Health issues related to electromagnetic radiation exposure and chemical exposure

  • EMFacts Consultancy, founded in 1994 by Don Maisch, has produced a wide range of reports and papers dealing with various health issues related to human exposure to Electromagnetic Radiation.

    This website was established in 1997 as an independent source of information on the possible health and safety issues arising from human exposure to Electromagnetic Energy (EME).

    This consists of both 50 and 60 Hertz (Hz) Electromagnetic Fields (EMF) from our use of electricity and Radio-frequency/Microwave (RF/MW) Electromagnetic Radiation (EMR) from telecommunications.

    This site is designed to be utilized as a resource by individuals, groups, organisations and communities who are trying to empower themselves by gaining a better understanding of the complex issues involved with this important environmental issue.

    EMFacts Consultancy also offers a range of advisory services.
    Click here for further information.

Closed

A personal Electromagnetic Hypersensitivity (EHS) case study

From Steve Weller:

Introduction:

My name is Steven Weller and I wrote this Electromagnetic Hypersensitivity (EHS) case study that is included with this covering statement with the hope it may be of benefit to those who either find themselves in a similar position to me, or, maybe just interested in a getting a better understanding of what EHS is and the likely cause.

The study documents my personal journey towards self-diagnosis as being EHS, the ensuing questions it raised, along with information which might assist fellow sufferers to better cope with a condition which, until relatively recently, was unknown on our planet.
SNIP

Read More »

Closed

Two Scientists Break Silence on “Major Flaws” in Royal Society’s Recent Report on Safety of Cell Phones and Towers, Smart Meters and Wi-Fi

OTTAWA, April 14, 2014 /CNW/ – Two peer reviewers involved in this month’s Royal Society report on wireless safety say the results cannot be trusted, because the Panel ignored evidence that wireless radiation is harmful to humans.

The scientific reviewers also said key panelists were in conflict of interest as they regularly accept funding from wireless and energy companies. One of the reviewers, Dr. Martin Blank, holds two PhD’s and has published more than 200 papers at Columbia University on the health effects of wireless radiation. The other reviewer, Dr. Anthony Miller MD, is Professor Emeritus at the Dalla Lana School of Public Health at the University of Toronto. Both say the Royal Society panel ignored scientific evidence published over the past five years. As peer reviewers, they noted some panelists were conflicted and others lacked sufficient expertise.
SNIP

Read More »

Closed

Critique of the supposedly ‘new’ ARPANSA RF review

From Dariusz Leszczynski’s blog, Between a Rock and a Hard Place:

Excerpt

ARPANSA Report: No epiphany, just déjà vu, all over again
Gallery
Posted on April 14, 2014

From time to time are published new reports, reviewing scientific evidence on possible health risks of cell phone and cell-phone-like radiation. Reading them, I do not experience epiphany feeling but, often, I experience déjà vu feeling. I often have the feeling that the authors of new reports use extensively texts and opinions of earlier reports. It means that instead of duly reviewing also older original studies they rely on the opinions of others.

This is not a good development. Reading older original studies and evaluating them in the context of new original studies, it may together bring this very welcome feeling of epiphany. Instead, authors of new review reports bring us, readers, often the feeling of déjà vu.

The just published ARPANSA report is no exception. No epiphany, just déjà vu.

SNIP

Read More »

Closed

Is Science Being Hidden from the Public?

Eileen O’Connor, Director, Radiation Research Trust

500 million citizens are relying on SCENIHR: Is Science Being Hidden from the Public?

9 April 2014

The European Commission in collaboration with the Greek Atomic Energy Commission (GAEC) under the auspices of the EU Council Greek Presidency organised a major workshop in Athens on EMF electromagnetic fields and health effects with a focus on public awareness, conciliating scientific findings and uncertainties in policy making. The event took place on 27th & 28 March 2014 at Cotsen Hall, Athens, Greece and included presenters from various parties from the European Commission, WHO, public authorities, industry, operators, environmental and consumer associations and academia. The goal of the conference was to reach a common approach for the future in order to respond to public concerns about electromagnetic fields, to enhance information dissemination and discuss new studies and scientific evidence in relation to EMF, and to identify knowledge gaps needed for sound policy making. In this context, the new SCENIHR draft opinion on EMF and potential health effects was presented.
SNIP

Read More »

Closed

Conclusions of the Canadian report confirm that EHS research, and its review, are polluted by the bad science

From the blog of Dariusz Lesczcynski: Between a Rock and a Hard Place

Excerpt

Recent publication of the Canadian report on Safety Code 6 (RF-EMF and health) brought again to limelight the problem of electromagnetic hypersensitivity – EHS.

Yet again, scientists and lay audiences were fed with the standard mantra in the Canadian report: “The symptoms are real, but what causes them is a mystery”. The same mantra is propagated by WHO, ICNIRP and numerous expert committees.

I have the feeling that this mantra was introduced to the EMF research area few years ago for the sole purpose to “get the EHS people off our backs”. Designers of this mantra assumed that by showing compassion for the suffering of EHS people they will alleviate tensions that exist between EHS sufferers and decision-makers.

They were mistaken. The mantra did not alleviate tensions and EHS sufferers more and more forcefully demand solution to their problem. Simple admission that their symptoms and suffering are real is not enough. What is needed is both, precautionary approach and a serious research effort to find out what and how causes EHS.

Unfortunately the arena of EHS research is polluted with bad science. Badly designed studies waste money and produce bad conclusions. This status quo is perpetuated and new funding is granted for new badly designed studies. Are scientists gone mad? Don’t they understand what they are doing?

SNIP

Read More »

  • Welcome

    "Listen to both sides and you will be enlightened; heed only one side and you will be blinded. We are facing a big knowledge gap in evaluating EMF health risk at this stage. This is the reason why there is no satisfactory and generally acceptable EMF standard around the world. I think an international EMF exposure standard might only be established on the principle of science and democracy, on the principle of mutual understanding and to reach unanimity through consultation." - Opening remarks by Professor Huai Chiang at the 3rd International EMF Seminar in China, 13-17 October 2003.

  • Recent Posts

  • Browse Categories