Headache in the Car

Kopfschmerzen im Auto – Headache in the Car (English Subtitles)

This experiment demonstrates brain effects from Wifi, Bluetooth, smart devices  and other electronic features in modern vehicles.

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on Headache in the Car

Video : War-Gaming for Profit – Mobile Radiation, Cancer Risk and Industry Lobbying

Courtesy of Kompetenzinitiative e.V.


Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on Video : War-Gaming for Profit – Mobile Radiation, Cancer Risk and Industry Lobbying


Source Article: Microwave News Louis Slesin

July 20, 2022
Last updated July 22, 2022

My wife and I spent a few days in Basel, Switzerland, earlier this month. We came for its many  exceptional museums, and they didn’t disappoint. One afternoon as we were walking through town, not far from the complex that is home to Art Basel, the annual contemporary art fair, I spotted a carefully crafted warning on the side of an otherwise unremarkable building on Drahtzugstrasse. “The Odious Smell of Truth,” it called out.

With a little Googling, I learned that the expression comes from the title of an exhibition held at the Royal College of Art in London in the spring of 2017. The show was organized by Peter Kennard, a noted British political artist, and his students. They called themselves the Rage Collective. What does it mean, they wanted to know, to tell the truth in a world of false news and social media misinformation.

The Odious Smell of Truth
A building on Drahtzugstrasse in Basel

As it happens, a few days later while I was making my way home to New York, I received an email from Peter Hensinger, the scientific director of Diagnose Funk, a German-Swiss environmental and consumer protection group. It took me right back to those words above Drahtzugstrasse.

Hensinger sent me a commentary he had recently published which was sharply critical of Martin Röösli, an associate professor of environmental epidemiology at the University of Basel.

Last year, Röösli was the lead author of a health review for physicians on the state of RF science and what might be expected from the latest generation of wireless technology, known as 5G. The message is that there’s nothing to worry about. “According to current knowledge,” Röösli advises, 5G “would not represent a health risk.” The open access paper is in German, with an abstract in English.

“Röösli’s paper is full of misleading half-truths,” Hensinger told Microwave News. “It reminds me of the work of David Michaels,” he said, referring to the author of Doubt Is Their Product: How Industry’s Assault on Science Affects Your Health. “Röösli is manufacturing uncertainty.” Michaels, an American epidemiologist, was the head of OSHA under President Obama.

A Prominent Member of the RF–Health Community

Few people are as influential in RF/microwave public policy circles as Röösli. He is a full member of the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP), and has been since 2016. He serves on a number of committees, including those that advise the German, Swedish and Swiss governments. Indeed, he chairs the Swiss group, called BERENIS, which prepares regular updates on new research for the Federal Office of the Environment. He sits on a number of editorial boards of scientific journals, including Bioelectromagnetics and the International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health (IJERPH).

No one doubts that Röösli is well briefed in all facets of RF health research. He knows what’s in the literature. His influence comes from deciding what’s important and what’s not. As Hensinger shows in his seven-page deconstruction of Röösli’s review paper, discomfiting findings are often shunted aside.

Martin Röösli     Peter Hensinger
Martin Röösli                      Peter Hensinger

For example, Hensinger points out that Röösli does not mention the U.S. NTP’s $30 million animal study that showed RF radiation leads to cancer. He similarly ignores the Ramazzini Institute study that, remarkably, found an increase in the same rare tumor —schwannoma of the heart— as had the NTP.

That Röösli ignores the NTP and Ramazzini studies is all the more striking given that BERENIS, the Swiss advisory group which he was chairing at the time, published a special issue evaluating them in November 2018. There, the panel wrote that these two animal studies are “the most comprehensive” to date and, despite their methodological differences, they both showed “relatively consistent results.” Based on these findings, BERENIS called for a precautionary approach for RF/EMF exposures.

Röösli also fails to tell his readers that IARC has classified RF radiation as a possible human carcinogen, and that RF is on the priority list for reassessment. A possible upgrade will be considered in light of the release of the NTP and Ramazzini results.

Misrepresenting a Fertility Study

Hensinger is particularly critical of the way Röösli discounts RF effects on sperm quality and fertility. Here’s what Röösli wrote:

“Until recently we have not had an epidemiological study of sufficient quality about the impact of radiation from wireless communication technologies on sperm quality, even though it is a matter of public controversy. In a recently published prospective cohort study with about 3,000 subjects, no effect was observed for the use of cell phones in the front pockets of pants on sperm quality and the period until a pregnancy is confirmed.” [Hensinger’s translation]

Sounds definitive, but as Hensinger points out, “Röösli bypasses an overall analysis of the current body of knowledge from in vivo [animal], in vitro [cell culture] and epidemiological studies by pointing to an anecdotal note in a single (!) epidemiological study.” [That’s Hensinger’s exclamation mark.]

A recent report for the European Parliament, cited by Hensinger, reviewed more than 60 studies and concludes that there is indeed an effect on fertility.

How reliable is that prospective study that Röösli insinuates settles the fertility issue? If you read the paper —take a look, it’s open access— you’ll see details on the many possible sources of exposure misclassification that would tend to mask any risks. The research team calls the problem of determining radiation dose a “major challenge” [p.1402].

