Political Interests
Wireless radiation
Political and industrial conflict of interests
Conflict of Interests
Does the telecom industry tell the truth about wireless technology and harm?
Of course not. Too much money is involved. The telecom industry has much more money than the tobacco industry would ever have imagined.
You will be surprised on how much influence the telecom industry has on politics.
You will be surprised to hear how much money is spent to pay influential persons, leaders, and scientists concerning political interests.
You will be surprised to see that the telecom industri has got the power and leadership on all important political issues concerning wireless radiation, even concerning health effects and “safety limits”.
Is the telecom industry objective concerning heath effects and “safety limits”? Of course not.
Huawei at the heart of a corruption scandal in the European Parliament
Several people have been charged with active corruption, criminal organization and money laundering.
Cash for a pro 5G letter investigation
2025
Belgian prosecutors investigate whether Huawei paid MEPs for pro-5G letter to EU Commissioners.
Authorities are probing whether eight MEPs were illegally paid to sign a 2021 letter supporting the Chinese tech giant’s 5G interests.
BRUSSELS — Belgian prosecutors are investigating whether Huawei made illicit payments to eight Members of the European Parliament in exchange for signing a 2021 letter addressed to EU Commissioners, defending the Europe’s 5G rollout.
“The description of the Belgian probe, as provided by the investigative judge in charge of the case, says: “A sum of €15,000 was offered to the writer of the 5G letter, while each co-signatory was offered €1,500.””
Industry funded and directed COSMOS Cohort study
the study design was negotiated with Ericsson
August 2024 ScienceDirect Elsevier
COSMOS: A methodologically-flawed cohort study of the health effects from exposure to radiofrequency radiation from mobile phone use
“COSMOS was partially funded by the telecommunications industry in three countries, Finland, Sweden, and the United Kingdom (Feychting et al., 2024). Although the authors reported a “firewall” agreement ensured “complete scientific independence,” the study design was negotiated with Ericsson prior to adoption of this agreement (Monica Kleja, NyTeknik, May 30, 2012; https://www.nyteknik.se/nyheter/stralforskare-kringgar-avtalet-om-oberoende/1752342 (accessed 3/25/2024)). In our opinion, institutional support or research funding from industry constitutes an ongoing, competing financial interest because industry can terminate future funding should investigators fail to protect industry interests when they publish their research.”
“Given the serious methodologic problems with this interim COSMOS paper discussed above, we recommend that the authors retract their conclusion: “Our findings to date, together with other available scientific evidence, suggest that mobile phone use is not associated with increased risk of developing these tumours.”.”
Link:
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160412024003933
WHO and IARC are now both funded by the telecom industry and together with ICNIRP they want to review cancer and 5G.
WHO’s Cancer Research Agency to Assess 5G Health Risks — But Not Until 2025
5 Jan 2023
CHD By Suzanne Burdick, Ph.D.
“The World Health Organization’s International Agency for Research on Cancer will participate in a project to assess the health risks of exposure to 5G technologies, but critics accused the agency of ignoring already existing evidence and suggested the results could be tainted by industry partners.”
” Nilsson emphasized that in view of the influential corporate economic interests involved, it is necessary that any risk assessment be performed by scientists that have no ties to the telecom sector or telecom-affiliated corporations.
“However, the IARC is unfortunately no longer a guarantee for such objectivity,” she said, adding:
“The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation is by far the largest single voluntary funder of the IARC and such funding probably comes with strings attached.
“Further, IARC’s head of the radiation department, Joachim Schüz, is a well-known risk-denier, in spite of growing evidence to the contrary, who has produced a seriously biased report for the EU-Commission and flawed studies on brain tumor risks from cellphones, funded by telecom companies, such as the Danish Cohort and the Cefalo study.”
“… Nilsson told The Defender the project “looks like a greenwashing project for the rollout of 5G to the benefit of the major corporate stakeholders.”
For instance, Nilsson pointed out, some of SEAWave’s consortia partners — such as Telecom Paris and ITIS — are “of concern” for potentially receiving sponsor funding from 5G stakeholders.”
Link:
Dr Elisabete Weiderpass, MD, MSc, PhD, is a Brazilian cancer researcher who is a naturalized Swedish and Finnish citizen. She is an expert in cancer epidemiology and cancer prevention. She took office as IARC Director on 1 January 2019.
https://european-cancer-centers.com/scientific-committee/
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/langlo/article/PIIS2214-109X%2819%2930482-6/fulltext
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/langlo/article/PIIS2214-109X%2819%2930482-6/fulltext
ICNIRP and WHO The EMF Project
With seven new commissioners to ICNIRP—telecom industry’s private, self-replenishing NGO—in July 2024, the close ties between ICNIRP and the WHO’s EMF Project have only grown stronger. This connection is clear in the flawed WHO-commissioned studies that have been published recently.
ICNIRP’s Deepening Ties with the WHO’s EMF Project
In July 2024, seven new commissioners were appointed to ICNIRP, a private NGO closely linked to the telecom industry. Since ICNIRP is self-governing, the selection process remains undisclosed.
The organization’s already strong connection to the WHO’s EMF Project has now been further reinforced.
Akimasa Hirata, a professor of electrical engineering, has stepped in as the new chairman, succeeding psychologist Rodney Croft. Meanwhile, physicist Ken Karipidis takes over as vice-chairman, replacing Eric van Rongen.
Although two medical doctors are now on the commission, physicists and electrical engineers still make up the majority of its members.
The long-standing assertion that only heat-related effects are harmful—and the claim that mobile phones have no link to brain cancer—will continue to shape the organization’s stance.
Link: https://nejtil5g.dk/icnirps-taette-baand-til-whos-emf-projekt/
ICNIRP Commission Members
In a post on X (formerly Twitter), Martin Röösli announced that he was stepping down to focus on his role at the Swiss School of Public Health, where he was recently appointed professor at the University of Basel, effective February 1, 2024.
Röösli has been involved in multiple national and international environmental research committees, including BERENIS (a Swiss expert advisory group), the COSMOS project, IARC, and various scientific panels in Sweden and Japan. (See HERE)
However, he has faced criticism over conflicts of interest, accusations of misrepresenting research findings, and promoting positions that diverge from the majority of scientific consensus. He has also been scrutinized for receiving funding from the Swiss telecommunications industry via the Swiss Research Foundation for Power and Mobile Communications (FSM).
Link. https://nejtil5g.dk/icnirps-taette-baand-til-whos-emf-projekt
IEEE and ICNIRP
2025
The heat-based approach is upheld by the influential organizations IEEE (through its ICES subdivision) and ICNIRP. Their documents clearly state—albeit in footnotes—that they do not take responsibility for effects caused by anything other than heating. Instead, they suggest that it is up to others to determine whether radiation may cause harm through other mechanisms. However, this responsibility is passed on to entities such as governments, the EU, and employers, who, in turn, rely on IEEE and ICNIRP’s heating-based guidelines. They establish ad hoc committees—often led by IEEE and ICNIRP members—that apply the same heat-based framework to evaluate research.
ICNIRP and IEEE are private standardization bodies in this field and have direct influence over key regulatory authorities, including the FCC (the U.S. regulatory body) and the WHO’s International EMF Project, which is tasked with establishing global radiation protection standards. The WHO relies on IEEE and ICNIRP for expertise, but these organizations are entirely committed to the heating-based perspective, leaving no room for alternative viewpoints.
ICNIRP connections in the new WHO and IARC review on cancer and RF exposure
2023
The WHO task force group to review cancer and RF exposure (and 5G)
“Eleven of the 21 people have a current or former association with ICNIRP. Most of the other individuals have published or presented papers defending the ICNIRP limits for RF exposure.”
” Not a single one of the 250 EMF scientists who signed the International EMF Scientist Appeal was selected by the WHO for the Task group. Neither of these researchers was selected to work with the ten research overviews that the working group will consider. The signatories of the International EMF Scientist Appeal have more than 2,000 EMF publications listed in the EMF-Portal archive.”
Link (multiple language translation on the website):
WHO ANNOUNCES MEMBERS OF THE TASK GROUP ON RADIOFREQUENCY FIELDS AND HEALTH RISKS
21 Dec 2022
Einar Flydal
“It appears that WHO has biased the selection of task force and research review participants to ensure that the forthcoming WHO health risk monograph on RF will support ICNIRP’s lax exposure limits for RF, which fail to protect humans and other species from chronic exposure to low levels of radio frequency radiation. It’s no wonder that much of the public distrusts the WHO if this is how the agency is going to continue to “improve its handling of conflicts of interest and strengthen public trust and transparency.”
Link (multiple language trranslation on the website):
ICNIRP
The report “The International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection: Conflicts of interest ,
corporate capture and the push for 5G” writes:
“The majority of ICNIRP-scientists have done, or are doing, research partly funded by industry. Is this important? As we argue in the introduction, we believe it is. Scientific
publications, co-authored by two ICNIRP-scientists – Anke Huss and Martin Röösli, confirm the importance of funding. In 2006 and 2009 they did a systematic review of the effects of
the source of funding in experimental studies of mobile phone use on health, and their conclusion was that, “industry-sponsored studies were least likely to report results
suggesting (adverse health) effects”. And theirs is not the only study that showed this, as there have been numerous studies of the differences in reporting from industry-funded research versus publicly-funded research that suggest a strong funding bias on the results.
In addition to the fact that certain members of ICNIRP, are simultaneously members of the International Committee on Electromagnetic Safety (ICES) of the US-registered Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE), we have seen further evidence of a close cooperation between ICNIRP and ICES, an organisation in which many people from the
media and telecom industries, as well as from the military, are actively and structurally involved. During the current leadership of ICNIRP, these ties have become even closer “with
the goal of setting internationally harmonized safety limits for exposure to electromagnetic fields”. This must surely be considered as a situation in which conflicts of interest are a real
possibility.
It is clear from ICES minutes that ICNIRP worked very closely with IEEE/ICES on the creation of the new RF safety guidelines that were published in March 2020. And this implies that large telecom-companies such as Motorola and others, as well as US military, had a direct influence on the ICNIRP guidelines, which are still the basis for EU-policies in this domain.”
2020
“The report describes ICNIRP’s history and examines conflicts of interest for each of the 45 members of ICNIRP’s so-called “main commission” and “scientific expert group.” The question of whether ICNIRP is truly an independent organization or if there are conflicts of interest within the organization is raised.
The new report suggests that ICNIRP may not be a reliable independent decision-making body. ICNIRP’s composition is highly one-sided and not representative of the scientific community’s stance. Furthermore, over half of the members have conflicts of interest in the form of funding from the telecommunications industry. Additionally, several members of the industry organization ICES are also within IEEE. ICES issues guidelines for permissible radiation in line with ICNIRP’s perspective that only immediate heating effects are of concern. Representatives from telecom, military, and energy companies are actively involved in decision-making processes within ICES. Nevertheless, in 2016, ICNIRP Chairman Eric van Rongen chose to invite ICES members to submit comments on the new ICNIRP proposals. Several other events, according to the report, demonstrate a close collaboration between the industry organization ICES and ICNIRP. The fact that Eric van Rongen and several other ICNIRP members are also ICES members reinforces the perception that ICNIRP may not be as independent as claimed.”
“ICNIRP exerts significant influence on the risk assessments of member countries, not only through its recommendations but also because ICNIRP members hold positions in many other expert panels within various organizations, including WHO, the EU, the Radiation Safety Authority, and the Public Health Agency. A majority of their expert groups also consist of ICNIRP members. Therefore, when “teleloven” (law) refer to WHO, ICNIRP, EU, SSM, and the Public Health Agency arriving at the same conclusion, it is largely due to the fact that it is the same limited group of experts who have conducted these assessments. Additionally, these ICNIRP experts often have ties to the telecommunications industry through research funding, as confirmed by the new report.”
