logo

Corporate influence on Science, government and the military

  • Home
  •  
  • Corporate influence on Science, government and the military
    • 09 APR 17

    Australia’s NH&MRC accused of bias and misleading the public

    In the below press release from the Australian Hom”opathic Association, they make the allegation that the National Health and Medical Research Council (NH&MRC)has misled the public over the effectiveness of homeopathic medicine and has systematic conflicts of interest in its scientific evaluation. Well, if proven, that is nothing new. For example see Professor Martin Brian’s 1986 paper; Bias in awarding research grants, published in British Medical Journal…
    SNIP
    In the above light, perhaps the NH&MRC can be considered more of a “captured agency” firmly binded to government and industry policy, ignoring inconvenient evidence….

    Read more →
    • 14 MAR 17

    Highly recommended: Video of Leszczynski’s lecture in Reykjavik on Feb. 24, 2017

    Video of Leszczynski’s lecture in Reykjavik on Feb. 24, 2017

    Here is the link to Dariusz’s video of his presentation in Reykjavik on Feb. 24, 2017

    The first slide sets the tone:

    ICNIRP, WHO EMF Project & Environmental Health Criteria

    The most influential ‘echo chamber’ is ICNIRP, a “private club” where the current members select and appoint new members. SNIP

    Read more →
    • 01 MAR 17

    Science Propaganda wars (The Ecologist)

    Propaganda wars: ‘pro-science’ GMO, chemicals boosters funded by climate change deniers

    Stacy Malkan

    28th February 2017

    Excerpt

    They promote GMOs, defend toxic chemicals, and attack people who raise concerns about those products as ‘anti-science’. But behind the slick ‘astroturf’ PR fronts lurk some very dubious funders: the same arch-conservative foundations that finance climate science denial. Stacy Malkan exposes the key players in the agribusiness and chemical industry propaganda wars. SNIP

    Read more →
    • 28 FEB 17

    Judge Rules California Must Release Papers Discussing Risk Of Cellphone Use

    BERKELEY (KPIX 5) – California could have to hand over some documents on cellphone use it tried to keep under wraps.

    On Friday, a Superior Court judge ruled the state must release papers discussing the possible risks of long-term cellphone use. The documents were written by the state’s Environmental Health Investigations branch and are believed to contain cellphone radiation warnings and recommendations for public use.But the state refused to hand them over when requested by a director at University of California, Berkeley School of Public Health. So Joel Moskowitz, Ph.D., sued the state under the California Public Records Act. SNIP

    Read more →
    • 30 JAN 17

    Scientific misconduct, censorship and the Interphone study

    From Dariusz Leszczynski’s blog, Between a Rock and A hard Place.

    Excerpt

    Uncensored version of blog post on Interphone, first published in 2011 and re-published for the first time now…

    Posted on January 30, 2017

    Below is the uncensored version of my science blog published in 2011. This version was subsequently censored by, then, STUK Director General who called me personally and informed that if I do not agree to rewrite the blog post he will need to consider if I am suited to continue work at STUK. Under this threat I agreed and STUK Director General personally revised my blog post. The link to censored version of the post and to two other posts on this subject can be found in my yesterday’s blog post. The uncensored version of the blog, published in 2011 and re-published for the first time since, gives a better idea of what happened to science and what form of scientific misconduct Interphone committed…SNIP

    Read more →
    • 27 JAN 17

    U.S. Congress moves to eliminate regulations that inhibit the roll-out of IoT technology

    The “Mobile Now Act” and “The DIGIT Act” have passed out of the U.S. Senate Commerce Committee and are headed to the full senate for a vote. They will probably be heard in the next week or two.

    Bill Info: These bills lay the foundation for the Internet of Things that will require a small cell tower transmitter every couple of homes emitting high frequency 24Ghz to 90Ghz which has never been tested for non-thermal biological effects [It is illegal in the land of democracy to oppose wireless technology for health or environmental reasons]. These transmitters will be put in public right of ways with NO ability to consider health and safety. The transmitters will be ugly, decrease property values, and expose occupants to potentially harmful microwave radiation so that your home appliances can communicate with one another which does not seem like a necessity and your privacy can be violated even more easily.

