• 28 FEB 20

    Evidence based science or prostitution?

    By Rafał Górski , Poland Posted on February 27, 2020 by Multerland Original post published by: Instytut Spraw Obywatelskich – Institute of Civil Affairs Title: Nauka oparta na dowodach czy na prostytucji? About scientific prostitution, the impact of corporations on scientific research and how the dismantling of the environmental and human protection system in Poland

    Read more →
    • 27 FEB 20

    Einar Flydal on ICNIRP’s “acceptable science”

    Excerpt:
    A few weeks ago, the president of Switzerland and her counsel received a serious letter. The authors were a number of the world’s foremost scientists in the field of radiation protection and health.The researchers warned that Martin Röösli, the man who chairs the BERENIS committee, a committee responsible for providing the Swiss government with advice on radiation protection guidelines, should be scrutinized for impropriety –or to put it more bluntly –for scientific fraud.About time, was my initial reaction. Then, I began to ponder: Is Martin Röösli an outright fraudster? Or are his mis-characterisations of the science the result of the application of unreasonable scientific criteria in his search for truth? It seemed to be an interesting topic worthy of reflection.Either way, the consequences are substantial, not just for Switzerland, but also for the Nordic countries and Japan, as Röösli is a member of radiation protection committees of those countries as well. These committees establish what is to be considered “accepted science” –and thereby also establish the misconceptions on which the radiation protection and health care agencies, as well as politicians, act.

    Read more →
    • 19 FEB 20

    Book Review: The Triumph of Doubt Exposes the Disinformation Playbook in Action

    Excerpt: What do tobacco, silica, diesel, teflon, asbestos, lead, PFAS, sugar, talc, alcohol, opiods, climate change, and even football head injuries have in common? Aside from their inherent dangers and significant public health and environmental impacts? Aside from the rigor of the scientific evidence about these impacts? And aside from powerful industries whose profits derive from their use? The answer: They are examples in a well-honed industry public relations playbook based on deception and used to manufacture doubt and uncertainty about the dangers of these products. The playbook’s goal? Confuse the public, stymie any governmental action to protect the public from harm, and protect producer profits for as long as possible…SNIP

    Read more →
    • 17 FEB 20

    The Australian 5G inquiry and Whirling Dervishes…

    Excerpt: At the International conference, Mobile Communications and Health: Medical, Biological and Social Problems, held in Moscow in 2004, The then ICNIRP chairman Paulo Vecchia stated the following in relation to ICNIRP’s so called precautionary principle approach: “ICNIRP only considers acute effects in its precautionary principle approach. Consideration of long-term effects is not possible. Precautionary actions to address public concerns may increase rather than mitigate worries and fears of the public. This constitutes a health detriment and should be prevented as other adverse effects of EME.”…SNIP

    Read more →
    • 17 DEC 19

    The Australian government’s $9 Million 5G disinformation spin campaign begins

    It had to happen after all those anti-5G community protests. After comments from various industry groups to the recent government’s 5G inquiry over industry concerns about community opposition interfering with the rollout of 5G technology, the government has taken up their concerns. The Morrison government’s solution is a $9 million public relations misinformation campaign designed to convince the Australian public that 5G is safe after all – so that they can”feel empowered” and take up the technology and become happy consumers of all the wonders that 5G promises. It has been estimated 5G and the associated Internet of Things (IoT) and autonomous vehicles represents a $17 trillion windfall to the various industries pushing for 5G. Never mind the concerns over huge uncertainties and possible hazards, such as expressed by Dariusz Leszczynski and many others, its really just all about the money and to hell with pubic health. So here comes the government’s smoke & mirror circus assisted by the clowns at ARPANSA. and ACEBR. NOTE: For an interesting aside see the link on Prime Minister Scott Morrison and how his bizarre religious beliefs influence his politics.. .read on.

    Read more →
    • 19 NOV 19

    Lies, Damn Lies and the Australian 5G inquiry

    Following on from the last message on the Australian 5G inquiry here are some submission quotes which clearly illustrate a willful maintenance of a state of scientific ignorance and outright lies, based on Procrustean Approach principles. The first is from  ACEBR and then from Vodafone. SNIP….

    Read more →
    • 23 JUL 19

    Fake news on 5G from New York Times Science Desk (two articles)

    1) A Fact-Free Hit on a 5G Critic Fabricating History on the New York Times Science Desk
    From Louis Slesin, Microwave News
    Excerpt: Last Tuesday, the New York Times devoted most of the front page of its science section to Bill Broad’s latest attack on those who challenge the dogma that wireless radiation is absolutely safe.“The 5G Health Hazard That Isn’t” is the catchy headline of the Web version of his article. It’s followed by “How one scientist and his inaccurate chart led to unwarranted fears of wireless technology.”There’s a major problem with Broad’s reporting. The key facts are wrong.Please take a look at the critique that I just posted on the Microwave News website.

