• 17 NOV 14

    A must read posting from Dariusz Leszczynski on the recent, ICNIRP, ACEBR and ARPANSA all too obvious spin at Wollongong

    But first my comments: On October 8th I mentioned a forthcoming “Networking Evening/Public Forum” to be introduced by Rodney Croft, as head the Australian Centre for Electromagnetic Bioeffects Research (ACEBR) and the Illawarra Health and Medical Research Institute (ihmri)

    I said in that blog, among other things, that the speakers are all well known proven stalwarts of ICNIRP orthodoxy: Rodney Croft, Eric van Rongen, Michael Repacholi and Emilie Deventer. All who have built their reputations steadfastly defending ICNIRP’s viewpoint. That is; the only ‘proven’ effects of RF exposure are thermal and anything else must be psychosomatic.

    Was I being unfair and premature in my estimation?

    Well, read on for Dariusz Leszczynski’s evaluation of the proceedings. Also see the nice picture of Rodney Croft presenting his slide denying everything, as usual……..


    Read more →
    • 29 SEP 14

    ICNIRP Workshop to be held at Wollongong University

    Perhaps it is somewhat ironic that it was through the University of Wollongong where I wrote my 2010 PhD thesis; The Procrustean Approach: Setting exposure standards for telecommunications frequency electromagnetic radiation. Chapters 4 and 5 examined the limitations of ICNIRP’s blinkered understanding of the science. Now 4 years later we see the University hosting an ICNIRP conference where ICNIRP’s Procrustean Approach to all things RF will be regurgitated for the attendees. Expect nothing new except for some finely crafted PR spin to maintain the status quo.

    ICNIRP (International Commission on Non-Ionising Radiation Protection), ACEBR (Australian Centre for Electromagnetic Bioeffects Research) and ARPANSA (Australian Radiation and Nuclear Safety Agency) are jointly organizing the Workshop on Radiofrequency Field Health Effects & Standards, 11 November 2014. It is hosted by the University of Wollongong, Australia (Innovation Campus, Building 230, Level 2, Squires Way, Fairy Meadow, NSW 2519).

    The aim is to discuss the latest evidence of health consequences from exposure to radiofrequency (RF) fields, and their relationship to ICNIRP’s current updating of the HF guidelines.

    Read more →
    • 30 JUL 14

    Lessons not learned: UK govt. and industry to mount massive spin campaign to promote smart grids

    Contrary to the claim below that the British energy industry has “learned from mistakes in the USA and Australia” just the opposite is true. What about the many reports on health effects coming from Australia and the U.S. Absolutely nothing is mentioned below. Its all about “lifestyle changes” with part of the spin using cartoon characters Gaz and Leccy spreading the supposed benefits of smart meters. Perhaps appropriately like to the cartoon character Joe Camel featured in those old cigarette commercials.

    Wouldn’t it be nice if the money was instead spent on investigating those health effects? A bit like believing in the Easter Bunny…..

    I recommend downloading the report mentioned at the end of the article.



    From Smart Grid Australia

    UK Energy industry unveils £85m plan to tout smart meter benefits

    Having learned from mistakes in the USA and Australia, the British energy industry has joined forces for a nationwide campaign that seeks to rally support for smart meters by touting the devices as a platform for future lifestyle changes in households. Cartoon versions of gas and electricity (Gaz and Leccy) will star in ads nationwide later this month.

    Smart Energy GB, an organisation set up by the Government and funded by energy companies, has just launched the first phase of the £85 seven-year marketing plan. It was first revealed in March and the campaign will play a key role in the Government’s £11bn plan to install the devices in every home by 2020.


    Read more →
    • 12 MAY 14

    STUK and Finland, where only a single opinion is permitted…

    From the blog of Dariusz Leszczunski, Between a Rock and a Hard Place:


    This post was updated on May 10, 2014…

    European Union is in an economic crisis. In Finland the official (=government) opinion is that the one and the only way to survive is to remain in EU and retain common currency. There are voices that disagree with this official opinion.

    Several scientists from the University of Helsinki formed in the autumn 2013, the EuroThinkTank. This group of 12 scientists analyzed advantages and dis-advantages of the Finnish membership in the EU. The report of the EuroThinkTank was published on May 6, 2014, unfortunately only in Finnish language.