    S19
    Mobile Now Act (a) Short Title.–This Act may be cited as the “Making Opportunities for Broadband Investment and Limiting Excessive and Needless Obstacles to Wireless Act” or the “MOBILE NOW Act”.

    S88 the DIGIT Bill “To ensure appropriate spectrum planning and interagency coordination to support the Internet of Things.” SNIP

    Read more →
    • 19 JAN 17

    Susan Foster on Conflict of Interest in the Berkeley’s “right to know”

    From the blog of Dariusz Leszczynski, Between a Rock and A Hard Place

    Excerpt

    This is the next in a series of the Guest Blogs on BRHP. The opinions expressed in it are of Susan Foster herself (photo). Publication of these opinions in BRHP does not imply that BRHP automatically agrees with or endorses these opinions. Publication of this, and other Guest Blogs, is an attempt to start an open debate and free exchange of opinions on RF and health.

    WILL A JUDGE’S FAILURE TO RECUSE

    SILENCE BERKELEY’S “RIGHT TO KNOW”?

    The long battle over cell phone consumer labels, with a hidden twist of legal super heroes and questions about a Ninth Circuit Court judge’s failure to recuse herself.

    A battle over free speech in Berkeley, California has pitted the city of Berkeley against the mighty telecommunications trade group, CTIA – The Wireless Association. Berkeley stands on the First Amendment argument they have a right to inform consumers of certain precautions the FCC already requires in the back of cell phone user’s manuals. SNIP

    Read more →
    • 11 JAN 17

    Health Policy Groups Question FCC’s Allowing Manufacturer Violation of Its Cell Phone Microwave Radiation Exposure Limit

    Majority of cell phones on market may exceed FCC’s stated RF safety limit of 1.6 W/kg, experts warn

    http://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20170110005479/en/Health-Policy-Groups-Question-FCC%E2%80%99s-Allowing-Manufacturer

    Attached is an inquiry letter sent by attorneys Swankin & Turner to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) on behalf of the National Institute for Science, Law & Public Policy and Environmental Health Trust questioning the adequacy of the FCC’s enforcement of its existing cell phone radiation limits.
    The letter suggests as many as 75% of cell phones on the market today may possibly exceed the FCC’s exposure limit.
    Examples of how cell phone commonly exceed the safety limit were provided in Exhibit A to the letter.
    The Swankin & Turner inquiry letter to the FCC raised other equally important issues regarding FCC oversight of cell phones and wireless transmitting devices, including how the FCC considers its current safety limit to protect children given the psSAR assessment methodology the FCC uses was never intended to protect children….. SNIP

    Read more →
    • 23 DEC 16

    WHO Monograph on Radiofrequency Radiation and ICNIRP

    From Lennart Hardell’s blog posting:

    There is growing international concern on the biased representation of persons in the preparation of the WHO Monograph on Radiofrequency Radiation. As discussed earlier the group is dominated by members of ICNIRP. In fact the Ethical Board at the Karolinska Institute in Stockholm, Sweden concluded already in 2008 that being a member of ICNIRP may be a conflict of interest that should be stated in scientific publications (Karolinska Institute Diary Number 3753-2008-609). SNIP

    Read more →
    • 30 NOV 16

    New paper: When theory and observation collide: Can non-ionizing radiation cause cancer?

    The Missing Link
    Why your government isn’t protecting you from Wi–Fi and cell phone radiation when
    research shows this radiation causes cancer.

    The American scientific journal Environmental Pollution reports, in its next issue, that
    government safety guidelines for microwave radiation emitted by mobile phones, Wi-Fi, smart
    meters, and other common wireless devices, are fundamentally flawed and fail to protect the
    public from this possible carcinogen.

    Increasing scientific evidence shows wireless radiation causes cancer and infertility and other
    health effects, but due to a flawed assumption in safety guidelines, governments in the United
    States, Canada, and the UK are allowing their citizens to be overexposed to microwave
    radiation from wireless technology….
    SNIP

    Read more →
    • 29 NOV 16

    Has the WHO EMF Project been hijacked by ICNIRP?

    From Lennart Hardell’s blog:

    Has the WHO EMF Project been hijacked by ICNIRP?