“In 1996, ICNIRP’s first chairman, Michael Repacholi, became the head of WHO’s work on the issue. He ensured that WHO established a close collaboration with ICNIRP, leading to WHO essentially acting as an extended PR arm for ICNIRP and promoting ICNIRP’s recommendations, which were favorable to telecommunications laws. The interest groups of telecom companies, such as the Mobile Manufacturers Forum (MMF), of which Ericsson is a member, and the GSM Association, where Telia is a member, were allowed to finance WHO’s efforts to promote ICNIRP’s recommendations worldwide, including through a so-called “harmonization project.”
Connections between the EUropean Commission and the telecom lobby
2020
The report “The International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection: Conflicts of interest , corporate capture and the push for 5G” writes:
“The Telecom Lobby
In order to promote a continuation of favourable policy-making, European telecom companies have many lobby-meetings with the European Commission, and no doubt also at national political levels. According to the EU transparency Register, ETNO has a budget of over one million euros for lobbying and representing Europe’s telecom companies. With at least seven registered lobbyists, ETNO had 70 registered lobby meetings with the European Commission (EC) in 2019. “ETNO’s primary purpose is to develop top-level policy papers and support members in promoting a positive policy environment allowing the EU telecommunications sector to deliver best quality services to consumers and businesses. We also organize some of the main European events for discussing telecom and digital policy.”
But of course, the individual telecom companies also have lobbying budgets and lobbyists representing them at the European institutions in Brussels. Ericsson had a lobby budget of 700.000 euros and five accredited lobbyist in 2019, Telefonica had a lobbying budget of 1,8 million euros and 6 lobbyists who covered no less than 83 meetings with the EC, Deutsche Telekom had a 1,5 million lobbying budget, with 5 lobbyists and a total of 110 lobby meetings with the EC.
In early December 2019, a large delegation of CEOs from ETNO met with Margrethe Vestager, Executive Vice-President of the European Commission responsible for “Europe fit for the Digital Age”. The delegation included: Tim Hoettges from Deutsche Telekom, Stephane Richard from Orange; Thomas Arnolder from Telekom Austria, Salvatore Rossi from TIM, Alexandre Fonseca from Altice Portugal, as well as the Chairman of ETNO, Steven Tas, the Director General of ETNO, Lise Fuhr, and senior representatives from Telefonica and Telenor.
At the end of January 2020, an important event was held, the European 5G conference. It welcomed more than 250 delegates, who discussed “the necessary next steps to ensure the success of 5G in Europe”. Eric Van Rongen, at the time still ICNIRP-Chair, was among the speakers who provided “the audience with insightful views on their areas of expertise.” The purpose, apparently, was not to discuss the sagacity and safety of rolling out 5G, but rather to ensure the success of 5G deployment.
It is important to note that the efforts of the telecom industry to influence regulatory agencies often take illegal forms. Telecommunications companies are high on the list of the
companies that were penalised in the U.S. for corrupt practices. European companies like Ericsson, Alstom and Telia are in the top ten.
Also significant, is the fact that more and more world leading insurance companies are backtracking from insuring telecom companies concerning the risks around EMF. In March
2019, in its “SONAR Emerging risk insights” report, one of the world’s largest insurance companies, Swiss Reinsurance Company (Swiss Re), classified “unforeseen consequences of electromagnetic fields” into the highest risk class, together
with endocrine disrupting chemicals. “The ubiquity of electromagnetic fields (EMF) raises concerns about potential implications for human health, in particular with regard to the use of mobile phones, power lines or antennas for broadcasting. Over the last decade, the spread of wireless devices has accelerated enormously. The convergence of mobile phones with computer technology has led to the proliferation of new and emerging technologies.
This development has increased exposure to electromagnetic fields, the health impacts of which remain unknown.”
The lobby power of the telecom-industry in Brussels, the decision-making heart of the EU, is enormous. Yet the corporations involved do not have to lobby the guidelines and health advice related to their technology, because ICNIRP has been providing the “safety certification” for over 25 years. At the same time the insurance sector is not very assured and does not want to pay possible litigation costs once telecom companies would get sued, which is happening more and more frequently. “
World Health Organization, radiofrequency radiation and health - a hard nut to crack
2017 Pub Med.
By Lennart Hardell
Department of Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and Health, Sweden.
“The biophysicist Michael Repacholi from Australia was the first chairman of ICNIRP in 1992.
Repacholi was during 1996-2006 the leader of the WHO department of electromagnetic radiation, the WHO
EMF project.
Michael Repacholi immediately set up a close collaboration
between WHO and ICNIRP (being head of both organizations)
inviting the electric, telecom and military industries to meetings. He also arranged for large part of the WHO EMF project to be financed by the telecommunication industry’s lobbying
organisations; GSM Association and Mobile Manufacturers
Forum, now called Mobile & Wireless Forum.
Michael Repacholi acted like a representative for the telecom industry while responsible for the EMF health effects
department at the WHO. Since he left WHO in 2006 he has
been involved in industry propaganda video interviews with
GSM Association and Hydro Quebec where he clearly speaks in favor of the telecommunications and the power industries, respectively.
Michael Repacholi is still the Chairman emeritus at ICNIRP and has propagated during almost 20 years worldwide the ‘only thermal effect’ paradigm of health risks from RF-EMF exposure, ignoring the abundant evidence for nonthermal effects or cancer risks.
Repacholi recruited Emilie van Deventer to the WHO EMF Project in 2000. She is the current project manager at WHO for the EMF project. She has been a long time
member of the industry dominated organization Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE). IEEE is the world’s most powerful federation of engineers. The members are or have been employed in companies or organizations that are producers or users of technologies that depend on radiation frequencies, such as power companies, the telecom and the military industry. IEEE has prioritized international
lobbying efforts for decades especially aimed at the WHO.
Van Deventer is an electrical engineer. She has no formal
or earlier knowledge in medicine, epidemiology or biology, so it is surprising that she was selected for such an important position at the WHO.”
WHO uses the telecom industry and their funds on science concerning health effects
RESONANCE BEINGS OF FREQUENCY DOCUMENTARY FILM
The documentary reveals that the WHO made research funded by the telecom industry “Mobile Telecommunications and Health Research (MTHR).
David Cogggan, chief scientist at the MTHR, admits that it gives a conflict of interest.
Please watch 41 minutes in the documentary.
We also has a link to this documentary on our page here: https://microwavesicknessinfo.com/index.php/wireless-harm/
The EU Commission scientific advisory group, SCHEER
2022
Critique of SCHEER Opinion Report on Health Risks from Radiofrequency Radiation
A review of the EU expert group and opinion of August 2022 on the need of a revision of the maximum exposure limits for radiation from wireless communications
“The EU Commission scientific advisory group, SCHEER, has released a draft opinion report on the possible risks from exposure to wireless technology like 5G, 4G, cellphones, Wi-Fi etc.
The SCHEER Opinion published in August 2022 advises positively on the adoption of the ICNIRP 2020 limits, in stark contrast to the opinion of the majority of field experts, concluding that ICNIRP limits are far too high, allowing radiation exposures known to cause harmful effects.”
“The EU Commission has appointed only eight scientists to produce the SCHEER Opinion report 2022 (the working group). The chosen scientists are either not experts in the field, or scientists who have previously expressed opinions favorable to upholding the prevailing exposure limits, and some members even having ties to the telecommunications industry”
EU SCENIHR: SCENIHR members' history (bias and conflicts of interest)
SCENIHR is the European Union’s Scientific Committee on Emerging and Newly Identified Health Risks
Swedish Radiation Protection Foundation, Sweden and
Priartem, France write in their report:
“Unbalanced and biased expertise on EMF
The European Commission expertise on EMF has since 2004 only included experts with an industry-friendly viewpoint and interpretation of the scientific literature. In the 2015 review, one single SCENIHR committee member was in charge of steering the process and selecting the experts assisting him. Nine of the ten selected experts have been involved with standards committees in the past who have repeatedly underplayed evidence that pointed to health effects – most notably ICNIRP, WHO-EMF Project, the Swedish Radiation Protection Authority (SSM) and the UK’s AGNIR. An updated opinion from such a group is likely to be consistent with the opinions they’ve previously expressed.”
“A context of industry influence
The European Ombudsman published a strong report in January 2015 criticizing the lack of transparency that surrounds the powerful experts groups called upon by the European
Commission.
“The Ombudsman calls on the Commission to establish a legally binding framework for all expert groups, including a definition of what balanced representation in different groups should look like.
She also recommends measures to reduce potential conflict of interest situations and to publish more information about the work of the groups. The Commission should reply to her proposals by 30 April 2015″
Link:
https://www.stralskyddsstiftelsen.se/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/Annex_1_SCENIHR_Experts_2015.pdf
“..there are noteworthy conflicts of interest in the SCENHIR EMF expert group. Several members have intimate relations to the concerned industry like
Theodoros Samaras (ex-consultant, Vodafone),
Mats-Olof Mattsson, ICNIRP (Telia Sonera’s scientific council),
Kjell Hansson-Mild (Telia Sonera’s scientific council),
Zenon Sienkiewicz, ICNIRP (consultant, Japan EMF Information Center emanating from Japan Electrical Safety & Environment Technology Laboratories and the Japan Electric Association) and
Anssi Auvinen, ICNIRP (repeatedly funded by MMF, the Mobile Manufacturers’ Forum)3.
The industry benefits tremendously from the no-risk conclusion as it postpones costly regulations and lowers the risks of liability claims.”
Link: https://www.helbredssikker-telekommunikation.dk/nyheder/39-ngoer-klager-til-eus-ombudsmand
Who is funding the WHO?
2023 (2021-2023)
The main funding of the WHO is by voluntary contributions.
The information is from the WHO’s own website.
Link:
Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation is the second largest financial contributor in the WHO.
They have funded the WHO for many years.
Apple
Gates Ventures
The digital dilemma - Documentary
2024
The digital dilemma reveils corruption and industry funds in the WHO
The digital dilemma on Dr. Michael Repacholi
CONFLICTS OF INTEREST EXISTING AT THE INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON NON-IONIZING RADIATION PROTECTION (ICNIRP)
2015
“This paper has been prepared in order to demonstrate the existence of numerous conflicts of interest among the members of the international organization ICNIRP (International Commission on Non Ionizing Radiation Protection. In Castilian, the International Commission for Non-ionizing radiation), that despite its private nature, is recognized by the World Health Organization (WHO) as reference entity to set limits of exposure for people to non-ionizing radiation in order to prevent such radiation affecting your health.
The fact that the members of the organization engage in various conflicts of interest, being related to companies interested in the development of telecommunications and new technologies, undermines the impartiality that should govern the regulation of limits on non-ionizing radiation people.
It’s incomprehensible that an international organization such as WHO, which has numerous and qualified public resources to adequately establish these limits, has delegated to a private organization issues affecting public health of all humanity.”
Links: https://www.avaate.org/IMG/pdf/escrito_web_icnirp_ingles_final.pdf
https://www.avaate.org/?CONFLICTOS-DE-INTERES-EXISTENTES-EN-LA-COMISIi-N-INTERNACIONAL-PARA-LA
Critic of ICNIRP & WHO International EMF Project
We’ve previously looked at industry fundings in the WHO and in ICNIRP.
We’ve also looked at conflicts of interests and scientific barriers in the WHO and the WHO EMF Project.
Here’s some additional information.
Chaiman of ICNIRP appointed the head of the WHO EMF Project
“.. Currently, the most prominent and influential evaluation group is the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection – ICNIRP. The influential position of this group stems from the fact that the first chairman of ICNIRP was appointed the head of the WHO EMF Project, and since then the WHO begun to use scientific evaluations and recommendations made by ICNIRP. This, in turn, brought to this evaluation group international recognition, prestige and influence – the WHO recommended what ICNIRP recommended.“
Dariusz Leszczynski (2012) “In experts we trust” or … should we?
