• 06 APR 16
    • 0

    Mike Repacholi responds to “ICNIRP did it again…” (recommended reading!)

    My comment to the below blog from Dariusz Lesczcynski:

    Mike Repacholi’s response to Dariusz Lesczcynski’s blog posting on ICNIRP is clear evidence of the international influence that Dariusz’s blog is having. Repacholi does not like criticism of the creature (ICNIRP) he created in order to maintain the disingenuous paradigm that the only hazardous biological effect of radiofrequency/microwave EMR is thermal. I note that Repacholi states that “ICNIRP Main Commission members are selected for their scientific integrity, no industry conflict of interest, range of expertise to cover all scientific disciplines to review EMF research, as well as excellent and reliable scientific publications themselves.” The current commission members are here: http://www.icnirp.org/en/activities/news/news-article/membership-2016-2020.html

    Repacholi’s definition of “scientific integrity” means a firm adherence to ICNIRP’s orthodoxy as well as a viewpoint that all the claimed athermal health effects of exposure are psychosomatic, a chant which ICNIRP Main Commission member Rodney Croft knows all too well. As for “no industry conflict of interest”, perhaps Repacholi hopes that if he repeats that falsehood often enough it somehow transmogrifies into being true. I have written on this false claim here and here.

    Don

    Now over to Dariusz:
    *******************************************************************************************************************
    From Dariusz Leszczynski’s blog; Between a Rock and A Hard Place:

    Excerpt

    Following yesterday”s (April 4, 2016) publication of the blog “ICNIRP did it again””, I received today (April 5, 2016) message from Mike Repacholi, Chairman Emeritus of ICNIRP.

    With Mike”s permission I am posting his entire message with my responses and clarifications. List of persons “CC” in Mike”s message I covered, out of my own desire of preserving privacy.

    Message from Mike RepacholiQuoting Michael Repacholi :

    Repacholi: “Dariusz why is it that some people just don”t get it. You have been told many times that ICNIRP Main Commission members are selected for their scientific integrity, no industry conflict of interest, range of expertise to cover all scientific disciplines to review EMF research, as well as excellent and reliable scientific publications themselves.”

    Leszczynski: No argument here. The members of the Main Commission of ICNIRP are experts, and so I said in the end of my post. What you describe is an ideal situation. As we well know, real life differs from the ideal. Furthermore, the only assurance of the fulfilment of these requirements is via self-policing. It has been shown in scientific studies that the self-policing does not work unless there is a possibility that some higher authority may check whether indeed all requirements are met and the self-policing works. Without such overlook, self-policing does not work, no matter what ICNIRP says. As I said in my post “”ICNIRP consensus” is not the scientific consensus”” ICNIRP”s avoidance of real scientific debate leads to problems “” dissatisfied scientists and citizens go to politicians and courts. I can reverse your question and ask “why it is that ICNIRP just doesn”t get it”.

    SNIP

    Read the full posting here

    **********************************************************************************************************************

    Leave a reply →