    Recently the following appeal has been posted at http://olgasheean.com/who-emf/ .
    Sign this VOTE of NO CONFIDENCE in WHO’s EMF Project ….SNIP

    [Commentary from Lennart Hardell and Michael Carlberg]

    IARC as part of WHO evaluated radiofrequency (RF) radiation in May 2011 and concluded it to be a possible human carcinogen, Group 2B. However, in a fact sheet issued by WHO in June 2011 shortly after the IARC decision it was stated that ‘To date, no adverse health effects have been established as being caused by mobile phone use’.

    WHO has still not acknowledged health risks form RF radiation: ‘No major public health risks have emerged from several decades of EMF research, but uncertainties remain’.

    WHO plans to publish in 2017 an Environmental Health Criteria Monograph on RF radiation. It has been open for comments and parts of our letter to WHO is shown below: SNIP

    Read more →
    • 25 NOV 16

    CORPORATE TIES THAT BIND: An Examination of Corporate Manipulation and Vested Interest in Public Health

    This forthcoming book (February 2017) is timely reading as we are now seeing a well-orchestrated tactic by various industry front groups and their “fellow travelers” to create a false scientific consensus in an effort to kill-off controversial health and environmental issues which threaten various industries.

    SNIP

    Read more →
    • 23 NOV 16

    The Rise and Fall of Wikipedia

    Friday, September 30th 2016
    Written By: Orthomolecular News Service
    www.GreenMedInfo 2016

    Ever venture into natural healing or alternative medicine on Wikipedia and find the answers become totally skewed in favor of corporate medicine?

    Don’s Comment: For example, check out the disinformation on “Electromagnetic Hypersensitivity at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromagnetic_hypersensitivity At the end of the Wikipedia entry is a link to Pseudoscience.

    Commentary by Howard Straus

    (OMNS, Feb 8, 2016) Anyone who uses the Internet to search for information is very likely to be familiar with the Wikipedia site. Wikipedia is very often among the first results that pop up on queries like, “What is the population of Kazakhstan?” or “How many French speakers are there in the United States?” To questions like this, with little or no commercial impact, and no scientific or political controversy surrounding them, Wikipedia sometimes offers decent answers.

    But venture into natural healing or alternative medicine and the answers become totally skewed in favor of corporate medicine. Naturally, Big Pharma is one of those entities willing to pay to control the flow of information. Those pages are not identified as being advertising or propaganda. SNIP

    Read more →
    • 03 NOV 16

    The axing of the entire Catalyst crew

    It was confirmed this afternoon on the ABC radio national program PM that the reason the entire Catalyst science grew has been sacked was largely because of the Wi-Fried program. In an interview with Professor Simon Chapman (who had soundly criticised the Wi-Fried program) he was amazed that the response of ABC senior staff was to sack the entire science crew and that it was a loss for Australian science reporting.

    The obvious message is loud and clear for the Australian Media. Dare report anything bad about Wi-Fi technology (and other contentious science issues), and your head will be chopped off as well! It was not enough to just get rid of the producer of the Wi-Fried program, Maryanne Demasi, it looks like ABC management made the decision that all the Catalyst crew had to pay the price because of Demasi’s program daring to question the safety of telecommunications technology.

    Read more →
    • 01 NOV 16

    America’s next president on 5G and the Internet of Things.

    I am assuming that the outcome of the current election circus will be a Clinton win – A Trump win is simply too scary to contemplate, unless you happen to be a simpleton that is. However, assuming Hillary gets in, here are some of her policies on 5G and the Internet of Things. Its even clearer now why Obama appointed industry lobbyist Tom Wheeler to head the FCC.
    SNIP

    Read more →
    • 01 NOV 16

    Off with their heads! ABC’s Catalyst staff to be sacked and weekly TV show format scrapped

    Note: In the below article it is apparent that one of the reasons the present format of the Catalyst science program is now being scrapped, including sacking of the staff, is because of a chorus of so-called “independent” expert opinions, all claiming that the Catalyst Wi-Fried program as incorrect in not supporting the “scientific consensus” that there are no hazards from wireless technology.

    According to ACEBR Director, Rodney Croft, any other scientific opinion on this issue is fringe science and that “there is no substantiated evidence that the low levels of radiofrequency emissions encountered by mobile telecommunications can cause any harm”.

    In other words, ABC management has taken the easy option and succumbed to the Procrustean Approach…..