    The leader of the EuroThinkTank, Professor Vesa Kanniainen, in his explanation why the EuroThinkTank was formed, said the following:

    ”…Yritykset kyseenalaistaa virallinen totuus on nähty vaiettavana toisinajatteluna…” [Attempts to question the official truth were seen as discordant opinions needed to be silenced; free translation DL].

    Professor Kanniainen was also quoted in the news report as saying:

    ”…Suomi on aina yhden totuuden maa, meillä ei ole sellaista traditiota, että arvioitaisiin avoimesti ja analyyttisesti vaihtoehtoisia näkemyksiä…” [Finland is always the place of the single truth only, we have no tradition of an open minded analytical evaluation of different options; free translation DL]

    I do agree with this opinion…..


    Read more →
    • 09 MAY 14

    Further critique of the SCENIHR spin

    From Mona Nielsson,the Swedish Radiation Protection Foundation:


    April 16, 2014

    Comments on the SCENIHR preliminary opinion on ‘ Potential health effects of exposure to electromagnetic fields (EMF) approved at the 4th plenary of 12 December 2013

    We hereby submit the comments from the Swedish Radiation Protection Foundation, a non-profit organization with the aim of informing and protecting citizens from health hazards of EMF. Our comment focus mainly on the content of the SCENIHR 2013 report on “Health Effects from RF-fields (chapter 3.5) Summary This section of the SCENIHR preliminary opinion provide false, in accurate, misleading and biased information about available research and results from both epidemiological studies on neoplastic diseases (cancer) and studies on other health risks. There is even evidence of scientific fraud or misconduct.


    Read more →
    • 01 MAY 14

    Breaking News: Industry bias exposed in SCENIHR’s scientific assessment

    From Eileen O’Connor, UK Radiation Research Trust


    Scientific Committee on Emerging and Newly Identified Health Risks (SCENIHR) member Dr Kjell Hansson Mild has exposed control of science within the SCENIHR group. SCENIHR excluded many studies from the latest scientific review, including five studies by the Hardell Group, published in 2013. Dr. Mild was a co-author with Dr. Hardell. At the same time SCENIHR excluded Dr. Hardell’s and Dr. Mild’s key scientific papers, they promoted Dr. Mild’s participation in SCENIHR as giving balance and transparency to this process. These studies from the Hardell Group are the longest studies on mobile phones and brain cancer. Of even greater significance is Hardell’s conclusion that the proof of mobile phones causing an increase in gliomas — the deadliest of brain tumours, and acoustic neuromas tumours on the auditory nerve.

    The SCENIHR Report fails to do a thorough review of hundreds of papers on non-ionizing electromagnetic fields (EMF) and biological health effects, and excludes literally hundreds of papers containing new information in the field concerning adverse EMR impacts.


    Read more →
    • 29 APR 14

    BioInitiative Working Group exposes SCENIHR process irregularities

    The BioInitiative Working Group has reviewed the Preliminary Opinion on Potential Health Effects of Exposure to Electromagnetic Fields (EMF) dated November 29, 2013. We have submitted detailed comments and suggested revisions. We hope these suggested revisions will be incorporated in the Final Opinion.

    Further, we are aware that one of our BioInitiative Working Group members, Dr. Kjell Hansson Mild, is also a member of the SCENIHR Advisory Group. It has come to our attention that Dr. Mild’s name has been used by you to give the impression that the process has been balanced and transparent, and that his participation is legitimizing the opinions expressed within that preliminary Opinion.

    In fact, Dr. Hansson Mild has substantial disagreement with the process to date. He has told the Committee (Dr. Schuz in particular) that several key papers on which he is co-author have been systematically disregarded. These papers were within the timeframe for review, and are relevant. They provide evidence that the link between mobile phone use and glioma and acoustic neuroma are strengthened, not weakened as the preliminary Opinion concludes. That conclusion is possible only by excluding key evidence, and Dr. Hansson Mild has brought this to the attention of the Committee. We hope you will look into this matter, and provide counsel to the Committee to make this situation right.


