generator… Where do the orders come from? You must have asked yourself this question?

I don’t know who they are influenced by. The Dean of the Faculty of Science? But he too is probably influenced…

It is striking that at the ULB, disturbing ideas have no place… At the ULB and elsewhere…

Yes, in many firms, organizations, publishing houses, etc.

And ultimately in elementary schools, in high schools.

Yes. I agree with you. And in the newspapers, on television,
… Coca Zero: it’s on TV, and people accept!

It’s the great spectacle of lies!

But have you ever seen the Coca Zero ad? We would really drink it! That’s great! And fluoride! We put so many advertisements on fluoride to whiten teeth and we gave fluoride to children… And it is toxic!

A minority takes advantage of it…

It benefits a whole range of people, yes. This benefits all those who sell a whole range of things. This benefits politicians, pharmacists, those who sell food with food additives … It reaches all areas! This concerns Mr. Toulemonde.

You said in the March 2013 Kairos ⁽⁶⁾ that people have their heads in the sand because they don’t want to know…

Yes, someone who is completely addicted to cigarettes, he puts his head in the sand. He knows he smokes and that it’s bad; it’s the same with young people and their phones.

Except that the cigarette is now clearly known… The rest we try to keep quiet…

Yes, we minimize. We say to ourselves that it is not serious…

Interview conducted by Alexandre Penasse