The outcome of the forthcoming ACRBR public information meeting in Melbourne “Unplugged and uncertain?”(see message #976) seems pretty certain if one considers the below article about an Australian ’study’ that apparently rules wireless technology as safe - as long as exposures are kept below the thermal-effects-only RF/MW standard. Also note on ACRBR’s website under “World News Update!” it highlights statements from the US FDA, as follows:

The FDA has updated its Cell Phone website as of 10/14/2008. In general, FDA finds no link between health problems and cell phone use by any segment of the population including children. Follow the links below to see what they have to say:

Children and Cell Phones
Quote: “The scientific evidence does not show a danger to any users of cell phones from RF exposure, including children and teenagers.”

It is interesting to see a perfect alignment on dismissive health effects opinions between ACRBR and the industry body the Australian Mobile Telecommunications Association (AMTA), who partly funded the below mentioned ’study’. It is also interesting to go through the ACRBR website to see how deeply Telstra employees, both present and former are embedded in ACRBR research.

It is understandable why Telstra would want to be involved in the running of ACRBR, considering the admission in Telstra’s 2004 Annual Report. In bold type, under the heading “Risk factors” Telstra stated that “[t]he establishment of a link between adverse health effects and electromagnetic energy (EME) could expose us to liability or negatively affect our operations”. Consequently, any research effort into this possible link would be of vital importance to Telstra, not only because of the obvious need to clarify possible health hazards from telecommunications technology but also because of its potential to adversely impact on litigation, regulation and the corporation’s bottom line.

This is the thousand pound conflict-of-interest gorilla in the corner of the room that does not appear to be a problem in the current state-of-play for Australian mobile phone research. Telstra could most likely argue that there is nothing surprising about their interest in health effects and having health effects research and commercial development being undertaken under the same roof, considering their expertise and excellent laboratory facilities. However, one would have to be naive in the extreme not to see the potential for corporate interests to influence the research under such an arrangement.

Another problem for Australian telecommunications health research was where it should be based. Australia once had a suitable world-class research facility (the Department of Radiophysics) at the Commonwealth Science and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO) but this was eliminated by the previous government at the behest of the industry. The government, then a major share holder in Telstra, saw the CSIRO as being in conflict with its policy to promote telecommunications while the industry saw possible CSIRO research as a ‘loose cannon’ that it could not easily control. Amazingly one of the reasons why the industry opposed CSIRO involvement in telecommunications research was that they claimed CSIRO research proposals were just a blatant attempt to gain research funding for the organization. That reason was apparently sufficient enough for the previous government to remove CSIRO from all non-ionizing research.

After CSIRO was taken out of the picture, RMIT became the most logical place as a base for ACRBR, (provided one ignored that gorilla). RMIT is an industrial research organization that is “renowned for collaborating with industry, providing solutions, new ideas and processes that deliver real outcomes for business”. A cooperative relationship with Telstra existed by the already close working relationship between the two organizations. RMIT was home to the “Telstra Home Team: a different way of thinking”, a team consisting of 5 postgraduate researchers funded by Telstra. The Team “undertakes research projects for Telstra while studying “full time” at RMIT”. RMIT was also a partner in the Australian Telecommunications Cooperative Research Centre (ATCRC), focussing on “developing and commercializing the technologies that will drive a new generation of telecommunications.” This meant that RMIT became a base for both commercializing communications technology and researching for possible health effects from that technology. With such a close working relationship between RMIT, Telstra and ACRBR it could be argued that there was not so much a conflict of interest but more of a shared interest between the three organisations. - An invisible thousand pound gorilla.

The challenge for both ACRBR and Telstra, if they want public trust, is to convince the public that there are mechanisms in place to ensure that Telstra’s involvement and its corporate needs, does not place the corporation in a position to influence ACRBR’s scientific results. To date this issue has been sidestepped.

Such a scientific working relationship is not unique to Australia but has (perhaps inevitably) become the norm in many countries. Call it one aspect of corporate globalization. Sheldon Krimsky in “Science in the Private Interest” (2003) examined the ethical quandary whereby university research has generally become deeply entangled with entrepreneurship and commercial interests - to become what Krimsky called an “inevitable tide of corporate and academic partnerships and the commercialism of knowledge”. Krimsky concluded: “As universities turn their scientific laboratories into commercial enterprise zones, and select faculties to realize these goals, fewer opportunities will exist in academia for public interest science -an inestimable loss to society.”

So, for those attending the “Unplugged and uncertain?” meeting on 12 November the meeting may be more like attending a Hare Krishna mantra session. Hare… Hare…thermal effects only…thermal effects only…on and on and on and on….. until it seems self evident that it certainly must be true.

Of course this is one mantra that won’t take you to a higher state of consciousness.

Don Maisch

*************************************************************************************
Australian Associated Press General News
5 November 2008

FED: Wireless gadgets dangers “minuscule”: study

Tamara McLean, Medical Writer

SYDNEY, Nov 5 AAP - Wireless gadgets like cordless phones and baby monitors emit “minuscule” levels of radiation, according to an Australian study that rules the technology safe.

Scientists tested levels of electromagnetic waves in 20 Melbourne homes after some studies raised questions about health hazards.

“Essentially, everything was extremely low, ranging from being about 10,000 times lower than the national standards to being 10 times below,” said lead researcher Professor Rodney Croft of the Australian Centre for Radiofrequency Bioeffects Research.

“With such minuscule levels, it’s very hard to conceive of how there could be a problem at such low levels.”

The team measured radiation emitting from various devices in the home and found small gadgets like wireless alarms, baby monitors, PDAs, wireless keyboards and mouses had levels under one-thousandth of a per cent of the national standard.

Wireless internet, doorbells, cordless phones and mobile phones all came in under one per cent of the standard.

The average microwave oven reached just 0.65 per cent of the standard, with the worst example recording 16 per cent.

“For the highest emitting device that’s still very low, but it’s comparatively high, given we never would have thought that with microwave ovens,” Prof Croft said.

The overall levels in the house were just 0.11 per cent of the national guidelines for safe household exposure, showing the cumulative effect was not of concern.

“There was a concern that with cumulative exposure we were being bombarded with electromagnetic waves but the difference between devices turned off and turned on was quite trivial.”

He said the study, partially funded by the industry body Australian Mobile Telecommunications Association, was the first in Australia to independently verify real exposure in homes, with the results “making sense in terms of the physics”.

“The radio frequency of these devices is designed to be as small as possible to make it as little a burden on the battery as possible and these results are in keeping with that.”

But Melbourne occupational and environmental medicine specialist Dr Bruce Hocking said there were too many unknowns to judge the technology safe.

“It’s true that most houses have low fields but that doesn’t mean that there aren’t houses or parts of houses with higher fields that are concerning and impact negatively on health,” Dr Hocking said.

“It’s too soon to call that. We still don’t know.”

The results will be released at a Swinburne University of Technology forum next week.