Link: https://www.chronicexposure.org/limitsICNIRP.html
Other links: https://ehtrust.org/scientists-call-for-transparency-at-the-world-health-organization-emf-project/
Problems in ICNIRPS assessment
“Problems in assessment of risks from exposures to microwaves of mobile communication
Critique of ICNIRP-guidance levels – no consideration of:
- wavelength/frequency
- near field/far field
- overall duration of exposure (continuous, interrupted), acute and chronic exposures
- polarization (linear, circular)
- continues wave (CW) and pulsed fields(pulse repetition rate, pulse width or duty cycle, pulse shape, pulse to average power, etc.)
- modulation (amplitude, frequency, phase, complex)
- static magnetic field at the place of exposure
- electromagnetic stray field”
Link: https://www.chronicexposure.org/limitsICNIRP.html
Other links: https://ehtrust.org/scientists-call-for-transparency-at-the-world-health-organization-emf-project/
Scientists Call For Transparency at the World Health Organization EMF Project
2019
“.. several scientists who have expertise in electromagnetic radiation wrote Dr. Emilie van Deventer, an electrical engineer and Head of the International EMF Project, at the World Health Organization. The letter asks questions related to the recent call for teams to perform a systematic review of electromagnetic radiation.”
The IARC vets experts for conflicts of interest and industry ties and has classified RF as a Class 2 B possible carcinogen, whereas the EMF Project also under the WHO umbrella is criticized for a lack of transparency and industry loyalty.
Links:
https://ehtrust.org/scientists-call-for-transparency-at-the-world-health-organization-emf-project/
Why are wifi and mobile phones allowed today?
“1984 Despite research findings suggesting that direct exposure to low-level microwave radiation may or may not be safe, the FDA exempted cell phones from pre-testing in 1984, allowing them to be sold to the public without any FDA approval.”
“In his book Cell Phones: Invisible Hazard in a Wireless Age , published in 2001, Dr. Carlo tells the inside story of what happened when it turned out that the results of this research were not all that reassuring.”
In this article you can read about how Tom Wheeler (chairman and chief lobbyist for the powerful wireless industry trade association (CTIA) (later on chairman of the FCC made an offer to the FDA about that the industry would finance and implement a large post-market study about mobile phone safety. The purpose was to convince the public that mobile phones were safe.
In February 2000, Carlo presented his final report to the industry. Later, in the summer of 2000, he published the research results in the peer-reviewed online journal Medscape.
At the end of October 2000, Carlo publicly discussed his research findings on the American national television program 20/20. He also informed viewers that mobile phone users were twice as likely as non-users to develop brain cancer and rare tumors.
Link: https://einarfly
dal.com/2024/06/10/arsaken-til-at-mobiler-wifi-og-smartmalere-overhodet-er-tillatt-i-dag/
How do you manipulate science?
There are many ways to manipulate science.
One of them is to use simulated signals and not real-world signals.
Real- world signals are pulsed microwave signals and are more biological reactive. You find them in wi-fi routers, mobile phones, Bluetooth, antennas, and masts.
Simulated signals are non-pulsive (like the ones in a microwave owen), and they are less biological reactive.
Science financed by the telecom Industry uses simulated signals.
Read more on our page about real-life or simulated exposure here. Internal link:
The lack of international and national health policies to protect persons with self-declared electromagnetic hypersensitivity
2022
26 October 2022
Dariusz Leszczynski
“
Abstract
Electromagnetic hypersensitivity (EHS), known also as an idiopathic environmental intolerance attributed to electromagnetic fields (IEI-EMF) or a microwave sickness, is not considered by the World Health Organization (WHO) as being caused by the exposures to electromagnetic fields (EMF). EHS is not recognized as a disease anywhere in the world. Some studies have roughly estimated that 1–10% of the population might experience some form of EHS. However, because of the lack of diagnostic criteria for EHS, these estimates might be either under- or over-estimates. Because the vast majority of human population is exposed to EMF, the possibility of developing EHS from the EMF is a substantial public health issue that should be dealt with globally, even if the individual risk of developing EHS might be small. The WHO recognizes that the symptoms experienced by the EHS persons might be severe and might significantly hamper everyday life. However, after a broad analysis of international and national documents, there seems to be currently no effort to develop health policies for the dealing with EHS, no matter what causes it. National governments, follow the opinions of the WHO and the EMF safety standards setting organizations, the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP) and the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers – International Committee on Electromagnetic Safety (IEEE-ICES), are not developing any practical health policy advisories for self-declared EHS sufferers. However, symptoms experienced by the self-declared EHS persons affect their well-being and, according to the Constitution of the WHO, are a health problem. Hence, independently of what causes EHS symptoms, this admitted well-being-impairment should be dealt with globally by developing an uniform health policy. Furthermore, WHO, ICNIRP and IEEE-ICES should be advocating and supporting research that would generate a reliable scientific evidence on what are the possible cause(s) of EHS. Without such research there is not possible to develop diagnostic methods as well as any possible mitigation approaches. There is an urgent need for the WHO to advocate for the national governments to urgently develop a comprehensive and common EHS health policy.
Keywords: EHS; electromagnetic hypersensitivity; health policy; IEI-EMF; RF-EMF“
https://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/10.1515/reveh-2022-0108/html
Ronald Melnick on the NTP study and how "science" was conducted in the 80s and 90s
Ronald Melnick PhD talks about how ICNIRP uses “science” from the 80s where monkeys only were exposed to wireless frequencies from an hour and they only looked at one specifik pre-determined behaviour.
International Commission on the Biological Effects of Electromagnetic Fields (ICBE-EMF)
Environmental Health volume 21, Article number: 92 (2022)
“In the late-1990s, the FCC and ICNIRP adopted radiofrequency radiation (RFR) exposure limits to protect the public and workers from adverse effects of RFR. These limits were based on results from behavioral studies conducted in the 1980s involving 40–60-minute exposures in 5 monkeys and 8 rats, and then applying arbitrary safety factors to an apparent threshold specific absorption rate (SAR) of 4 W/kg. The limits were also based on two major assumptions: any biological effects were due to excessive tissue heating and no effects would occur below the putative threshold SAR, as well as twelve assumptions that were not specified by either the FCC or ICNIRP. In this paper, we show how the past 25 years of extensive research on RFR demonstrates that the assumptions underlying the FCC’s and ICNIRP’s exposure limits are invalid and continue to present a public health harm.”
https://ehjournal.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12940-022-00900-9
Link: https://ehjournal.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12940-022-00900-9
Telecom industry advisors for Japan, Korea NTP Repeat
The American NTP study found clear evidense on cancer in male rats. Now the telecom industry in Janan and Korea is making their own study concerning RF exposure
2023
Japanese-Korean “validation study”
Advisors for Japan, Korea NTP Repeat
“This is the list of members who receive money from or who comes directly from the telecom industry:
As appears from the list of members of the Japan-Korea International Advisory Committee, 8 out of 10 have a connection to ICNIRP or the telecommunications industry :
Alexander Lerchl , Prof. Dr. at Jacobs University (private), Germany. Over a number of years, industry spokesperson and, among other things, known to persecute other researchers. In both 2015 and 2020, he lost a libel lawsuit, an attempt to sweep the EU’s 20 million with false accusations. large REFLEX studio from 2004 under the carpet. Was dropped from the WHO’s IARC expert panel in 2011 due to his association with industry and his general behavior.
Michael Repacholi , Prof., founded the WHO-EMF Project and chairman of ICNIRP from 1992 to 1996, since then he has been honorary chairman.
Emilie van Deventer , electrical engineer, employed by Repacholi as head of the WHO-EMF Project.
Eric van Rongen , former chairman but now vice-chairman of ICNIRP.
Vijayalaxmi , University of Texas Health Science Center
Joe Wiart , Telecom Paristech, formerly France Telecom. Senior Fellow of the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE). IEEE’s mission is ‘to advance technology for the benefit of mankind .’
Michael Wyde , toxicologist and head of the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS)/NTP “
Link (multiple language translation on the website):
Link:
https://microwavenews.com/short-takes-archive/korea-japan-advisors
Swisscom (telecom industry) writes
Swisscom (telecom industry) 2003:
“The influence of electrosmog on the human body is a known problem. The health risk from mobile radio transmitters, handys and DECT telephones has been an explosive subject among the general public at least since the enormous breakthrough in mobile radio technology in the 1990s.”
“ …When, for example, human blood cells are irradiated with electromagnetic fields, clear damage to hereditary material has been demonstrated and there have been indications of an increased cancer risk”.
“ … These findings indicate that the genotoxic effect of electromagnetic radiation is elicited via a non-thermal pathway. Moreover aneuploidy is to be considered as a known phenomenon in the increase of cancer risk.”
(You can read more in the Responsum from lawyer Christian F. Jensen. Link: https://microwavesicknessinfo.com/index.php/emf-links/ )
International people and who they work with
International
Maria Feychting , professor and cancer researcher at the medical school, Karolinska Institutet in Stockholm. In articles and statements, she reassures the public about wireless technology and defends the limit values that she herself has helped to adopt from her top position as vice chair of the powerful international industry NGO, ICNIRP. According to ICNIRP, she has fulfilled the following roles: Vice Chair 2012-2020, Commission Member 2008-2020, SCI (Epidemiology) Member 2000-2008. Currently sits in 2 project groups under ICNIRP: Knowledge gaps regarding RF knowledge (including with Martin Roosli) and a project group regarding short wavelength light and circadian rhythm.
ICNIRP advises Denmark and approximately 50 other countries on the limit value for mobile radiation. ICNIRP sovereignly elects its own members itself in closed election processes.
Maria Feychting has also conducted research for millions of kroner, which the Nordic telecommunications industry made available years ago to the Karolinska Institutet and the research project Cosmos, which was to investigate whether there is a connection between mobile phone call times and increased morbidity. In Sweden, the project was funded by Telia, Telenor and Ericsson with approximately 7 million Swedish kroner for a project period that lasted from 2007 to 2012. In Denmark, the Danish Cancer Society
is the official research partner, and the study is being conducted by approximately the same team that from 1994 and approximately 20 years later conducted the large Danish cohort study of mobile telephony and cancer, which Denmark’s two largest mobile phone companies funded with 1.5 million kroner (2020-converted). She herself does not believe that there is a conflict of interest. This is because the Swedish innovation agency, Vinnova, received the money from the telecommunications industry and distributed the millions to the most suitable researchers. “I don’t think it’s a problem because the funds are channeled through third parties that act as firewalls between us researchers and industry, which guarantees us independence,” she said. But Ny Teknologi documents that this “firewall” is missing. Contacts between industry and researchers are not reported as stipulated in the agreement. Despite a statement in the agreement that it will “ensure that all connections” between the companies and researchers are “transparent,” Vinnova does not request specific meeting minutes. The researchers have mentioned contacts with industry in status reports to Vinnova. However, there is no information about the meeting date, agenda or participants. There are no notes about such meetings in the authority’s document list in the case.
About the International EMF Scientist Appeal: “Not scientifically trained.” “It is better to rely on scientific compilations made on behalf of established/public organizations such as WHO, EU SCENIHR, Public Health England, HEALTH COUNCIL OF THE NETHERLANDS and SSM (Radiation Safety Authority) in Sweden.”
This was stated by Maria Feychting to the Swedish Expressen back on April 13, 2020, long before the report from the National Health Council in the Netherlands came out on September 2, 2020. In the report, the Dutch Health Council recommends, among other things:
1) monitoring exposure before, during and after the rollout of 5G systems in order to identify possible long-term health risks that can then be better estimated.
