From the blog of Dariusz Leszczynski, Between a Rock and a Hard Place: Did INTERPHONE commit scientific misconduct? July 7, 2011 The definitions of the scientific misconduct used by various institutions or provided in various dictionaries differ slightly. Here are few of them. British Medical Journal (BMJ) uses the definition of the scientific misconduct provided
Read more →I must congratulate GLENTEL Inc. with being innovative enough to actually turn the IARC findings into a positive spin to sell their wireless products. Further congratulations go to their successful partnership with the Canadian Cancer Society. What will CCS do with its newfound $$$$ windfall. Put it into research on brain tumours and mobile phone
Read more →From the Environmental Health Trust: In 1960, neuroscientist Allan Frey, then with Cornell University”™s General Electric Advanced Electronics Center, became curious about the impact on the nervous system of electromagnetic fields moving at the speed of light. Long before cell phones were commercialized, his findings would eventually prove that radio frequency radiation has a measurable
Read more →In a previous message I mentioned the recent ICNIRP paper, “Mobile Phones, Brain Tumours and the Interphone Study: Where Are We Now?” Well, where we are now is in Conflict of Interest and BIAS land where its acceptable for the lead author of the ICNIRP paper, Anthony Swerdlow, who is also on the Main Commission
Read more →So, the Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency is being investigated for being in a nice cozy relationship with the nuclear industry regulator (and promoter) that has endangered nuclear safety. No surprise to those who have been seeing ARPANSA being too close to other industry sectors. How about widening the investigation to include how
Read more →From Louis Slesin, Microwave News: The battle over Interphone continues. This time it’s in full public view as key players publish papers detailing where they stand on cell phone tumor risks. The diametrically opposing views have led to conflicting stories in the media as each new study is released. The latest chapter came late last
Read more →Just like in those old US Western TV shows, when the cowboys were under threat from the marauding Indians and all was about to be lost, the Cavalry rides to the rescue just in time. Now we have the mobile phone industry under threat from the mounting scientific evidence that long term mobile phone use
Read more →In the Blog, “Between a Rock and A hard Place”, by Dariusz Leszczynski, he examines the continuing controversy generated by the media, scientists and industry spin doctors over the recent IARC ruling of RF as a possible carcinogen. He takes special exception to the statements of David Black, New Zealand’s expert on everything, the President
Read more →On May 16, 2011, TVNZ (New Zealand) broadcast on their breakfast show an interview with David Black. Remember he was featured on a recent NZ documentary (see earlier message) as saying that he is paid by the Telcom industry because they like what he says. Well, they will love this interview. Note the claim that
Read more →From Cindy Sage: 1) IARC findings: Carcinogenicity of radiofrequency electromagnetic fields. Robert Baan et al, June 22, 2011 Lancet Oncology DOI:10.1016/S147-2045 (11)70140-4 The Lancet Oncology today published a summary from a meeting of the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), that classifies radiofrequency electromagnetic fields (RF-EMF) (including those caused by mobile phones) as possibly
Read more →From Louis Slesin, Microwave News: Lancet Oncology posted a summary of the IARC working group’s decision to classify RF radiation as a possible human carcinogen this morning. In other news, check out our latest Short Takes on: ** The attendance at last week’s Bioelectromagnetics Society meeting in Nova Scotia; ** The U.S. military paying for
Read more →Source: Cindy Sage as posted on the CHE-EMF list: Commentary Cellphone Waves May Bring A Litigation Wave Stephen Riccardulli, Jennifer Kalnins Temple and Lisa Linsky, 06.20.11, 03:00 PM EDT It will be a high burden to prove correlation between phone use and cancer. On May 31, 2011, it was reported that the International Agency for
Read more →Sent in by Blake Levit: Below is a link to a comprehensive piece on CBS News — Henry Lai’s (and my) paper is cited. This writer did a good job with a complicated subject… Blake Trouble with cell phone radiation standard June 2, 2011 9:59 AM By Marguerite Reardon Exerpt: Editors’ note: This is the
Read more →From Bürgerwelle News: 14/06/2011 The FINANCIAL — Brussels, 14 June 2011 ”“ A proposal to update and improve EU rules to protect workers from electromagnetic fields in their daily tasks has just been put forward by the European Commission. The rules are to protect workers like doctors and nurses giving patients magnetic resonance imaging scans
Read more →Sent in by Sharon Noble: From Moneyweek, 10 June 2011 There is no ”¨shortage of stuff ”¨out there to ”¨make investors ”¨feel nervous. ”¨The euro could ”¨get blown apart if a long, ”¨hot summer of protest in ”¨Greece and ”¨Spain boils over ”¨into civil unrest. ”¨The Chinese ”¨economy might suddenly turn down, ”¨removing just about
Read more →Original source: The Spanish website ASQUIFYDE , dedicated to researching the causes of Multiple chemical sensitivity, Chronic Fatigue Syndrome, Fibromyalgia and other environmental diseases, characterized as emerging diseases, disabling and neglected. The activities carried out by Asquifyde are aimed at making the government take over the management and prevention of these diseases. (Translation) SUMMARY OF
Read more →From Louis Slesin, Microwave News: Ironically, as many are asking what research should be done after IARC’s decision to designate RF radiation as a possible cancer agent, Australia’s RF research center has closed down. We think we know why. In other news, Anders Ahlbom has resigned from a key Swedish government advisory panel. And two
Read more →From Dariusz Leszczynski, Between A Rock and A Hard Place Blog: As I have written in my previous blog (published yesterday), IARC classification of mobile phone radiation as 2B category carcinogen ”“ possibly carcinogenic to humans ”“ is a big news. So far, WHO evaluation of mobile phone carcinogenicity was based on the reviews by
Read more →