    Read more →
    • 24 APR 14

    Microwave News on the Canadian Conflict of Interest Follies

    As Dariusz Leszczynski pointed out in the previous post, the telcos are getting desperate. This is also seen with the Royal Society of Canada’s RF panel. Read on….


    From Louis Slesin, Editor, Microwave News:

    Earlier this month, a panel of the Royal Society of Canada released a report on Health Canada’s proposal to revise its RF exposure limits. The original chairman of the RSC panel, Daniel Krewski of the University of Ottawa, resigned last summer in the midst of a controversy over his and other panel members’ possible conflicts of interest. We looked into what happened. One lesson to be drawn is that when it comes to such conflicts, anything goes except non-disclosure.

    Read our new story at:

    Read more →
    • 23 APR 14

    Is the telecom industry so desperate that it calls for desperate measures?

    From Dariusz Leszczynski’s blog, Between a Rock and a Hard Place


    In my previous blog I criticized ‘Letter to the Editor’ published in Bioelectromagnetics journal. In it the authors bluntly attacked the IARC Working Group experts for their incompetence. Significantly, one of the co-authors of this ‘Letter to the Editor’ is Dr. Mike Repacholi, former Head of the WHO EMF Project and Chairman Emeritus of the ICNIRP.

    Somewhat simultaneously, with the publication in Bioelectromagnetics, was published in ‘The Indian Express’ an interview with Dr. Siddhartha Mukherjee. The title of this interview-story is “No link between mobile phone radiation and cancer, says Padma awardee doctor“.

    In this interview Dr. Siddhartha Mukherjee calls for an unprecedented action by IARC – to remove cell phone radiation from the list of human carcinogens. Dr. Siddhartha Mukherjee is not calling for new review of the scientific evidence, he is bluntly calling to trash the work of IARC Working Group. It is again, as in Bioelectromagnetics journal but this time in daily news journal, calling the IARC selected experts – incompetent.


    Read more →
    • 19 APR 14

    Industry attack on IARC RF classification: and they dare call it science!

    From Dariusz Leszczynski’s blog, Between a Rock and a Hard Place:

    ‘Letter to Editor’ of Bioelectromagnetics journal: A travesty of science

    Bioelectromagnetics, a peer-review journal of the Bioelectromagnetics Society and the European Bioelectromagnetics Association has just published a ‘Letter to the Editor‘:

    Wiedemann PM, Boerner FU, Repacholi MH. Do people understand IARC’s 2B categorization of RF fields from cell phones? Bioelectromagnetics. 2014 Apr 15. doi: 10.1002/bem.21851

    This publication is the clear attempt to discredit the work of IARC’s invited experts who, as members of the Working Group, classified in May 2011 cell phone radiation as a possible human carcinogen.

    This is not any new situation. Classification of the cell phone radiation as a possible human carcinogen was criticized, right from the start, by ICNIRP and by the industry. Immediately after the classification was made public, ICNIRP’s epidemiologists published contra-opinion saying that the IARC classification is not supported by the epidemiological evidence. The industry had its share of dismissive opinions in attempt to neutralize impact of the classification on the future health policies:


    Read more →
    • 10 APR 14

    Is Science Being Hidden from the Public?

    Eileen O’Connor, Director, Radiation Research Trust

    500 million citizens are relying on SCENIHR: Is Science Being Hidden from the Public?

    9 April 2014

    The European Commission in collaboration with the Greek Atomic Energy Commission (GAEC) under the auspices of the EU Council Greek Presidency organised a major workshop in Athens on EMF electromagnetic fields and health effects with a focus on public awareness, conciliating scientific findings and uncertainties in policy making. The event took place on 27th & 28 March 2014 at Cotsen Hall, Athens, Greece and included presenters from various parties from the European Commission, WHO, public authorities, industry, operators, environmental and consumer associations and academia. The goal of the conference was to reach a common approach for the future in order to respond to public concerns about electromagnetic fields, to enhance information dissemination and discuss new studies and scientific evidence in relation to EMF, and to identify knowledge gaps needed for sound policy making. In this context, the new SCENIHR draft opinion on EMF and potential health effects was presented.