2) research into, among other things, the relationship between exposure to 5G frequencies used and the incidence of cancer, reduced male fertility, poor pregnancy outcomes and birth defects.
3) not using the 26 GHz frequency band for 5G as long as the potential health risks have not been investigated.
4) taking a cautious approach and keeping exposures as low as reasonably achievable.
Maria Feychting, wrote in an email to the Swedish Expressen that there is no basis for claims that 2G, 3G, 4G or 5G will affect the immune system.
“If it were that way, we would have seen an increased incidence of infectious diseases in most countries for a long time, which has not been observed. On the contrary, there has generally been a reduction in mortality.”
This is stated in an article in Expressen, which deals with 5G, corona and the burning of telephone masts in England.
“When Expressen asks Anders Sydborg from the Facebook group Strålningsupproret what sources he bases his opinion on, he refers to The International EMF Scientist appeal. The organization describes itself as “a credible and influential voice” that drives public opinion towards the UN, its sub-organizations and member states for increased protection of health from exposure to radiation.”
But Maria Feychting believes that the international EMF Scientist Appeal is not a scientific organization:
“Many of those listed there are not scientifically trained or have their scientific background in a completely different field of research and/or are no longer scientifically active. I think it is better to rely on scientific compilations made on behalf of established/public organizations such as WHO, EU SCENIHR, Public Health England, Health Council of the Netherlands and SSM (Radiation Safety Authority) in Sweden.”
Could Maria Feychting be referring to the Health Council of the Netherlands today? Interestingly, the council also included members of ICNIRP – the privately owned telecom industry NGO – namely:
Eric van Rongen: one of the two secretaries of the Dutch committee on EMF. Chairman of ICNIRP since 2016 and vice-chairman from 2020. He was still chairman during the preparation of 2020. Has long been a member of the industry organization IEEE, which represents the military, telecom and electrical industries.
Anke Huss: Department of Risk Assessment Science, University of Utrecht, also member of ICNIRP
Zenon Sienkiewicz: invited as an expert by the Dutch Committee on EMF. He was a member of ICNIRP during the preparation of the ICNIRP 2020 guidelines.
All three are co-signatories of the Dutch report.
Sources:
https://www.expressen.se/nyheter/coronaviruset/masterna-branns-for-coronateori-utan-belagg/
https://emfscientist.org/
https://www.nyteknik.se/digitalisering/stralforskare-kringgar-avtalet-om-oberoende-6417308
https://www.healthcouncil.nl/documents/advisory-reports/2020/09/02/5g-and-health
https://www.facebook.com/groups/traadloesfritorsdag/permalink/639138510332203/
Anders Ahlbom is Maria Feychting’s closest professorial colleague. Anders Ahlbom agreed directly with the mobile phone manufacturer Ericsson on how the research project should be carried out. On 6 October 2011, Anders Ahlbom sent an email directly to Ericsson with a research and budget plan, and he announced that he would subsequently ask the intermediary, Vinnova, to distribute the money.
In May 2011, it was revealed that Anders Ahlbom also worked in Brussels as a telecommunications lobbyist together with his brother Gunnar Ahlbom. It was revealed shortly before Anders Ahlbom was to participate in the WHO’s evaluation of cancer and mobile telephony in 2011.
The WHO’s cancer agency, IARC, removed him from the assignment directly, and afterwards he voluntarily resigned as a member of the scientific council of the Swedish State Radiation Safety Authority, SSM, which is considered one of the world’s leading national councils in the field. However, he continued his partnership with Maria Feychting at the Karolinska Institute in Stockholm for a number of years. They co-wrote a section on mobile phone radiation in the Swedish Environmental Health Report from 2017, where they jointly conclude that there is no evidence of harmful mobile phone effects.
Anders Ahlbom was a member of ICNIRP from 1996 to 2008 and chairman of ICNIRP SCI (Epidemiology) during the same period.
More about Maria Feychting’s conflicts of interest and scandals:
https://www.nyteknik.se/digitalisering/stralforskare-kringgar-avtalet-om-oberoende-6417308
https://stralskyddsstiftelsen.se/…/anders-ahlbom-and-maria…/
https://betweenrockandhardplace.wordpress.com/…/epidemiolo…/
https://microwavenews.com/news-center/anatomy-rumor/
https://microwavenews.com/news-tags/maria-feychting/
https://www.icnirp.org/en/about-icnirp/former-members/index.html
Theodoros Samaras, professor of physics at the Aristotle University of Thessaloniki in Greece, who is quoted in a broadcast on Detektor, broadcast on May 3 and a post on DR.dk from May 4, 2019, as saying, ” As it stands right now, there is no reason to worry about the 5G network. “
By googling, we can easily find the following about the interests of the chairman of the EU Commission’s expert group, SCENIHR, the “Scientific Committee on Emerging and Newly Identified Health Risks” (an umbrella term for the EU Commission’s expert panels on health risks associated with new technologies, etc.) Theodoros Samaras also represents. Samaras is a member of the industry organization IEEE, which represents the military, telecommunications and electrical industries. IEEE is the organization that recommends the limit value for the permitted radiation. ICNIRP (The International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection) bases its recommendations on those that IEEE prepared in the early 1980s. In 2010 – 2012 Samaras was a consultant for Vodafone-Panafone, a telecommunications operator in Greece. IT’IS, a Swiss organization funded by the major telecommunications companies, states that Samaras is their advisor and was previously employed there. Furthermore, he is a co-owner of Thessaloniki Software Solutions SA Samaras can therefore not be considered an independent expert in any way.
https://ec.europa.eu/health/scientific_committees/emerging/docs/doi_scenihr_samaras_en.pdf
See more here:
https://nejtil5g.dk/dokumenter/internationale-graensevaerdier-for-mikroboelegestraaling/
Eric van Rongen . PhD, radiobiology. That is, he has a PhD (1989) on radioactive radiation of cancer. This field of study is irrelevant in terms of being able to assess the effects of RF-EMR, as the mechanisms are completely different (physical mechanisms vs. biological mechanisms). He joined ICNIRP in 2001, was chairman from 2010 to May 2020 and is now vice chairman. ICNIRP (1) (2) is a private scientific association registered in Germany. Despite its unofficial status, ICNIRP has become the de facto scientific authority for safety guidelines on exposure to electromagnetic radiation for most European states.
Eric van Rongen is also scientific secretary of the Dutch Health Council’s Committee on Electromagnetic Fields (EMF) (3), as well as a committee member of the Swedish State Research Committee in the field (SSM). Institutions that Denmark has traditionally leaned on.
Eric van Rongen has long been a member of the industry organization IEEE, which represents the military, telecommunications and electrical industries. IEEE is the organization that recommends the limit value for the permitted radiation. On May 3, 2019, DR’s Detektor asked several experts to comment on the appeal against 5G, which 417 independent international researchers in the EMF field have signed ( http://www.5gappeal.eu/ ). Eric van Rongen is quoted as saying: ” With all due respect, many of those who have signed are not experts in the field .” He is also the one who, in a report on CNBC on March 27, 2019, compares radiation from mobile phone masts with radiation from an incandescent lamp, despite the fact that it is in no way comparable.
But you can also find quotes like this:
“It (5G) is not set up as an experiment with public health, but of course you can consider it that way. It will be necessary to obtain more information about exposure and all the health problems that can result from it.”
More quotes from Eric von Rongen can be seen here:
https://tabttraad.home.blog/2020/09/27/uhorte-citater-om-5g-og-stralesikkerhed-af-mr-icnirp/
Interview with Eric Van Rongen, Vice-Chairman of ICNIRP:
“The only established effect of radiofrequency fields is the induction of heat in tissue.”
Regarding the criticism of ICNIRP’s new recommendation for guidelines (4) (5) from the Foundation for Research on Information Technologies in Society (IT’IS), an independent research foundation, van Rongen states: “We are aware of this paper and have discussed it in ICNIRP. We do not feel that it shows that there may actually be a problem with the currently proposed limits at the higher frequencies.”
It is the radiation expert Niels Kuster , PhD researcher at ETH Zurich, (5) and his private, Swiss research organization, IT’IS, who have, among other things, criticized the current limit values and the assumptions behind them. He and IT’IS have cast doubt on whether the limit values for 5G antennas will protect the skin from the heating damage for which the limit values are intended. (6) (7) (8)
Regarding his opinion on the long-standing and extremely expensive US National Toxicology Program (NTP) study (9), van Rongen states: “Most likely, the warming effect of the large male rats contributed to the increased risk of this heart tumor.”
The article from Investigate Europe is from April 2, 2020. (10)
Sources :
1) https://www.icnirp.org/
2) https://nejtil5g.dk/dokumenter/internationale-graensevaerdier-for-mikroboelgestraaling/
3) Van Rongen is thus also a co-signatory of the 5G report from the National Health Council of the Netherlands: From the conclusion: “The Council cannot answer the question of whether exposure to 5G frequencies actually poses health risks. This is because it is not known at what level of exposure effects may occur or how high the exposure to humans will be after the 5G systems are put into use.” The report was published on September 2, 2020.
https://www.healthcouncil.nl/documents/advisory-reports/2020/09/02/5g-and-health
4) https://www.icnirp.org/cms/upload/consultation_upload/ICNIRP_RF_Guidelines_PCD_2018_07_11.pdf
5) https://nejtil5g.dk/dokumenter/icnirp-og-de-nye-2020-graensevaerdier/
6) https://itis.swiss/who-we-are/staff-members/all-staff/niels-kuster/
7) https://academic.oup.com/rpd/advance-article-abstract/doi/10.1093/rpd/ncz293/5707344?redirectedFrom=fulltext
8) https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30247338/
9) https://nejtil5g.dk/dokumenter/cancer/
10) https://www.investigate-europe.eu/en/2020/%E2%86%92-eric-van-rongen-of-the-international-commission-on-non-ionising-radiation-protection-we-need-more-studies-on-5g-but-it-is-not-icnirps-task-to-decide-that/
Rodney Croft has been ICNIRP Chairman since May 2020. The election took place at the ICNIRP General Assembly on 20 November in Munich.
“Rodney Croft is Professor of Health Psychology in the School of Psychology, University of Wollongong, Australia. He earned degrees in philosophy and psychology before completing his PhD in psychology at the University of Wollongong in 2000, and then worked in cognitive neuroscience as a postdoc at Imperial College, London and then at Swinburne University, Australia. His research focuses on the delineation of human brain function, particularly in relation to agents that may influence it (e.g. electromagnetic fields, illicit and medicinal drugs), as well as psychiatry more generally. He has been involved in research into ELF and RF non-ionising radiation since 2000, primarily using the electroencephalogram as a means of observing subtle changes in brain function. He serves on a number of national and international scientific and government committees, was the Executive Director of the Australian Centre for Radiofrequency Bioeffects Research (2004-2011) and is currently the Director of the Australian Centre for Electromagnetic Bioeffects Research. Croft was appointed Associate Editor of the BEMS journal in 2014 and joined the ICNIRP Biological Standing Committee in 2008 and the Main Commission in 2012.”
https://www.icnirp.org/en/about-icnirp/commission/details/chair.html
Rodney Croft will be succeeded as Chair in July 2024 by Akimasa Hirata , Professor of Electrical Engineering at Japan’s Nagoya Institute of Technology,
Alexander Lerchl , professor of biology and ethics at the private Jacobs University in Bremen, who will be in charge of the large research project that has been launched in Germany, where the German federal state has invested the equivalent of 8 million Danish kroner to investigate whether the DNA of skin cells will be affected by the new 5G frequencies from 26 Gigahertz and upwards. One of the most expensive basic biological research projects that will investigate radiation effects in humans. (1) (2)
Alexander Lerchl has been an industry spokesman for a number of years and is known, among other things, for persecuting other researchers. In both 2015 and 2020, he lost a libel lawsuit due to his involvement in an attempt to sweep the EU’s 20 million REFLEX study from 2004 (3) under the carpet with a major campaign of false accusations. (4) (5) (6) He was also dropped from the WHO’s IARC expert panel in 2011 due to his connections to the industry and his general behavior.
