• 16 MAY 17

    People don’t trust scientific research when companies are involved

    From The Conversation

    May 8, 2017

    Excerpt

    A soda company sponsoring nutrition research. An oil conglomerate helping fund a climate-related research meeting. Does the public care who’s paying for science?

    In a word, yes. When industry funds science, credibility suffers. And this does not bode well for the types of public-private research partnerships that appear to be becoming more prevalent as government funding for research and development lags.

    The recurring topic of conflict of interest has made headlines in recent weeks. The National Academies of Science, Engineering, and Medicine has revised its conflict of interest guidelines following questions about whether members of a recent expert panel on GMOs had industry ties or other financial conflicts that were not disclosed in the panel’s final report.

    Our own recent research speaks to how hard it may be for the public to see research as useful when produced with an industry partner, even when that company is just one of several collaborators. SNIP

    Read more →
    • 06 MAY 17

    Trump orders FDA TV’s to be locked on FOX News (A big win for Rupert Murdock)

    In what may be a backroom deal between Trump and Rupert Murdock, the head of FOX News, the TV’s at the Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) research campus are to be locked on the FOX News station.

    CBS News has confirmed an email was sent to researchers at the FDA’s Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research responding to apparent efforts to change the channel on internal television screens. The email from “[White Oak] Digital Display” sent on Wednesday, May 3, was sent to inform the researchers of the “reason for the change from CNN to Fox.” White Oak is the name of the FDA’s campus.

    The email goes on to inform employees that the decision came from the Trump administration.
    SNIP….

    Read more →
    • 29 APR 17

    Dariusz Leszczynski: Where science and big money collide…

    From the blog: Between a Rock and a Hard place

    April 28, 2017
    Excerpt

    Where science and big money collide, we enter a strange “twilight zone” of science politics, where various methods are applied to neutralize “inconvenient” science.

    One of the examples of such collision between science and big money is presented in, as always, a very good story from Louis Slesin: ‘Peer Review in the Raw’. From his long-time perspective as Editor of the ‘Microwave News’ Louis is showing, yet again, that science and politics in EMF are a “toxic mix” for science.

    The story of Henry Lai and N.P. Singh reminded me of my first publication in EMF arena.

    In 2002 my research group published article that made worldwide headlines: ‘Non-thermal activation of the hsp27/p38MAPK stress pathway by mobile phone radiation in human endothelial cells: molecular mechanism for cancer- and blood-brain barrier-related effects.’ by Leszczynski D, Joenväärä S, Reivinen J, Kuokka R; Differentiation. 2002 May; 70(2-3):120-9…. SNIP

    Read more →
    • 09 APR 17

    Australia’s NH&MRC accused of bias and misleading the public

    In the below press release from the Australian Homœopathic Association, they make the allegation that the National Health and Medical Research Council (NH&MRC)has misled the public over the effectiveness of homeopathic medicine and has systematic conflicts of interest in its scientific evaluation. Well, if proven, that is nothing new. For example see Professor Martin Brian’s 1986 paper; Bias in awarding research grants, published in British Medical Journal…
    SNIP
    In the above light, perhaps the NH&MRC can be considered more of a “captured agency” firmly binded to government and industry policy, ignoring inconvenient evidence….

    Read more →
    • 14 MAR 17

    Highly recommended: Video of Leszczynski’s lecture in Reykjavik on Feb. 24, 2017

    Video of Leszczynski’s lecture in Reykjavik on Feb. 24, 2017

    Here is the link to Dariusz’s video of his presentation in Reykjavik on Feb. 24, 2017

    The first slide sets the tone:

    ICNIRP, WHO EMF Project & Environmental Health Criteria

    The most influential ‘echo chamber’ is ICNIRP, a “private club” where the current members select and appoint new members. SNIP

    Read more →
    • 01 MAR 17

    Science Propaganda wars (The Ecologist)

    Propaganda wars: ‘pro-science’ GMO, chemicals boosters funded by climate change deniers

    Stacy Malkan

    28th February 2017

    Excerpt

    They promote GMOs, defend toxic chemicals, and attack people who raise concerns about those products as ‘anti-science’. But behind the slick ‘astroturf’ PR fronts lurk some very dubious funders: the same arch-conservative foundations that finance climate science denial. Stacy Malkan exposes the key players in the agribusiness and chemical industry propaganda wars. SNIP

    Read more →
    • 28 FEB 17

    Judge Rules California Must Release Papers Discussing Risk Of Cellphone Use

    BERKELEY (KPIX 5) — California could have to hand over some documents on cellphone use it tried to keep under wraps.