    Read more →
    • 03 APR 14

    Canadian “Expert” Panel Presents Disappointing and Biased Review of Current RF Exposure Limits

    From SkyVision Solutions:


    An expert panel of the Royal Society of Canada (RSC) released a report on April 1, 2014, entitled “A Review of Safety Code 6 (2013): Health Canada’s Safety Limits for Exposure to Radiofrequency Fields.” Although the report is comprehensive at 165 pages in length, it clearly presents a disappointing and biased account of the current state of science on RF exposure effects and what to do in response to those effects.

    As summarized by one Toronto new source regarding the new report, “Federal guidelines that spell out safe exposure levels of radiofrequency waves emitted by cellphones and other wireless devices appear to be mostly adequate, but research to clarify the potential risk of cancer should be aggressively pursued, an expert panel recommends.”

    In other words, there is some evidence that RF exposure might be harmful, but we need more studies to quantify the possible risk. Where have we heard that before?

    Read more →
    • 26 MAR 14

    ICNIRP’s procrustean hegemony under attack in the EC.

    In the following article, the GSMA (the telco trade association representing the interests of mobile operators worldwide), bemoans the fact that their planned rollout of 4G/LTE technology in the EC is being hampered by what they call “non-science based restrictions on mobile phone antennas in some member countries”. No doubt that GSMA is also worried about the future rollout of 5G.

    This shows that ICNIRP’s assurances of safety, based solely on thermal considerations, is seriously being questioned and rejected in the EC. Hopefully this ‘contagion’ will spread internationally. What is not said is that the EC doubts over ICNIRP flow directly from the widespread awareness of the Bioinitiative report.

    Read more →
    • 18 MAR 14

    How industry manipulates “science” by promoting scientists who support their economic interests

    Lawyer Sue Grey’s below letter to the Editor of the New Zealand magazine North and South is in reply to a just published investigative article by NZ journalist Donna Chisholm. Titled with the leading intro.: “Science for Sale?: With scientists now expected to deliver more economic bang for each funding buck, Donna Chisholm asks if corporate funding is putting their integrity, and the direction of our science, at risk”

    But first a bit of background:

    In September 2011 New Zealand lawyer Sue Grey contacted me with a request to undertake a formal review of the MD thesis by Dr. David Black. As Black had refused to provide a copy for some reason, it took Grey a bit of digging around Auckland University to unearth a copy. It is important to note that it was largely on the strength of his thesis that Dr. Black was elected president of the Bioelectromagnetics Society (BEMS) and invited to be a consulting expert to ICNIRP. Despite these impressive appointments, however, there were serious deficiencies in his thesis.

    Read more →
    • 11 MAR 14

    SCENIHR criticised over its inept approval on dental amalgam.

    In May 2008 SCENIHR issued a report titled, Safety of Dental Amalgam and Alternative Dental Restoration Materials for Patients and Users. The report concluded, in part: “We conclude that dental health can be adequately ensured by both types of material. All the materials are considered safe to use and they are all associated with very low rates of local adverse effects with no evidence of systemic disease.”
    HOWEVER, this report has come under extreme criticism from the International Academy of Oral Medicine & Toxicology – Europe (IAOMT), with its membership restricted to scientists, Medical doctors and dentists. The Scientific Advisory Committee of IAMOT issued a dissenting report on SCENIHR’s dismissing the toxic effects of mercury amalgams. SNIP. They concluded in part: “The SCENIHR report is best described as a Fishing Expedition rather than a scientific document; the omissions speak louder than the inclusions. The only logical interpretation is that the committee has selected data to support a predetermined conclusion as to the safety of dental amalgam.”
    And now the experts at SCENIHR are to give their opinion on the Potential health effects of exposure to electromagnetic fields. According to Dariusz Leszczynski (last message) it is looking like SCENIHR is about to do another almighty spin and dare to call it science.

    Read more →
    • 10 MAR 14

    Dariusz Leszczynski: Very problematic SCENIHR Report

    From Dariusz Leszczynski’s blog Between A Rock and A Hard Place:

    I just finished reading the 2013 SCENIHR Report and got an overwhelming feeling of the utmost desperation. Evaluation of the scientific evidence is being distorted and SCENIHR provides an aura of “legitimacy” to this distortion. SCENIHR report has over 200 pages and it is not possible to mention all problems with it in this short blog. Here are few of the more grave problems with the SCENIHR report.