The ITEM replication study (2015): The fact that Lerchl had been put under scrutiny also meant that he could not tamper with the results of his replication study from 2015, which replicated the ITEM study from 2010.
The intention was to disprove the 2010 study, but he found with the 2015 study exactly the same result as the 2010 study: That non-ionizing electromagnetic radiation (wireless technology) accelerates cancer/tumor growth (in this case in mice). (7) (8)
An article in Tabt Trådt elaborates on the story of Lerch: (9)
Unwelcome at WHO
Long before Alexander Lerchl was convicted of libel, he himself encountered opposition to his person because of the smear campaign.
In 2010, he applied to assist the expert group that was to evaluate the possible link between mobile phones and cancer at the WHO’s cancer agency, IARC (International Agency for Research on Cancer). Lerchl proposed himself as a technical consultant to the working group, but IARC asked him to stay away. (10)
In a personal letter that was later made public, IARC justified the rejection by saying that half of Lerchl’s own published research was not original research. They were articles with critical comments against research results that had suggested that mobile phones could have harmful effects on health, and Lerchl had also extended his campaign to other dissemination platforms than research articles.
“Considering the above points, we do not feel that your participation will contribute to a balanced search for consensus in the upcoming working group ,” IARC wrote in its negative response.
The IARC evaluation concluded in May 2011 with radiofrequency radiation being classified as possibly carcinogenic to the WHO.
However , the Japanese-Korean research project
Alexander Lerchl still holds several crucial top positions in international radiation research. He is still in the thick of things, where the big positions and money bags for research are handed out, and that is nothing new to him, writes Tabt Tråd.
From 2002 to 2008, he was a significant recipient of research funds from the German mobile research program, DMF (Deutsche Mobilfunk-Forschungsprogramm), which was coordinated by the German Radiation Protection Commission, SSK. The telecommunications industry provided half of the program’s budget of 17 million euros. Corresponding to 160 million Danish kroner.
In 2019, Alexander Lerchl was appointed to sit on the external advisory panel for the Japanese-Korean research project, which is a large toxicological animal study that is to directly verify and replicate the results that the National Toxicology Program (NTP) in the United States published in 2018. NTP’s research concluded that mobile radiation is carcinogenic in laboratory animals.
Head of his own key study on 5G
In 2019, Alexander Lerchl received a grant of approximately 8 million kroner from the German Federal Radiation Agency, BfS, which has therefore chosen to maintain close cooperation with Lerchl – despite the libel verdict in 2015. The research project will investigate whether the particularly high frequencies from 26 Gigahertz and above, which are the most technologically ambitious part of the 5G vision, can pose a harmful potential for DNA in human cells by irradiating laboratory cultures of skin cells with frequencies that are planned for 5G use.
ICNIRP
Although Alexander Lerchl has never had a seat in ICNIRP himself, he is considered a permanent part of what some critics call the “ ICNIRP sphere ”. According to Tabt Tråd, this has become the critics’ way of defining and delimiting a network of powerful researchers and institutions that guard over the limit value as we know it, and that consistently reject the significance of research results that show harmful effects.
Lerchl has worked sporadically for ICNIRP. He himself has been closely associated with the BfS in Munich, which is Germany’s Federal Agency for Radiation Protection, for decades. Perhaps it should have been called the “BfS sphere”, because the German federal state institution in Munich seems to be a center point in international radiation research, where money and influence come with it.
Will the libel verdict have consequences?
The radiation-critical German-Swiss environmental organization Diagnose:Funk is demanding that the second libel verdict have consequences for Alexander Lerchl.
In a long press release, Diagnose:Funk is now demanding that the German radiation authority, BfS, remove Alexander Lerchl from responsibility for the multi-million-euro research project that is investigating the unexplored new 5G frequencies for DNA effects. The project is being carried out at the privately run Jacobs University in Bremen, where Lerchl is a professor.
It is demanding that the Medical University of Vienna compensate Elisabeth Katochvil and Hugo Rüdiger, who both suffered the harm of the university supporting the fraud allegations.
Sources:
1) https://tabttraad.home.blog/2019/11/28/tyskland-millioner-fra-forbundsstaten-til-5g-forskning-af-huden/
2) https://www.jacobs-university.de/news/forschungsprojekt-zu-den-auswirkungen-des-5g-mobilfunks-auf-die-menschlichen-zellen-der-jacobs
3) https://kompetenzinitiative.com/wissenschaft/reflex-studie-gentoxisches-potenzial-hochfrequenter-emf/
4) https://stiftung-pandora.eu/2021/01/27/das-hanseatische-oberlandesgericht-bremen-verurteilt-professor-alexander-lerchl-zur-ruecknahme-seiner-faelschungsbehauptung-gegenueber-der-reflex-studie/#more-17686
) https://tabttraad.home.blog/2021/01/29/domt-for-injurier-igen-tysk-professor-fortsatte-svindelanklagerne-mod-brandvarmt-forskningsresultat/ 6) https://www.facebook.com/groups/traadloesfritorsdag/permalink/744865353092851/
7) https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0006291X15003988 8) https://kompetenzinitiative.com/wissenschaft/ueberraschte-oeffentlichkeit/ See more here: https://nejtil5g.dk/dokumenter/sundhedsrisici-ved-5g/
9) https://tabttraad.home.blog/2021/02/02/trods-to-domme-imod-sig-smudsprofessor-har-flere-toppositioner-i-international-stralingsforskning/
10) https://microwavenews.com/news-center/lerchl%E2%80%99s-unattainable-prize
Martin Röösli . Röösli is Professor of Environmental Epidemiology at the Swiss Institute of Tropical and Public Health in Basel and heads the Unit for Environmental Exposures and Health. He has a background in atmospheric physics and a PhD in environmental epidemiology. His research focuses on various environmental topics. In the field of non-ionizing radiation, he has conducted several exposure assessments and epidemiological studies on the health effects of electromagnetic fields, including population-based studies dealing with cancer, neurodegenerative diseases and non-specific symptoms of ill health and an occupational study of railway workers. He is a member of various national and international commissions for environmental research, including the head of BERENIS, the Swiss Advisory Expert Group, the COSMOS project, the IARC, but he also sits on committees in the Nordic countries and in Japan. He has been a member of ICNIRP since 2016 , but will leave ICNIRP as of July 2024. Martin Röösli was appointed professor at the Faculty of Science at the University of Basel with effect from 1 February 2024.
In January 2020, a number of researchers, including the Swedish cancer professor Lennart Hardell, sent a letter (1) to the Swiss federal government with the aim of removing Martin Röösli as an advisor to the Swiss Radiation Agency. The accusations against Martin Röösli are extensive. They accuse him of having, for a long time, undermining the solid research results showing evidence of cancer, effects on the blood-brain barrier and the effects of mobile phone radiation on fertility. The group also accuses Röösli of having major conflicts of interest , of promoting views that contradict those of the vast majority of scientists in the world, and of giving research articles strongly erroneous views about what research results show.
Another complaint in the letter is that Martin Röösli has received money from the Swiss telecommunications industry via the Swiss Research Foundation for Electricity and Mobile Communications, FSM . In a response to Tabt Tråd (2), Martin Röösli first denies that he has conducted research for industry money:
“Because my research is only funded by public money and non-profit funding. ICNIRP has a very strict policy regarding conflict of interest. No one with ties to the industry can be part of ICNIRP. All potential conflict of interest is made transparent,” he writes.
When Tabt Tråd asks him a new question and a new answer comes:
TT: “ But it is claimed that funding for your research from the Swiss FSM organization is money that can be traced back to the telecommunications industry. Is that factually correct, and if so, why do you disagree that it is a conflict of interest?”
MR: “Yes, the money comes from industry, as it does in the French radiation research program at ANSES (ed. French health agency). But in the FSM, only researchers are involved in the selection of research projects. I strongly believe that it is industry and not taxpayers who should come up with the money.”
In September 2020, the Dutch Health Council published a report on 5G and health. (3) The report presented its dilemma: on the one hand, it claims something that is in line with ICNIRP’s statements, but on the other hand, it admits that there is insufficient evidence to rule out the possibility of harmful health effects. This committee also included former chairman, now vice-chairman of ICNIRP, Eric van Rongen.
The same conflict is highlighted in the report referred to by BERENIS in the January 2021 newsletter, (4) which is an abridged version of the review of studies investigating the effects of ELF-EMF and RF-EMF exposures on oxidative stress. The conclusions of the abridged review state:
“ Pre-existing conditions, such as immune deficiencies or diseases (diabetes, neurodegenerative diseases), compromise the body’s defense mechanisms, including antioxidative protection, and it is therefore possible that individuals with these conditions experience more severe health effects. (…) More extensive studies under standardized conditions are needed to better understand and confirm these phenomena and observations .”
Therefore, studies on the effects of oxidative stress on people with pre-existing conditions are needed before it can be claimed that the ICNIRP safety guidelines protect everyone, regardless of age or health status.
But BERENIS has a member who is also part of ICNIRP, namely Martin Röösli. He thus guaranteed both, opposing, statements. Again, it is important to note that members of ICNIRP are selected by ICNIRP and only scientists who have the same “scientific” opinion as ICNIRP are invited.
Sources:
1) https://nejtil5g.dk/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/swiss_roosli_-berenis_uvec_january-2020_hardelletal.pdf
2) h ttps://tabttraad.info/2020/01/24/beskyldninger-fyger-who-eksperter-i-aaben-krig-om-schweizisk-5g-rapport/
3) https://www.healthcouncil.nl/documents/advisory-reports/2020/09/02/5g-and-health
4) https://nejtil5g.dk/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/newsletter_berenis_sonderausgabe_januar_2021-1.pdf
Anke Huss , PhD, epidemiology, University of Utrecht, The Netherlands. Assistant Professor in Environmental Epidemiology with a special focus on environmental exposures that show spatial distribution. She is involved in advanced methods for exposure assessment, including modeling of different exposures (electromagnetic fields, pesticides, experienced exposures, noise and others) and has evaluated the effects of these exposures on a wide range of outcomes, including sleep quality, neurodegenerative and neurodevelopmental effects from these exposures using different study designs such as case-control and cohort studies. She is co-PI of a Dutch LIFEWORK cohort and is, among others, a member of the Dutch Health Council. Member of ICNIRP , where she is also part of the project group on Low Frequency Guidelines (≤10 MHz). Member of the Swedish Research Council on Electromagnetic Fields, where she was chair until 2012. (1*) . Anke Huss has also received research funding from the Swiss Foundation, sponsored by the telecommunications industry, (2*) and is also a member of the foundation’s scientific committee. (3*)
Sources:
1*) https://www.uu.nl/staff/AHuss/Profile
2*) https://www.emf.ethz.ch/en/foundation-board
3*) https://www.wjgnet.com/2218-4333/full/v12/i6/393.htm
Christoffer Johansen . Until July 1, 2020, the Danish Health Authority’s sole advisor in the field, professor and senior physician at the oncology clinic (Medical treatment and radiotherapy of cancer) at Rigshospitalet and researcher at the Center for Cancer Research at the Danish Cancer Society. He was behind the Danish cohort study (1), which was funded by the mobile phone industry , Sonofon and TDC Mobil, as well as contributions from the Danish Cancer Society and IEI . The design of the study closely resembles the concept IEI used in connection with a radar study in the USA. 2 experts from IEI were involved in the first phase of the study (2).
