• 08 MAR 19

    Now ICNIRP/ACEBR researchers looks at NIR for cosmetic purposes!

    Wouldn’t it be nice if the folks at ICNIRP and ACEBR decided to research the following for example:

    * The biological effects of 5G millimeter waves for both humans and insects

    * Effects on sleep quality from close exposure to smart meter transmissions.

    But no, why risk finding inconvenient truths which could pose a risk to the virtual global rollout of 5G, the smart grid and the internet of things, when you can safely spend time drafting a statement on the “Intended human exposure to NIR for cosmetic purposes”.

    No matter how you word it, it still smells like bullshit…. SNIP

    Read more →
    • 21 FEB 19

    Row over Cancer, Cell Phone Review A Request That It Be Withdrawn (Microwave News)

    Excerpt
    Last month, a major review of cell phone cancer risks appeared in the Annual Review of Public Health. The authors would have us believe that cell phones do not present a cancer risk. In the course of digging into the text and supporting documents, I came across some striking contradictions, as well as some serious omissions. They give me pause about the paper’s conclusions and the motives at work. I believe that a major objective of the review is to cast doubt on IARC’s classification of RF as a possible human carcinogen, and by extension empower the WHO and ICNIRP to sidestep precaution.

    Please read:
    The Precarious Case Against Precaution, my detailed look at one of the central arguments used to dismiss precaution: If there were a cancer link, we would be seeing an increase in the number of brain tumors reported to national cancer registries. As I was finishing this article, I received some e-mail traffic that raises questions about the peer review process that the paper went through —or more correctly, about the lack of a conventional peer review.

    My companion piece:
    Row over Cancer, Cell Phone Review
    Louis Slesin, PhD
    Editor, Microwave News

    Read more →
    • 28 JAN 19

    Svenska Dagbladet’s science writer Emma Frans: “science evangelist” for whom?

    Excerpt: Following up on the last message “Incorrect information about wireless phones and the risk for brain tumours…” about an article written by Emma Frans in the Swedish paper Svenska Dagbladet, I received further information below from the Swedish Radiation Protection Foundation.

    According to the Wikipedia entry for Dr. Emma Frans, among other things, she is a science communicator who “examines the correctness and scientific accuracy of sensational news and popular science articles”. She has also been referred to as a “mythbuster” and “science evangelist”. After checking out her qualifications I think Rodney Croft should invite her to be an associate at ACEBR. After all, with her spin on science, she would be right at home with those folks…….SNIP.

    Read more →
    • 27 JAN 19

    Incorrect information about wireless phones and the risk for brain tumours in a Swedish newspaper

    Incorrect information about wireless phones and the risk for brain tumours in a Swedish newspaper from Lennart Hardell’s blog

    The well known Swedish daily newspaper, Svenska Dagbladet, has published an article that does not give correct information on the risk for brain tumours from use of wireless phones. The newspaper has refused to publish our rebuttal. It is now published in the medical journal, Medicinsk Access (only in Swedish).

    Google translation of the rebuttal letter follows: SNIP…

    Read more →
    • 04 JAN 19

    Microwave News: Skepticism Over New Aussie Brain Tumor Paper

    Excerpt from Louis Slesin, Microwave News:

    A few weeks ago, BMJ Open published a paper from Australia, which claims to show that there can be no link between cell phones and brain tumors because the incidence of brain cancer in the general population has stayed steady over the last many years. Don’t believe it. The paper is pure politics. The analysis, carried out under a multi-million-dollar grant from the Australian government, is incomplete and misleading —or worse….SNIP

    Read more →
    • 13 SEP 18

    New paper: Critique of ICNIRP’s latest deception

    Excerpt
    Critique of the ICNIRP Note of September 4, 2018 Regarding
    Recent Animal Carcinogenesis Studies
    Ronald L. Melnick PHD
    Senior Scientist (retired), National Toxicology Program, NIEHS, NIH
    September 12, 2018

