The Autistic: Canaries in the Electromagnetic Harm and Behavior Modification (Artificial Intelligence) Coal Mines

The community that supports the autistic must speak up on: 1) the threat posed by role of radiation in
this community vulnerable to linked health conditions, and 2) the vulnerability of this community to
artificial intelligence techniques, given challenges communicating with them and of comprehension.

The story of both the dramatic increase of autism (even with a change in definition to reduce the
numbers) and of their past control through the MK Ultra program, widely condemned, give these
potential canaries in coal mines a powerful voice.

Skyrocketing Autism in Children Appears Linked to Electromagnetic Exposure

Dr. Dietrich Klinghardt, of the top alternative medical clinic globally, worked with parents of autistic
children, after noticing higher levels of autism among those whose parents worked at Microsoft and
finding much higher levels of wireless radiation in their homes. By reducing wireless and other electric
fields, he often helped children improve their life, and sometimes recover in six months. He stated, in a
2012 video, that “he can accurately predict the risks of a pregnant mother faces of having an autistic
child, just by measuring the levels of electromagnetic fields in her sleeping environment.”

Dr. Martin Pall demonstrated the link of excess calcium flowing into cells and autism at the Autism One
Conference, and says, “The autism epidemic is probably caused by [electromagnetic field] exposure.”

Over two decades, he has published tens of papers on these channels, with Global Medical Discovery
recognizing Pall’s 2013 publication on voltage-gated calcium channels as one of the best that year.

Voltage-gated calcium channels -- that let calcium enter and leave cells -- use very low levels of
electricity to work. The mechanism is complicated and not worth describing here (drawn at a high level
in Pinealt, available online by Pall.) All types of electromagnetic fields (radiofrequency, magnetic,
electric) can keep one’s cells’ channels open for hours, which gives them extra calcium.

(This also may be linked to disruption of nerve cell communication, cardiac problems, oxidative stress,
cancer, breakdown of the blood-brain barrier, infertility, neurological problems including depression,
sleep disruption, cataracts, and neural development, in addition to autism.)

This work is consistent of that of Allen Frey. While working for General Electric’s Advanced Electronics
Center at Cornell University, when he was studying the effect of electrostatic fields on animals’ nervous
systems. In work funded by the Office of Naval Research and the United States Army, he discovered “the
blood-brain barrier effect.” At radiation levels lower than that of cell phones today, the protective shield
of the brain was damaged, letting in bacteria, viruses, and toxic chemicals. He showed that after a two�hour (cell phone equivalent) radiation of rats, fluorescent dye leached into their brains: this, from just one exposure.

While his career was terminated for this or similar research, others have confirmed the results including
Professor Leif Salford in Sweden, Dr. Nora Volkow of the National Institute of Drug Abuse, and triple
doctorate and Polish researcher Dariusz Leszczynski. So, too, has this harmful effect been demonstrated
in those who are exposed to high levels of dirty electricity, the power harmonics created by energy
efficient devices and radiofrequency used on electric lines for smart meters, among other causes.

Dr. Huttenlocher and Dabhokar in the Journal of Comparative Neurology said that before and right after
birth, a child’s brain becomes aware of sensory inputs, with Dr. Goldsworthy noting that the brain stores
of what it learns are regularly pruned to keep only those used frequently: “If the child is exposed to
radio frequencies during this period, the production of too many and often spurious signals will
generate frequent random connections. These will not be pruned even though they may not make sense
… [contributing to difficulty] with social interaction and various autism spectrum disorders.” (“An
Electronic Silent Spring: Facing the Dangers and Creating Safe Limits” by Katie Singer.)

In 2013 in Pathophysiology, Harvard pediatric neurologist Dr. Martha Herbert and the coeditor, Cindy
Sage, co-author of the 2012 Bioinitiative Report that reviewed 1800 studies, noted the coincidental
“dramatic increases” in Autism Spectrum Conditions which occurred at the same time as the
deployment of wireless technologies. They said low-intensity (non-thermal, the type we experience)
technology “might send spurious signals to developing brain cells during pregnancy, alter brain
development during critical periods, and may increase oxidative stress and immune reactivity that can
increase risk for later developmental impairments, with further disruption later in development
increasing risk, physiological dysregulation, and severity of outcome.” Sage separately worked with Dr.
Toril Jelter to shut down electric circuits to childrens’ bedrooms and to stop router and wireless
radiation (like Klinghardt), which improved 80 percent of the autistic children’s symptoms in two weeks.

A father of an autistic daugher had many autistic children sleep on an Earthing mat to reduce body voltage and provide a ready supply of electrons and found numerous positive behavioral changes (see Earthing book).

The Autistic Have Already Been Victims of Behavioral Modification (Like Artificial Intelligence)

The Senate Subcommittee on Constitutional Rights investigated the Central Intelligence Agencies’ highly
classified MK Ultra program that was tasked with “research and development of chemical, biological and
radiological material capable for employment in clandestine operations to control human behavior.” The
multiyear, bipartisan investigation questioned its constitutional legality of behavioral modification
principles and applications. The 1974 report rejected its use by state power (the only group conceived of
powerful enough to conduct such programs at the time).

The program was secret, because behavior modification was seen as illegitimate, professionally
unethical, a threat to the careers of participants, according to a 1963 Inspector General report, which
also noted many of the programs’ “activities were illegal, violated the interests of US citizens, and would
alienate public opinion.” (Zuboff). Academic psychologists and scientists contributed to the program,
which found “mind control” relied on unpredictable schedules of reinforcement.

The environments including control – that was total or close to it – included schools for the autistic.
Other places of experimentation included prisons, institutions for the mentally challenged, factories,
and psychiatric wards, and classrooms.

Information from the Senate Report

The Senate report said the founding fathers understood self-determination to be the “source of
individuality, and individuality … the mainstay of freedom” rejecting changing personality and manner of
thinking through behavioral control. “[T]he most serious threat … is the power of this technology
[which] gives one man to impose his views and values on another.”

Within government agencies, according to the report, there were a variety of behavior modification
techniques used which was “all the more disturbing that few real efforts have been made to consider the basic issues of individual freedom involved and … fundamental conflicts between individual rights and behavior technology.”

“Concepts of freedom, privacy and self-determination inherently conflict with programs designed to
control not just physical freedom, but the source of free thought as well … As disturbing as behavior
modification may be on a theoretical level, the unchecked growth of the practical technology of
behavior control is cause for even greater concern.”

The report offered severe condemnation for “electrophysiology … devices worn to constantly monitor
and control behavior (by computer) to “prevent a suspected behavior from occurring.”

“The First Amendment, the subcommittee argued, ‘must equally protect the individual’s rights to
generate ideas, and the right to privacy should protect citizens from intrusion into their thoughts,
behavior, personality and identity lest these concepts ‘become meaningless.”

Results

The prisoner’s and patient rights groups were better able to challenge behavioral control in public
institutions; psychologists start speaking of standards, accreditation, etc.; institutional review boards
were mandated; the Common Rule evolved and was institutionalized; and the “Belmont Report”
became the professional standard for ethics guideline for federal funded research on humans.

Yet even now, anecdotally, I sat next to the head of research at a major university on a plane who was
saying her friend could not get funding for studying behavioral treatment for the autistic, because the
[predominantly government money for research] was going into studying the minds and thinking of the
autistic. (I am paraphrasing).

The autistic – and their communities -- have a story to tell to avoid a repeat of a horrific chapter in
American history