The Danish cohort study was subjected to extensive and scathing international criticism from a large number of researchers (3) who asked the British Medical Journal to withdraw the study. It is reported that it is being used at higher education institutions in the USA as a textbook example of fraudulent and flawed research.
When IARC was to classify electromagnetic radiation in 2011, all relevant research was reviewed, and IARC ended up emphasizing studies that showed a cancer connection with mobile phones. In about a full page ( from page 199 ), the IARC expert group criticized the Danish study, which did not show at all whether the mobile phone users in the study actually talked on their mobile phones, put them in a drawer or lent them to their wives or husbands. IARC called this “multiple sources of misclassification”. (4)
Christoffer Johansen’s research list shows remarkably little research within non-ionizing research/EMF/RFR within the last 16 years (5). A relevant question is whether Christoffer Johansen can be said to be sufficiently up-to-date in the field in relation to being the only consultant that the Danish Health Authority has used so far.
(1) http://www.bmj.com/content/343/bmj.d6387?tab=responses
(2) https://nejtil5g.dk/dokumenter/iei-international-epidemiology-institute/
(3)E.g.:
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228111018_Review_of_four_publications_on_the_Danish_cohort_study_on_mobile_phone_subscribers_and_risk_of_brain_tumors
https://www.bmj.com/content/343/bmj.d6387/rapid-responses
(4) https://monographs.iarc.fr/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/mono102.pdf
(5) https://www.ft.dk/samling/20121/almdel/suu/spm/566/svar/1054998/1250708.pdf
More about Christoffer Johansen can be found here:
https://nejtil5g.dk/dokumenter/christoffer-johansen/
Members of the international councils
Information on more councils is on the way.
The COSMOS project
The Cosmos Project, which includes six countries, investigates whether there are links between mobile telephony and health problems by comparing people’s mobile call data with the same people’s patient data.
The Danish section of Cosmos is run by the Department of Statistics and Epidemiology at the Institute for Epidemiological Cancer Research, which is part of the Danish Cancer Society . The department is led by the same group of researchers (Aslak Harbo Poulsen, Christoffer Johansen and Joachim Schüz), who from 1994 and for a number of years onwards carried out the Danish Cohort Study , which was heavily criticised by international researchers and the WHO. The project group looks like this: Aslak Harbo Poulsen, project manager; Lissa Churchward, project secretary; Jørgen H Olsen, head of institute; Christoffer Johansen, department head; Joachim Schüz (former department head at the Danish Cancer Society), department head at the International Agency for Research on Cancer.
The Danish cohort study was to investigate whether there was a link between mobile phone subscriptions and brain cancer. The study was funded with over one million kroner, which came from Denmark’s two largest mobile phone companies. Conclusion: After 10 years of mobile phone subscription, the risk of brain cancer was reduced by 34%. This means that mobile phones were apparently supposed to protect against brain cancer.
The Danish state granted the Institute for Epidemiological Cancer Research and thus COSMOS approximately 7 million kroner back at the turn of the year 2003/2004.
https://www.cancer.dk/cosmos/hvem-staar-bag/
The mobile phone company Telenor is one of the Danish Cancer Society’s official partners .
About Christoffer Johansen see above or here: https://nejtil5g.dk/dokumenter/christoffer-johansen/
In Sweden, the Cosmos study has been financed by three telecommunications giants with seven million Swedish kronor over a five-year project period. Officially, Cosmos has maintained its independence from industry interests because the millions were received and passed on by the Swedish state innovation agency, Vinnova.
However, the Swedish Cosmos researchers have been heavily criticized for maintaining direct contact with the mobile phone manufacturer Ericsson both before and during the funding period. See above under Maria Feychting and Anders Ahlbom .
One of the Cosmos project’s lead researchers , Dutch Hans Kromhout , a professor at the University of Utrecht, has in 2020 distinguished himself as a critic of an uncritical 5G rollout, the current limit values and the influence of the organization ICNIRP. Kromhout is chairman of the independent working group that the Dutch legislative assembly asked the country’s National Health Council to set up to investigate the 5G issue. The 5G report was published on 2 September 2020. Eric van Rongen , current Vice-Chair of ICNIRP, was secretary of the committee.
For more information on the report and the Dutch Health Council, see below.
See here: https://einarflydal.com/2020/06/25/stadig-flere-varvarer-mot-5g-og-grenseverdier-som-damage-helse-og-miljo/
http://www.thecosmosproject.org/
https://tabttraad.home.blog/2020/04/09/forskning-kobler-mobiltelefoni-til-oevnvörstellungen/
Sweden: Scientific Council on Electromagnetic Fields
Unlike Denmark, Sweden has an independent research council on electromagnetic fields. (1) However, members of the council are not updated at the Swedish Radiation Safety Authority (SSM), and the members must therefore be found from the latest research report (2). Regarding ‘ conflicts of interest’, the report refers to the website, where nothing is stated either. The word ‘independent’ research council has a very hollow ring, since the majority of members are affiliated with ICNIRP and the others more or less share ICNIRP’s positions. (see below)
The council’s latest report on EMF
They write that it is a consensus report (1*), i.e. that all members of the council agree with the complete report. Since they all have largely the same position, this should not be a problem. The review states that no new causal relationships have been identified between EMF exposure and health risks. “ The results of the research review do not provide any reason to change reference levels or recommendations in this area, ” it states, adding that “ However, the observations of biological effects in animals due to weak exposure to radio waves clearly show the importance of maintaining the Swedish Environmental Code 1 precautionary approach .” However, further research is needed.
Despite the fact that no health risks with weak electromagnetic fields have been identified today, the Authority believes that further research is important, especially regarding long-term effects such as the entire population. The report can well be called a postponement report . However, there are areas that should be investigated: oxidative stress, the observed reduced sperm count and cognitive functions. Low-frequency magnetic fields contribute to the increased incidence of leukemia in children, is also mentioned. Although there is no established mechanism for the impact on health from weak radio wave exposure, more research is needed that covers the new frequency domains used for 5G. The Authority also encourages researchers to initiate epidemiological studies, i.e. cohort studies, in this area. So we roll out first and investigate along the way.
Sources:
1*) https://www.stralsakerhetsmyndigheten.se/publikationer/rapporter/stralskydd/2020/202004/
The full report:
https://www.stralsakerhetsmyndigheten.se/contentassets/47542ee6308b4c76b1d25ae0adceca15/2020-04-recent-research-on-emf-and-health-risk—fourteenth-report-from-ssms-scientific-council-on-electromagnetic-fields-2019.pdf
Council members :
As Ejnar Flydal writes in an article from 2017 (3), the committee members are interconnected in a cross-cutting manner, they work together in several bodies, none is particularly specialized in the electromagnetic field or bio-electricity, and as a common feature, they all more or less reject research that does not support the limit values of the telecommunications industry NGO ICNIRP. 3 of the 9 members of the council sit on ICNIRP (4), namely Anke Huss, Eric van Rongen and Martin Röösli. In addition, Maria Rosaria Scarfi has previously been affiliated with ICNIRP.
Leif Moberg, chairman (replaced Anke Huss in 2012): PhD, physicist/radiation protection, Sweden. Employed at SSM since 1977 and has progressed from laboratory assistant to research manager. His field has been ionizing radiation and he has held various positions in the UN system related to nuclear accidents. Is registered in PubMed with 2 articles, one on Swedish nuclear power plants and the other on eating disorders. (1*)
Sources :
1*) https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/?term=Leif+Moberg
Lars Mjönes, scientific secretary (since 2012): BSc, radiation protection, Sweden. Has been a researcher at SSM for a number of years. His research has been on radioactive gases in buildings. (1*) Has for a number of years supported the thermal dogma (heat) as « the only proven health risk » and at the same time argued that « it is too early to make definitive conclusions » (2011) and that « there are no known health risks with radio waves from mobile towers and wireless data networks, but it cannot yet be completely ruled out that there are health risks for those who use mobile phones over a long period of time, more than ten years . » (3) According to Einar Flydal (3), Lars Mjönes has been affected by thyroid cancer, a form of cancer that is on the rise and which is probably related to mobile phones. (2*) (3*)
Sources:
1*) https://www.researchgate.net/scientific-contributions/L-Mjoenes-73280696
2*) https://einarflydal.com/2016/07/14/kreft-i-strupehodet-oker-pa-grunn-av-smarttelefoner/
3*) https://nejtil5g.dk/mobiltelefoner/cancer/
Anke Huss:PhD, epidemiology, University of Utrecht, The Netherlands. Assistant professor in environmental epidemiology with a special focus on environmental exposures that show spatial distribution. She is involved in advanced methods for exposure assessment, including modeling of different exposures (electromagnetic fields, pesticides, experienced exposures, noise and others) and has evaluated the effects of these exposures, including sleep quality, neurodegenerative and neurodevelopmental effects from these exposures using different study designs such as case-control and cohort studies. She is co-PI (leading member) of a Dutch LIFEWORK cohort and serves as a member of the Dutch Health Council. Member of ICNIRP (9), where she is also part of the project group on Low Frequency Guidelines (≤10 MHz). Member of the Swedish Research Council, where she was chair until 2012. (1*) Anke Huss has also received research funding from the Swiss Foundation, sponsored by the telecommunications industry, and is also a member of the foundation’s scientific committee. (2*)
Sources:
1*) https://www.uu.nl/staff/AHuss/Profile
2*) https://www.wjgnet.com/2218-4333/full/v12/i6/393.htm
Aslak Harbo Poulsen: PhD, epidemiologist at the Danish Cancer Society, Copenhagen, since 2001. Project manager for the Danish part of the COSMOS project under the Danish Cancer Society. Aslak Harbo Poulsen was also part of the research group behind the Danish cohort study (1), which was to investigate whether there was a connection between brain cancer and mobile telephony. The study was supposed to have been an exoneration of mobile telephony, but was instead strongly criticized partly in the international research community, but also by the WHO’s expert panel in 2011, which chose to emphasize research that showed a cancer connection. The study was funded by grants from two telecommunications companies (TeleDanmarkMobil and Sonofon), the International Epidemiology Institute (IEI), Rockville, USA (2) and the Danish Cancer Society, as shown in the study. (3) As stated above, Aslak Harbo Poulsen supports the ICNIRP views.
Sources:
1*) https://nejtil5g.dk/dokumenter/christoffer-johansen/
2*) https://nejtil5g.dk/category/iei-international-epidemiology-institute/
3*) https://academic.oup.com/jnci/article/93/3/203/2906436
Clemens Dasenbrock , Dr. med. vet. (veterinary medicine), professor, toxicology/experimental oncology (cancer diseases), head of the department for Toxicological testing of environmental and occupational safety, Fraunhofer Institute, Hannover, Germany. Has several articles in PubMed (*1), several with names from the «no-side», including Martin Röösli. Found increased cancer incidence after UMTS exposure, possible but unconfirmed link to leukemia in another study, and no connection in a study with mice.
Sources:
1*) https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/?term=Clemens+Dasenbrock
Eric van Rongen, PhD, radiobiology. A veteran in this field. Scientific secretary of the Dutch Health Council’s Committee on Electromagnetic Fields (EMF), the Netherlands, where Anke Huss also sits. Joined ICNIRP (9) in 2001, was chairman from 2010 to May 2020 and is now vice-chairman. Also a member of IEEE and WHO’s The International EMF Project. For more on Eric van Rongen, see above .