    Membership of the working group

    I do not know what procedure was applied when the membership of the working group of SCENIHR was assembled. What is clearly seen, is that the vast majority of scientists involved in the working group are known for the opinion that the current scientific evidence shows that RF exposures do not cause detrimental effects to human health. Such composition of the working group is, by itself, a reason for serious concern about possible bias in evaluation of the scientific evidence.


    Read more →
    • 16 FEB 14


    From Blake Levitt on the cheemf list:

    The piece below is long but an excellent read. The telecom and now smart grid industries, IEEE, EPRI, COMAR, and others use most of these same tactics. Researcher Jerry Phillips described Motorola’s intentional delaying of his research results in the film Full Signal; they used “product defense” groups like Exponent to influence state agencies considering smart grid legislation in Maine and elsewhere; plant review “papers” in states like Texas and Washington under bogus authors; “buy” domain names to guarantee that their contrived “sound science” pages come up whenever a search is done on BioInitiative or specific people like me and Henry Lai; make false test “replications” by changing test parameters to confuse outcomes and therefore contaminate the database; maintain databases on “friendly” journalists to plant stories and personally profile unfriendly journalists and scientists, etc. etc. Jim Tozzi is mentioned below — he worked with George Carlo and CTIA on discrediting Henry’s work. Bogus risk analysis is applied to federal regulation and the industry controls the lit reviews considered by agencies like FDA, FCC, DoE, EPA. It’s the exact same playbook as below and what is described in David Michaels’ “Doubt is Their Product.”


    Read more →
    • 11 DEC 13

    The Environmental Defense Fund gets Greenwashed over its policy on smart meters.

    The US based Enviromental Defense Fund is an organization with considerable influence with environmental/Green groups internationally. This can be seen with the Green political parties in both Australia and New Zealand, both of which have a policy virtually identical with the EDF on smart meters and the smart grid.

    EDF president Fred Krupp calls himself a “Market-Minded Environmentalist” who “stopped looking at industry as the enemy and enlisted it as an ally in fighting climate change.”

    Read more here

    So when it comes to climate change ‘solutions’ Krupp has steered the EDF into a policy of working with industry in order to fight climate change. Very slippery ground here….

    Enter the controversy over the smart grid and smart meters. In order for Krupp and the EDF to decide on the safety of smart meters, they have not only consulted with the industry sector promoting the technology, but with so called health experts such as Dr. Leeka Kheifets.

    Sorry EDF but you have been well and truly Greenwashed from the inside out.

    Read more →
    • 12 SEP 13

    Queensland avoids smart meter mandate. Or is it smart meters by stealth?

    A report issued by the Queensland government advocates avoiding a mandated rollout of advanced electricity meters, such as smart meters, citing the much-criticised Victorian experience….A 30-year electricity strategy discussion paper released today by the Queensland government instead supports a “customer-driven rollout of advanced meters”, with service providers competing to offer metering services to consumers….“Customers can choose to adopt the technology based on their own assessment of the benefits,” the discussion paper states.

    My comment:

    However This is certainly a vast improvement, driven in part by the mess the Victorian smart meter rollout has created. However if Queenslanders think this is the end of the issue for them, better read the fine print and lock up your meter box-just in case….Note that the Queensland discussion paper avoids any mention of possible health issues and simply states ” A rollout of advanced meters would have to incorporate strong privacy protection for consumers”. Absolutely nothing about health protection.

    I call it spin.


    Read more →
    • 22 MAR 13

    Smart meters, depleted uranium, and bad advice from the Health Council of the Netherlands

    Lately the expert advice of the Health Council of the Netherlands has been relied upon by those promoting smart meter radiofrequency emissions as being perfectly safe. Often quoted is the HCN’s report: “Health Council of the Netherlands Electromagnetic Fields Annual Update 2008”

    The Health Council of the Netherlands has also earlier given its expert advice on the dangers of depleted uranium as widely used in Iraq. Often quoted was their 2002 report: “Depleted Uranium Report from the Health Council of the Netherlands”.

    This advice has turned out to be very bad………….

    Read more →