#807: The Danish Health Council predictibly rejects the Bioinitiative report
The following from Danish scientist, professor Sianette Kwee illustrates the level of bias in the decision making process at the Danish Health Council. Note the highlighted quote below.
Much the same bias applies to Australia, with the working group that has written the Australian draft ELF standard that increases allowable ELF exposures by a factor of three. This increase most likely is to accommodate new high power technology such as MRI, (see message #733). This working group, part of the Australian Radiation Protection & Nuclear Safety Agency (ARPANSA) has also rejected the Bioinitiative report by attacking the qualifications of the authors in a recent committee meeting.
Organisations like ARPANSA and the Danish Health Council, both subservient to government political and economic policy, have no choice but to dismiss inconvenient science that threatens the viability of an economic sector, be it the power or medical industry. As Michael Moore might say: ‘Its all about economics not health, stupid!’
Don
From Sianette Kwee:
Last week the Health Council was caught sleeping and needed a week to wake up.
Danish Health Council on WIFI
After one week of thinking, Lis Keiding, head of the Epidemiological section in the Danish Health Council, said to the press, that the claims of the Bioinitiative report are not based on any scientific evidence. The group behind the report is known for it activities in public debate and so the report is only a biased contribution to a general debate. Therefore the Health Council will not change its standpoint that EMF radiation from cellphones, WiFi and masts does not pose a health risk .
Since 1993 the Expert Panel on EMF of the Danish Health Council, that includes Lis Keiding, has published reports on health risk of EMF. However, they systematically omitted certain subjects which they considered the risks to be negligible. Among one of the subjects omitted was damage to DNA in cells,because the panel said they had no expertise on that matter and no time to go through the material.
At the time of the extensive public debate on 3G, in 2003, I was called to account by the Health Council for telling the public about the risk of RF. In my presentation I gave extensive scientific evidence for the health and biological effects of non-thermal EMF in all fields. After I finished it was very quiet for a moment, but then one of the members of the Expert panel said “I think we have been sleeping in this panel during these years”. Nevertheless after the meeting the director of the Health Council said in his statement to the press
“ There are no health risks due to EMF from any source, and we have choosen to ignore the scientific evidence that shows that there are biological and health effects.”
I wonder if the Expert Panel has woken up now and acquired more expertise.
Sianette Kwee
Denmark