Heidi Danker-Hopfe, Prof. Dr. rer. nat., biologist and statistician, professor at Charité – University Medicine, Berlin, where she heads a sleep research department (Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy). See her CV. (1*) Since 2006 member of the Commission for Radiation Protection (SSK), (2*) since 2011 board member of the European Bioelectromagnetics Association ( BEMS ) (5) since 2012 member of the EU’s SCENIHR (6), since 2013 member of the SSM’s scientific council. Her research is mostly about the therapeutic use of EMF in psychiatry and to improve sleep, and quite a bit about possible effects from GSM and UMTS (3G) etc. (3*)
Sources:
1*) https://psychiatrie.charite.de/fileadmin/user_upload/microsites/m_cc15/psychiatrie/PDF/CV_Danker_engl.pdf
The Commission for Radiation Protection (SSK) is an advisory body under the Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation and Nuclear Safety (BMU) and advises it.
2*) https://www.ssk.de/DE/UeberSSK/Zusammensetzung/MitgliederderAusschuesse/A6_Nichtionisierende_Strahlen_Mitglieder/nichtionisierendestrahlen_mitglieder.html
https://ec.europa.eu/health/scientific_committees/scheer_en
3*) https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Heidi-Danker-Hopfe
Maria Rosaria Scarfi , PhD, Researcher at CNR-IREA, Institute for Electromagnetic Sensing of the Environment IREA, Italian National Research Council, (1*), where she researches biophysics, electromagnetism and cell biology. (2*) Employed at CNR Institute for Electromagnetics and Electronic Components (IRECE, now IREA), Naples, from 1984 to 2001. Visiting researcher at the Clinical and Population Cytogenetics Unit, Western General Hospital, Medical Research Council, Edinburgh, UK from 1987 to 1988. Since 2001 Senior Researcher and Head of the Bioelectromagnetics Group, IREA.
Her research activities deal with the evaluation of cellular parameters related to carcinogenesis (cell viability, proliferation and cell cycle, apoptosis, oxidative stress, and DNA molecule integrity) in mammalian cell cultures after electromagnetic field exposures and co-exposures to physical and chemical agents, as well as the investigation of cellular and sub-cellular effects caused by high voltage, nanosecond electrical pulses.
Member of the Board of the European Bioelectromagnetics Association ( EBEA , 2001-2009) (7) and the Bioelectromagnetics Society ( BEMS , 2009-2012) (5). She is a member of BEMS, EBEA and the Italian Society for Radiation Research, SIRR (3*). Was on the list of experts of ICNIRP , 2006-2012 (9), external expert of the Working Group on Electromagnetic Fields, European Commission, SCENIHR , 2012-2015 (6), member of the core group for the preparation of The International EMF Project (2012-present) (8), and member of the Swedish since 2013. Since 2017 she has been co-director of the International School on Bioelectromagnetism, E. Majorana Foundation and Center for Scientific Culture, Erice, Italy. List of her publications (4*).
Sources:
1*) http://www.irea.cnr.it/en/
2*) https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/author/37426130400
3*) SIRR , Società Italiana per la Ricerca sulle Radiazioni , founded in 1983. Purpose: to promote scientific research related to ionizing and non-ionizing radiation. By promoting studies in each of several fields (physics and engineering, chemistry, biology and medicine) and by an interdisciplinary approach, the aim is to improve basic research and the dissemination of fundamental knowledge used in radiation protection, industry and biomedicine.
http://sirr.casaccia.enea.it/English/eng-index.html
4*) https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Maria-Rosaria-Scarfi
Martin Röösli: PhD, professor epidemiologist (statistician in medicine), at the Swiss Tropical and Public Health Institute (TFI) (1*), University of Basel, Switzerland. Member of ICNIRP (9) and WHO’s The International EMF Project (8), in a couple of COST working groups on health assessments, in the steering committee of ZonMw – the Dutch Research Council for Health Research (2*), in the crisis council of Japan’s EMF Information Centre. Röösli was part of the WHO’s large cancer study which gave microwave radiation class 2B possible carcinogenicity, but he thought that the statistics were not good enough. Head of the Swiss sister body of the Swedish Research Council, the Advisory Committee for Research Evaluations, BERENIS , (11) under the Swiss Ministry of the Environment. Of his research articles (3*) concerning EMF, no reliable connection can be found in the main. Has been part of ICNIRP since 2016. Sources :
1
*) https://www.swisstph.ch/en/about/
2*) ZonMwis an independent self-governing organization. Works closely with the Netherlands Organization for Scientific Research (NWO). ZonMw is responsible for research in healthcare, and NWO for other scientific research areas.
https://www.zonmw.nl/en/about-zonmw/zonmw-in-the-netherlands/
3*) https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Martin-Roeoesli
Main sources:
1) https://www.stralsakerhetsmyndigheten.se/om-myndigheten/sa-arbetar-vi/rad-och-namnder/vetenskapligt-rad-for-elektromagnetiska-falt/
2) https://www.stralsakerhetsmyndigheten.se/publikationer/rapporter/stralskydd/2020/202004/
3) https://einarflydal.com/2017/01/20/hvem-avgjor-om-din-wifi-ruter-er-helsefarlig-labyrinten-fram-til-tordenskjolds-soldater/#more-18405
4) https://www.icnirp.org/en/about-icnirp/structure-membership/index.html
5) BEMS , the Bioelectromagnetics Society, was established in 1978 as an independent organization of biological and physical scientists, physicians and engineers interested in the interaction of electromagnetic fields with biological systems. The purpose is to promote the exchange of ideas to advance the science of natural and applied electromagnetic fields in biology and medicine. BEMS is an international society with members from approximately 40 different countries and regions around the world. It is incorporated as a non-profit organization in the District of Columbia, USA.
https://www.bems.org/
6) SCENIHR , Scientific Committee on Emerging and Newly Identified Health Risks. Prepares opinions on new or newly identified health and environmental risks and on broad, complex or multidisciplinary issues requiring a comprehensive assessment of risks to consumer safety or public health, and related issues not covered by other Community risk assessment bodies.
https://ec.europa.eu/health/scientific_committees/emerging/members_wg_en
7) EBEA is a non-profit scientific association, founded in 1989 by scientists from various European countries. Its purpose is, among others, to: to promote the development of bioelectronics in Europe and to inform about possible health risks from exposure to electromagnetic sources in work, household or general environments.
https://www.ebea.org/about-ebea/
8) WHO The International EMF Project . The mandate of the International EMF Project is to assess the health and environmental effects of exposure to static and time-varying electric and magnetic fields in the frequency range 0 – 300 GHz. For the purposes of the EMF Project, this range is divided into: static (0 Hz), extremely low frequency (ELF, >0-300 kHz), intermediate frequencies (IF, >300Hz to 10 MHz) and radio frequency fields (RF, 10 MHz-300 GHz).
The EMF Project was started in 1996 with the then head of ICNIRP Michael Repacholi at the helm. In 2006 he was replaced by his closest collaborator since 2000, namely the Dutch Dr. Emilie van Deventer . Dariusz Leszczynski, retired professor at the University of Helsinki and radiation-critical researcher with several positions as top advisor in his career, has called the WHO EMF Project “ a front organization for ICNIRP ” , among other things when a so-called core group was set up a few years ago to follow the research, 5 out of 6 core group members were from the organization ICNIRP.
https://www.who.int/initiatives/the-international-emf-project
Find more about the EMF project here:
https://nejtil5g.dk/dokumenter/internationale-graensevaerdier-for-mikroboelegestraaling/
9) ICNIRP (International Commission on Non-Ionising Radiation Protection) is the telecommunications industry’s private NGO, which is registered in Germany, where it has premises at the German radiation protection authority, from which it also receives support. ICNIRP is no more international than its name, and in that it has members from several countries. ICNIRP advises, among others, WHO, the EU and nation states on non-ionising electromagnetic fields. ICNIRP does not set limit values, but develops calculation methods for setting limit values. The first guidelines came in 1998 and were only adjusted in 2020, among other things, to adapt them to 5G technology. The members are primarily physicists and statisticians who have close connections to the electrical and mobile industries as well as the military-industrial complex. ICNIRP is in no way a UN (WHO) or EU organization or an official government body , and is therefore not bound by international laws, conventions or regulations .
The main commission consists of 14 members and 4 sitting committees, as well as a number of consultants. New members of ICNIRP are elected by the sitting members, so ICNIRP is self-supplementary. ICNIRP recommends limit values, among other things, for non-ionizing electromagnetic fields/radiation, ultrasound, ultraviolet light, etc., as well as for the general population and in working life, where the exposure limits for the general population are set at lower levels than for working life.
https://www.icnirp.org/
See more here: https://nejtil5g.dk/dokumenter/internationale-graensevaerdier-for-mikroboelegestraaling/
10) COST , the European Cooperation in Science and Technology, is a funding organization for the establishment of research networks, called COST actions . These networks provide an open space for collaboration between researchers in and outside Europe, thereby boosting research progress and innovation.
https://www.cost.eu/
11) BERENIS, the Swiss expert group on electromagnetic fields and non-ionizing radiation, in their latest report completely disagrees with ICNIRP’s view that radiation protection from ICNIRP’s safety limits protects all citizens equally. BERENIS believes that studies need to be carried out on the effect of oxidative stress on people with pre-existing conditions before it can be claimed that ICNIRP’s safety guidelines protect everyone, regardless of age or health status. Martin Röösli, who is a member of both ICNIRP and BERENIS, has, like Eric van Rongen, who as a member of the Dutch Health Council was also critical of ICNIRP’s limit values, endorsed both opposing views.
Members of BERENIS can be found here:
https://www.bafu.admin.ch/bafu/fr/home/themes/electrosmog/newsletter-du-groupe-consultatif-dexperts-en-matiere-de-rni–ber/le-groupe-consultatif-dexperts-en-matiere-de-rni–berenis-.html
https://www.bafu.admin.ch/bafu/en/home/topics/electrosmog.html
Complaint from Dr. Lennart Hardell about the conflicts of interest in BERENIS:
https://mdsafetech.files.wordpress.com/2020/01/lettter-hardell-roosli-to-swiss-confederation-mrs.-sommaruga-reevalaution-of-safety-standards-icnirp-5g-berenis_uvek_january-2020.pdf
The Dutch Health Council
The Dutch Health Council recommended in its report of 2 September 2020 (1) that the 26 GHz frequency band should not be used for the implementation of 5G. At the lower frequencies, however, the council recommended the guidelines of ICNIRP, the telecommunications industry’s own NGO. As Hardell discusses in the report (2), these guidelines are not based on an objective assessment of health risks.
ICNIRP
The International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection, is no more international than its name suggests , and in that it has members from several countries. ICNIRP is also not bound by international laws, conventions or regulations. The organization is self-supplementary and its members consist primarily of physicists and statisticians who have close ties to the telecommunications industry and the military-industrial complex .
Hardell (*) writes in the introduction to his report: (headings and emphasis added)
Health concerns without effect
“ The fifth generation, 5G, of wireless communications is being rolled out worldwide despite health concerns. This has sparked debate among concerned people in many countries. In an appeal to the European Union (EU) in September 2017, currently endorsed by more than 400 scientists and doctors , a moratorium on 5G deployment was called for until a proper scientific assessment of negative consequences has been made (http://www.5Gappeal.eu). This has had no impact on the development of 5G deployment.
The Dutch Health Council On 2 September 2020, the Dutch Health Council published their evaluation of 5G and health (no. 2020/16/16e/ 16Ae). The committee consists of 9 members, 2 scientific secretaries, 1 other consulting expert and 3 observers. ( https://www.healthc Council.nl/documents/advisory-reports/2020/09/02/5g-and-health ). The Council was not impartial In terms of impartiality, it is concerning that a member of the committee, A. Huss , has been a member of the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP) since May 2020. ICNIRP is a private organization based in Germany that does not recognize health effects other than those caused by heating from radiofrequency (RF) radiation. This ignores non-thermal biological effects. Furthermore, one of the two secretaries, E. van Rongen , has been a member of ICNIRP since 2010, Chairman from 2016 to 2020 and Vice-Chairman since May 2020 (https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Eric_Rongen ). A third former ICNIRP member,
Z. Sienkiewicz , participated as a consulting expert.
It should be added that A. Huss received research funding from a telecom industry sponsored Swiss Foundation. She is also a member of the scientific committee of this foundation (https://www.emf.ethz.ch/en/foundation/organisation). Furthermore, E. van Rongen is a long-standing member of the industry organizations, the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers and the International Committee on Electromagnetic Safety (IEEE/ICES).