    Excerpt:
    The International Commission of Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP, 2018) recently
    issued a report (dated September 4, 2018) that contains numerous false and misleading
    statements, particularly those about the toxicology and carcinogenesis studies on cell phone
    radiofrequency radiation by the US National Toxicology Program (NTP). This flawed analysis by
    ICNIRP served as the basis for ICNIRP to support their conclusion that existing radiofrequency
    exposure guidelines do not need to be revised despite new evidence showing that exposure to
    cell phone radiofrequency radiation (RFR) causes cancers in experimental animals….SNIP

    Read more →
    • 08 AUG 18

    AURORA’s got it all wrong: Smart Meters Radiation Exposure Up to 160 Times More Than Cell Phones (Hirsch)

    Excerpt

    Recently in Tasmania, where consumers have the right to opt out of having a active smart meter installed on their home, an AURORA Energy spokesperson on the phone has been advising customers that there is no need to worry as the emissions from an active smart meter are the same one would get from a mobile phone or TV screen. As one concerned customer said in reply, “my electricity meter is close to my bedhead but I don’t sleep with a mobile phone or TV”.

    It is likely that the AURORA spokesperson was referring to the Tell Associates CCST report. The following from Daniel Hirsch exposes the report as another bit of industry bias, which power companies all too readily lap up as ‘media management’ in order to deceive and “comfort the community” – and dismiss all evidence to the contrary – in other words SPIN…. Read on….

    Read more →
    • 21 JUL 18

    Must see documentary: “Sugar Coated- How the Sugar Industry Managed to Dupe the World for Decades”

    While viewing this excellent documentary of how the sugar industry has spun the science to maintain their profits at the expense to public health, and how it mirrors the same tactics used by the tobacco industry, I am reminded of the PR tactics now used by the telecommunications industry to try and convince us that all is safe.

    Quoting in part from Dr. Christin Kearns now at the University of California as a Postdoctoral Scholar: …”the goal [of her research] is to be demonstrating the tactics used by the sugar industry and the tactics used by the tobacco industry”… “history is repeating itself absolutely unless we truly understand the industry practices the debate will continue to go on.” Recommended!

    Read more →
    • 15 JUL 18

    The inconvenient truth about cancer and mobile phones

    The Guardian

    Excerpt:

    We dismiss claims about mobiles being bad for our health – but is that because studies showing a link to cancer have been cast into doubt by the industry?.
    Eleven independent scientists spent three days at Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, discussing the study, which was done by the National Toxicology Program of the US Department of Health and Human Services and ranks among the largest conducted of the health effects of mobile phone radiation. NTP scientists had exposed thousands of rats and mice (whose biological similarities to humans make them useful indicators of human health risks) to doses of radiation equivalent to an average mobile user’s lifetime exposure. The peer review scientists repeatedly upgraded the confidence levels the NTP’s scientists and staff had attached to the study, fuelling critics’ suspicions that the NTP’s leadership had tried to downplay the findings. Thus the peer review also found “some evidence” – one step below “clear evidence” – of cancer in the brain and adrenal glands.

    Not one major news organisation in the US or Europe reported this scientific news. But then, news coverage of mobile phone safety has long reflected the outlook of the wireless industry. For a quarter of a century now, the industry has been orchestrating a global PR campaign aimed at misleading not only journalists, but also consumers and policymakers about the actual science concerning mobile phone radiation. Indeed, big wireless has borrowed the very same strategy and tactics big tobacco and big oil pioneered to deceive the public about the risks of smoking and climate change, respectively. And like their tobacco and oil counterparts, wireless industry CEOs lied to the public even after their own scientists privately warned that their products could be dangerous, especially to children. SNIP…

    Read more →
    • 09 JUL 18

    The Wifi Alliance, Coming Soon to Your Neighborhood: 5G Wireless

    From Global Research

    By Renee Parsons
    Global Research, July 06, 2018

    Excerpts:

    Just as any new technology claims to offer the most advanced development; that their definition of progress will cure society’s ills or make life easier by eliminating the drudgery of antiquated appliances, the Wifi Alliance was organized as a worldwide wireless network to connect ‘everyone and everything, everywhere” as it promised “improvements to nearly every aspect of daily life.”

    The Alliance, which makes no pretense of potential health or environmental concerns, further proclaimed (and they may be correct) that there are “more wifi devices than people on earth”. It is that inescapable exposure to ubiquitous wireless technologies wherein lies the problem. ..SNIP

    Read more →