    Don

    ABC’s Catalyst staff to be sacked and weekly TV show format scrapped

    SNIP

    Read more →
    • 26 OCT 16

    Australian Senate TPP submissions close on October 28

    For anyone who wishes to make a brief submission/comment to the Senate committee considering the TPP there are only two days left.

    The TPP inquiry is at:
    http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/Senate/Foreign_Affairs_Defence_and_Trade/TPP

    Submissions close on Oct 28.

    Regards
    Don

    Read more →
    • 26 OCT 16

    The TPP Attack on our food safety standards

    Will the current Australian Senate inquiry wake up to the many dangers of the TPP in their forthcoming discussions? Here’s more of what to expect if they ratify the TPP.

    From a report by the US based Food and Water Watch

    Selected excerpts:

    The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) has new and expansive provisions governing food safety and agricultural protection rules that can weaken consumer protections, undermine U.S. food safety standards and expose U.S. crops and livestock to dangerous diseases and pests. This broad area of domestic law and regulation that includes food safety inspection, laboratory testing protocols and quarantines to prevent the entry of livestock diseases and crop pests would be subject to the TPP’s Sanitary and Phytosanitary (SPS) provisions that make food safety rules more vulnerable to challenge at international trade tribunals. SNIP

    Read more →
    • 25 OCT 16

    New report on the Trans Pacific Partnership and the implications for Australia

    For months now, the Turnbull Government has flatly refused to conduct an independent analysis of the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP). So GetUp members chipped in and did it for them – and the findings of our new report, detailing the most controversial part of the deal, are explosive.

    The report, Canary in the Coal Mine, analyses the enormous risks Australia will face from the TPP’s dangerous Investor State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) provisions, that would give new powers to multinationals to sue our government in secret courts.

    Right now, the Senate is holding an inquiry – Australia’s last line of defence against ISDS – and Dr Kyla Tienhaara, who authored the report, has submitted it for their consideration. But many members of the committee will do their best to ignore its finding. That’s where we come in.

    Together we can back her in, flooding the submissions process with community concern about the unacceptable risks detailed in the report. Our Senators will have no choice but to face up to the risks – and recommend that the Senate vote down the TPP.

    THE CANARY IN THE COALMINE: WHAT CANADA’S EXPERIENCE WITH INVESTOR-STATE DISPUTE SETTLEMENT TELLS US ABOUT AUSTRALIA’S FUTURE UNDER THE TRANS PACIFIC PARTNERSHIP

    Dr. Kyla Tienhaara
    School of Regulation & Global Governance(RegNet) Australian National University
    14 October 2016

    SUMMARY
    Australia signed the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) Agreement on 4 February 2016……SNIP

    Read more →
    • 01 OCT 16

    Monsanto and the EPA, a loving embrace????

    From the Huffington Post

    Upcoming EPA Meetings on Safety of Monsanto Weed Killer Drawing Scrutiny
    By Carey Giliam

    29/09/2016 11:24 PM AEST | Updated September 29, 2016 23:24

    Excerpt

    Bayer better be paying attention to this.

    The German company’s intended $66 billion acquisition of Monsanto Co. comes amid growing concern over the future of the company’s top-selling weed killer, a chemical called glyphosate that Monsanto introduced to the world 40 years ago as the active ingredient in its Roundup herbicide. Monsanto reaps billions of dollars annually, roughly a third of its sales, from those products.
    So it’s no small matter that in mid-October the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) plans to spend four days holding public meetings with a scientific advisory panel on the topic of whether or not glyphosate can cause cancer. The idea of shining a public spotlight on this mounting concern about the world’s most widely used herbicide has not set well with Monsanto and the rest of the industry that profits from glyphosate products like Roundup. Agrichemical interests have gone so far as to tell the EPA that the meetings should not be held at all, and have said that if they are, many of the world’s top scientists should be excluded from participating.
    The industry clearly does not welcome the public scrutiny the meetings bring, but it should be satisfied that the EPA has made it clear it has no intention of contradicting Monsanto’s claims of glyphosate’s safety. After all, in a Sept. 12 report issued to the public, the EPA offered a 227-page evaluation of glyphosate’s cancer-causing potential that ended with a “proposed” conclusion that glyphosate was ‘”not likely to be carcinogenic to human’ at doses relevant to human health risk assessment.” All of this before the meetings are held.

    SNIP

    Read more →