Undisclosed conflicts of interest
These facts give rise to conflicts of interest in the Dutch Health Council. Furthermore, members of ICNIRP tend to adhere to the ICNIRP risk paradigm in relation to non-thermal RF radiation in all other settings. This may also be the case in the Health Council report. It should be noted that the ethics board at the Karolinska Institute in Stockholm, Sweden, concluded already in 2008 that being a member of ICNIRP may be a conflict of interest, which should be officially pointed out when an ICNIRP member makes statements on the health risks of electromagnetic fields (EMFs) on behalf of another organization, as in this case (Karolinska Institute Diary No. 3753-2008-609). This judgment was related to Prof. A. Ahlbom, member of the ICNIRP Commission from 1996 to 2008, but also as a general statement. Those involved in the current health council report with ICNIRP affiliation (current or former) have failed to state this conflict of interest. “
Lennart Hardell’s conclusion
“In conclusion regarding cancer, the current research clearly demonstrates an increased risk of glioma and acoustic neuroma with the use of mobile and/or cordless phones. Other tumor types and health endpoints are not discussed in this review. The increased risk of brain and head tumors is based on human epidemiological cancer studies and is supported by similar tumor types found in animal studies. In fact, these animal studies confirmed previous findings in case-control studies of increased tumor risk from wireless phone use (both mobile and cordless phones). Mechanistic aspects of carcinogenesis come from laboratory findings such as the increase in reactive oxygen species [5] and DNA damage [4]. The current evaluation by the Dutch Health Board is based on a WHO draft and an SSM report (the Swedish Radiation Safety Authority). It also recommends using the ICNIRP guidelines, which are considered insufficient to protect against health hazards, such as cancer, by the majority of researchers in this field (https://www.emfscientist.org).
The report does not represent a thorough, balanced, objective and up-to-date assessment of the risks of cancer and other harmful effects from RF radiation. It is also strikingly contradictory in concluding that serious health effects such as cancer and birth defects are “possible”. Yet it has no objection to the roll-out of 5G and recommends that further studies be conducted to investigate health outcomes such as cancer and birth defects. Thus, no lessons are learned from existing observations of increased cancer risks [49]. The Commission’s conclusion that there is no reason to stop the use of lower frequencies for 5G up to 3.5 GHz due to the lack of “proven adverse health effects” simply reflects the biased conclusions of the ICNIRP-dominated groups . Thus, this conclusion must be rejected and new guidelines for previous and new frequencies must be established, taking into account the new technology, the different propagation pattern of 5G and the increased RF radiation. A moratorium on the implementation of 5G for wireless communication is required [13]. Ultimately, wired solutions are preferred. Sources and notes: *) Lennart Hardell is a professor of oncology and cancer epidemiology at the University Hospital of Orebro, Sweden. Most of his research has been on risk factors for cancer, such as exposure to pesticides and persistent organic pollutants. In recent years, he and his colleagues have investigated the use of mobile and cordless phones and the risk of brain tumors. He also works as a consultant at the Department of Oncology at the hospital. 1) https://www.healthcouncil.nl/documents/advisory-reports/2020/09/02/5g-and-health 2) Hardell L. Health Council of the Netherlands and evaluation of the fifth generation, 5G, for wireless communication and cancer risks. World J Clin Oncol 2021; 12 (6): 393-403 [PMID: 34189065 DOI: 10.5306 / wjco.v12.i6.393] https://www.wjgnet.com/2218-4333/full/v12/i6/393.htm 4) Smith-Roe SL, Wyde ME, Stout MD, Winters JW, Hobbs CA, Shepard KG, Green. AS, Kissling GE, Shockley KR, Tice RR, Bucher JR, Witt KL. Evaluation of the genotoxicity of cell phone radiofrequency radiation in male and female rats and mice following subchronic exposure. Environ Mol Mutagen. 2020;61:276-290. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: 2] [Cited by in CrossRef: 17] [Article Influence: 17.0] 5) Yakymenko I, Tsybulin O, Sidorik E, Henshel D, Kyrylenko O, Kyrylenko S. Oxidative mechanisms of biological activity of low-intensity radiofrequency radiation. Electromagn Biol Med. 2016;35:186-202. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: 2] [Cited by in CrossRef: 84] [Article Influence: 16.8] 13)
Hardell L, Nyberg R. Appeals that matter or not on a moratorium on the deployment of the fifth generation, 5G, for microwave radiation. Mol Clin Oncol. 2020;12:247-257. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: 3] [Cited by in CrossRef: 5] [Article Influence: 5.0]
49) Hardell L, Carlberg M. Lost opportunities for cancer prevention: historical evidence on early warnings with emphasis on radiofrequency radiation. Rev. Environ Health. 2021;. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: 1] [Cited by in CrossRef: 3] [Article Influence: 3.0]
BERENICE
BERENIS (1) is the Swiss expert group on electromagnetic fields and non-ionizing radiation. In Switzerland, the Federal Office for the Environment (FOEN) is the responsible government body for monitoring and assessing research on the health effects of non-ionizing radiation (NIR) from stationary sources in the environment. This includes informing and updating the public on the current state of research, which is the basis for the ambient regulatory limits set out in the Swiss “Order on Protection against Non-ionizing Radiation”. In the event of reliable new scientific knowledge and experience, FOEN will advise the Swiss Federal Council to adapt these regulatory limits for the environment.
The advisory group of Swiss experts from various disciplines with scientific competence in the fields of electromagnetic fields and NIR , started its work in July 2014 under the name “BERENIS”, based on the abbreviation for the respective German term. BERENIS experts regularly screen the scientific literature and assess the publications they consider relevant to the protection of humans from potentially harmful effects. The results of this assessment are published in quarterly newsletters (2), which can be downloaded from this website.
The latest report focusing on oxidative stress was authored by two of BERENIS’ own experts, Professor Meike Mevissen from the University of Bern and Dr. David Schürmann from the University of Basel. The report questions ICNIRP’s view that radiation protection from the ICNIRP safety limits protects all citizens equally. (3) The authors note that most animal and cell studies show that electromagnetic fields and microwave radiation from wireless technology cause oxidative stress. Against this background, BERENIS believes that studies on the effects of oxidative stress on people with pre-existing conditions are necessary before it can be claimed that ICNIRP safety guidelines protect everyone, regardless of age or health. Martin Röösli, who is a member of both ICNIRP and BERENIS, has, like Eric van Rongen, who as a member of the Dutch Health Council was also critical of ICNIRP’s limit values, endorsed both opposing views.
Members of BERENIS :
- Prof. Dr. Martin Röösli, Institut tropical et de santé publique suisse, Basel (director)
- Prof. Dr. Peter Achermann, The KEY Institute for Brain-Mind Research, Zurich
- Dr. Jürg Fröhlich, Fields at Work GmbH, Zurich
- Prof. Dr. with. Jürg Kesselring, former médecin-chef de l’unité de neurologie et de neuroréhabilitation, Center de réhabilitation, Valens
- Prof. Dr. Meike Mevissen, unit of veterinary pharmacology and toxicology, University of Berne
- Dr. David Schürmann, Groupe de génétique moléculaire, Département de biomédecine, Université de Bâle
- Dr. with. Edith Steiner, Médecins en faveur de l’environnement, Basel
BERENIS chairman Martin Röösli is also a member of the so-called “main commission” of ICNIRP, which has drawn up reference values or limit values for permitted radiation. However, the values do not protect against the effects of oxidative stress and other harmful effects, such as DNA damage, neurodegenerative diseases and cancer risks. Röösli is also a member of the scientific council of the Swedish Radiation Safety Authority, which also denies that radiation below ICNIRP values can be harmful. ICNIRP’s limit values only protect against immediate heating of tissue caused by intense radiation within 30 minutes. But now two members of Martin Röösli’s own expert group have determined that microwave radiation and magnetic fields at levels below ICNIRP’s reference values have been shown to cause oxidative stress, which can be particularly harmful to the very young, the elderly and people with immunodeficiency diseases, diabetes, neurodegenerative diseases and much more.
Sources:
1) https://www.bafu.admin.ch/bafu/en/home/topics/electrosmog/newsletter-of-the-swiss-expert-group-on-electromagnetic-fields-a/beratende-expertengruppe-nis-berenis.html
2) https://www.bafu.admin.ch/bafu/en/home/topics/electrosmog/newsletter-of-the-swiss-expert-group-on-electromagnetic-fields-a.html
3) The newsletter (January 2021) with a review of the report:
https://www.bafu.admin.ch/bafu/en/home/topics/electrosmog/newsletter-of-the-swiss-expert-group-on-electromagnetic-fields-a.html
The full report:
https://www.mdpi.com/1422-0067/22/7/3772/htm
Complaint from Dr. Lennart Hardell on the conflicts of interest in BERENIS:
https://mdsafetech.files.wordpress.com/2020/01/lettter-hardell-roosli-to-swiss-confederation-mrs.-sommaruga-reevalaution-of-safety-standards-icnirp-5g-berenis_uvek_january-2020.pdf
PIECE
STUK is the Finnish authority that monitors radiation and nuclear safety. The purpose is to protect people, society, the environment and future generations from the harmful consequences of radiation. About 340 specialists work at STUK, according to the website.
No health risks have been proven, according to STUK’s website (updated 21.11.2019) on Mobile phones and mobile phone masts. (1)
In the best ICNIRP manner, as is also the case for an independent organization, it is only concerned with tissue heating and here it is found that mobile phones cause such a small heating of the tissues that the heating has no negative health effects. Other harmful conditions have not been proven in scientifically sustainable studies. If there are other side effects, they are based on an undetermined unknown mechanism .
Independent expert panels such as the European Commission’s SCENIHR (Scientific Committee on Emerging and Newly Identified Health Risks), the WHO and the ICNIRP (International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection) have published extensive literature summaries on the health effects of radiofrequency radiation. The conclusions can be summarised as follows: exposure below the current maximum permitted values does not have any adverse health effects .
However, more research information is needed on exposures close to the maximum values to draw definitive conclusions. In practice, such exposure only occurs when talking on a mobile phone, they write. But that is probably what you use a mobile phone for or… An increase in slow-growing cancers may not yet be visible in the statistics, as there is no data going back more than 15 years.
EMF as possibly carcinogenic
In 2011, the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) classified radiofrequency radiation as possibly carcinogenic (class 2B). The classification is based on studies on the use of mobile phones (e.g. Interphone). According to IARC, there has been limited evidence of an association between two types of brain tumours (glioma and acoustic neuroma) and the use of mobile phones. As regards other types of exposure (including background fields caused by mobile phone masts) and other types of cancer, IARC considers that there is no evidence that they cause cancer.
Delegation for Radiation Safety
The delegation, appointed by the State Council, makes proposals and initiatives on issues relating to radiation safety and issues opinions on radiation safety. It is not clear who is represented in the delegation.
Sources:
1) https://www.stuk.fi/web/sv/teman/mobiltelefoner-och-basstationer/det-finns-inga-bevis-for-att-stralningen-fran-mobiltelefoner-ar-skadlig-for-halsan
Link:
Sign up for our newsletter
“
Get the latest science and news about Microwave Sickness here
Microwave Sickness
<!– wp:tnp/minimal –>
<div style=”padding:20px” class=”wp-block-tnp-minimal”><p>Subscribe to our newsletter!</p><div>
<!– /wp:tnp/minimal –>