    On Friday, a Superior Court judge ruled the state must release papers discussing the possible risks of long-term cellphone use. The documents were written by the state’s Environmental Health Investigations branch and are believed to contain cellphone radiation warnings and recommendations for public use.But the state refused to hand them over when requested by a director at University of California, Berkeley School of Public Health. So Joel Moskowitz, Ph.D., sued the state under the California Public Records Act. SNIP

    Read more →
    • 30 JAN 17

    Scientific misconduct, censorship and the Interphone study

    From Dariusz Leszczynski’s blog, Between a Rock and A hard Place.

    Excerpt

    Uncensored version of blog post on Interphone, first published in 2011 and re-published for the first time now…

    Posted on January 30, 2017

    Below is the uncensored version of my science blog published in 2011. This version was subsequently censored by, then, STUK Director General who called me personally and informed that if I do not agree to rewrite the blog post he will need to consider if I am suited to continue work at STUK. Under this threat I agreed and STUK Director General personally revised my blog post. The link to censored version of the post and to two other posts on this subject can be found in my yesterday’s blog post. The uncensored version of the blog, published in 2011 and re-published for the first time since, gives a better idea of what happened to science and what form of scientific misconduct Interphone committed…SNIP

    Read more →
    • 27 JAN 17

    U.S. Congress moves to eliminate regulations that inhibit the roll-out of IoT technology

    The “Mobile Now Act” and “The DIGIT Act” have passed out of the U.S. Senate Commerce Committee and are headed to the full senate for a vote. They will probably be heard in the next week or two.

    Bill Info: These bills lay the foundation for the Internet of Things that will require a small cell tower transmitter every couple of homes emitting high frequency 24Ghz to 90Ghz which has never been tested for non-thermal biological effects [It is illegal in the land of democracy to oppose wireless technology for health or environmental reasons]. These transmitters will be put in public right of ways with NO ability to consider health and safety. The transmitters will be ugly, decrease property values, and expose occupants to potentially harmful microwave radiation so that your home appliances can communicate with one another which does not seem like a necessity and your privacy can be violated even more easily.

    S19
    Mobile Now Act (a) Short Title.—This Act may be cited as the “Making Opportunities for Broadband Investment and Limiting Excessive and Needless Obstacles to Wireless Act” or the “MOBILE NOW Act”.

    S88 the DIGIT Bill “To ensure appropriate spectrum planning and interagency coordination to support the Internet of Things.” SNIP

    Read more →
    • 19 JAN 17

    Susan Foster on Conflict of Interest in the Berkeley’s “right to know”

    From the blog of Dariusz Leszczynski, Between a Rock and A Hard Place

    Excerpt

    This is the next in a series of the Guest Blogs on BRHP. The opinions expressed in it are of Susan Foster herself (photo). Publication of these opinions in BRHP does not imply that BRHP automatically agrees with or endorses these opinions. Publication of this, and other Guest Blogs, is an attempt to start an open debate and free exchange of opinions on RF and health.

    WILL A JUDGE’S FAILURE TO RECUSE

    SILENCE BERKELEY’S “RIGHT TO KNOW”?

    The long battle over cell phone consumer labels, with a hidden twist of legal super heroes and questions about a Ninth Circuit Court judge’s failure to recuse herself.

    A battle over free speech in Berkeley, California has pitted the city of Berkeley against the mighty telecommunications trade group, CTIA – The Wireless Association. Berkeley stands on the First Amendment argument they have a right to inform consumers of certain precautions the FCC already requires in the back of cell phone user’s manuals. SNIP

    Read more →