    2) The Miseducation of America on 5G: The New York Times Gets It Spectacularly Wrong
    Devra Davis, the Environmental Health Trust
    Excerpt: When William J. Broad, a Pulitzer-Prize winning New York Times science writer, strangely mangles information on the dangers of 5G, this plays right into the hands of those determined to advance this never-tested technology without serious examination of its long-term impact on human health and the environment.The recent headline of the NYTimes trumpeted 5G as the “health hazard that isn’t.” Not so fast. A close examination of claims in that article indicates that it is time for a reset on the march to the latest wireless technology as the consequences could not be more monumental…..SNIP

    Read more →
    • 05 JUL 19

    Dr Karl – Misleading and Wrong Information and a much deeper problem in the selection of experts.

    News release from the Oceania Radiofrequency Scientific Advisory Association (ORSAA)
    Excerpt: 4/7/2019​We have seen lots of “Fake News” from various media and online sources over the last few years. Now the Australian trusted public radio station the ABC has created “Fake Information”.  Dr Karl, the ABCs trusted science communicator, has made several recent pronouncements on ABC radio station JJJ. He has claimed that concerns that are being raised about an untested 5G rollout are ‘hysteria’.  Dr Karl’s talks begin with a clear and correct explanation of the EMF spectrum, but then goes on to make incorrect and misleading statements. He declares that only the very high non-ionising frequencies can cause cancer. This statement has been falsified by the recent NTP study.One of our members, Dr Richard Cullen, who has a PhD in electrical engineering, with many years of experience in IT has evaluated Dr Karl’s recent pronouncements.  We have edited transcripts below. ..SNIP

    Read more →
    • 13 MAY 19

    Is the 5G health effects issue just a sneaky Russian plot to damage America’s 5G rollout? The New York Times thinks so.

    That’s right folks, according to a New York Times article written by American science journalist, William Broad “Your 5G Phone Won’t Hurt You. But Russia Wants You to Think Otherwise”. Now, in Australia, 5G community concerns  are trying to be dismissed by the promoters of the technology as just a result of media misinformation and needless worry, but in the the U.S., William Broad brings in the Russians, suggesting that any evidence on possible adverse effects from 5G technology is coming from Russia Today America (RT America), a global television news network based in Moscow, Russia and funded by the Russian government. It is no surprise that the Russian Government, using its propaganda arm, RT America, would like to spread fear amongst the American public and perhaps delay the rollout of 5G in the US. That’s what they are paid to do. HOWEVER for William Broad to then dismiss all evidence of 5G hazards as just Russian propaganda shows his own bias in scientific (mis)understanding of the issue. Understandable if he was a science advisor for President Trump but not for a science journalist writing for the prestigious New York Times. Read on….

    Read more →
    • 08 MAY 19

    Proposed Advisors for Japan and Korea’s planned NTP Replication study

    So, scientists from Japan and South Korea plan on doing a partial replication study of the NTP study which found exposure to radiofrequency radiation in male rats resulted in tumors in tissues surrounding nerves in the hearts. Unfortunately it seems they may fall for the old Procrustean Approach  spin in the choice of potential expert advisors for the study. Even ancient Michael Repacholi is being wheeled out of his cryogenic chamber for his sage like words of wisdom. The one name missing from the list of potential expert advisors is that of Rodney Croft who would have been useful by claiming that the adverse effects found in the NTP rats was the solely the result of a nocebo effect…Louis Slesin (Microwave News) and Dariusz Leszczynski have written excellent articles on the proposed study. SNIP

    Read more →
    • 27 MAR 19

    A historical revisit to ACEBR’s very questionable provocation testing

    Excerpt: In 2013 CSIRO scientist Dr. David McDonald won a COMCARE compensation case for crippling headaches, nausea and dizziness caused by using Wi-Fi and computers at work. Dr McDonald, was a mathematician who worked as a principal research scientist at the CSIRO for 15 years. He moved to the Victorian countryside to avoid electromagnetic radiation but later died from cancer. In 2011, as part of the case McDonald was asked to undergo a provocation study being designed for use in Australia by ACEBR (called ACRBR at the time) McDonald asked to see the testing protocol and it was provided under a request for confidentially. McDonald’s analysis makes for interesting reading indeed but his conclusions are telling and illustrate the dismal state of EHS research in Australia. To quote: …SNIP

    Read more →
    • 25 MAR 19

    Emeritus Professor Martin Pall slams ARPANSA response

    From Stop Smart Meters Australia:

    Excerpt: The Minister for Health (The Hon Greg Hunt MP) and the Minister for Environment (The Hon Melissa Price MP) referred a letter from a member of Stop 5G Perth and Australia wide to the Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency (ARPANSA) for a response. The letter sought information about the role of ARPANSA and the health impacts of millimetre wave (5G) technology.

    ARPANSA replied in its usual vein, downplaying any possible cause for alarm.

    Martin Pall PhD, Professor Emeritus of Biochemistry and Basic Medical Sciences, Washington State University, was asked by Stop 5G Perth and Australia wide to respond to ARPANSA’s (unsigned) letter.

    Professor Martin Pall’s 28-page forensic analysis of ARPANSA’s letter, which includes reference to his own document on the risks of 5G and other EMF, is a chilling indictment of the competence, professionalism and independence of ARPANSA. ARPANSA is the organisation that supposedly monitors and identifies radiation risks to Australians!..SNIP

    Read more →
    • 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 →