But the most obvious reason this study does not cancel out all the previous work is that —as Hensinger also points out and Röösli does not— in two different data sets, it shows a statistically significant decrease in fecundity among lean men who carried their phones in their front pockets. (No similar effect was observed in heavier men; fecundity is a fancy word for fertility.)

Röösli is effectively saying that phones can be worn near reproductive organs without hesitation, according to Hensinger. “That’s irresponsible,” he said.

5G Health Risks by Martin Röösli      Aktuelle Kardiologie
Martin Röösli’s 5G review was published in Aktuelle Kardiologie

Why a Cardiology Journal?

Another incongruous aspect of Röösli’s radiation review is that it appears in a cardiology journal, Aktuelle Kardiologie. Hensinger doesn’t know why it ended up there, but he did say that its parent company, Thieme, is one of the most important medical publishers in Germany and reaches a large number of practicing physicians.

The journal’s influence goes beyond its circulation of about 4,500. Röösli’s article was picked up by other German-language news outlets (one example here), with the result that, as Hensinger told me, “Almost all medical doctors in Germany, Austria and Switzerland learned about it.”

That, of course, was the objective.

When the experts mangle the facts so badly, is it any wonder that confusion reigns over RF health risks?

The corruption of the scientific literature continues. I don’t know when this might change, but a good start would be for Röösli to take a walk down Drahtzugstrasse and take a deep breath. Then, maybe, he’ll come to his senses.


Aktuelle Kardiologie has agreed to publish a one-page rebuttal of Röösli’s paper by Hensinger. It is scheduled to appear in mid-August.

This is not the first time an ICNIRP member has had trouble with the facts. See our “The Lies Must Stop.”

Another story on the same general theme: “Four Reasons Why David Grimes’s RF-Cancer Review Must Be Retracted.”

READ FULL ARTICLE https://www.microwavenews.com/


Press Release from PHIRE UK – Child with EHS Ruling

Source : PHIRE Physicians’ Health Initiative for Radiation and Environment 

Press Release August 2022

Education Health Care Plan (EHCP)
awarded (Aug 2022) for UK child on the
basis of
Electromagnetic Hypersensitivity (EHS).

Statements from parents, child and excerpts from 3 Tribunal Hearings included below:

Parents have now won a 5 year legal battle against 2 local authorities to have their child accommodated in school for EHS. They won in the Upper Tribunal, thus the ruling is also precedent setting. We believe this is the first case in the world where a government body is legally mandated to make low EMF educational provisions to accommodate a child with EHS.

The family wishes to protect the anonymity of their child, however they (and their child) hope that the ruling may begin to facilitate a better future for other children and adults with EHS:

The parents share, Going through this process has opened our eyes to some shocking truths regarding the ways in which families can be treated within the current system. We recognised that it would not be easy to navigate such novel and politically charged territory, but the bar was elevated to a higher degree than even we anticipated. Our daughter was put through misery that no child should have to go through. Nonetheless, finally justice has been served and we hope that our daughter can move forward with her education whilst also being allowed a healthy environment. We are proud of how optimistic she has remained. We are aware that currently other children with EHS in the UK are unable to access school and some of them are profoundly isolated given that even home schooling groups can be inaccessible to them due to prolific use of Wifi and mobile phones in the community. Legal recognition that some children can be adversely affected by these exposures in a serious and debilitating way, is the first step to making schools healthier for all pupils in our digital age and allowing equal opportunities for those who are acutely affected”.

The school girl wanted to share her thoughts with other children who have EHS, I am a 13 year old girl with EHS. I have headaches, insomnia and other symptoms sometimes when exposed to WiFi or other kinds of EMF (electromagnetic fields). These can become very severe. If you are reading this, you may experience these symptoms yourself, you may recognise them and are perhaps starting to think you may have this condition, or maybe you are doubtful it even exists. Maybe I would be too, if I hadn’t felt the effects firsthand. EHS has dramatically affected my life, but maybe not in the ways you might think. Of course there are places I can’t go, or things I don’t have, but I live a very “normal” life in most ways. I can message my friends through email or Skype on a hardwired system as long as I don’t spend too long and I can go to school now that I have one without Wifi and mobile phones. Some people have more severe EHS and can’t do these things that most take for granted. I appreciate how much they suffer, but believe that even those people, can recover in a low EMF environment. I can feel things and sense things most people can’t. This has protected my health, and I like to think of it as a superpower. Of course sometimes, when I can’t sleep, or can’t go to school, it doesn’t feel like that, but in my stronger states, I recognise that it is kind of amazing. I have previously been unable to go to school, as the school I went to put in WiFi, but people fought for me, comforted me, and welcomed me, despite how weird or crazy our situation may have been. These people were my family, my friends, teachers and sometimes near strangers, and they didn’t just fight for me, but for anyone and everyone with EHS. They are the people we need more of, those with open minds and hearts. Thank you, to all of them. If you have EHS, and are struggling to stay in good health, or can’t go to school, or work, don’t give up, because everything will get better. People are becoming more aware of this condition, and even if right now it seems like nothing will ever change, it already is…..

Please read full Press Release – and share from – here https://phiremedical.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/Press-Release-EHCP-for-UK-child-with-EHS-2022-PHIRE.pdf

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on Press Release from PHIRE UK – Child with EHS Ruling


Source: https://www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk/education-law/

New precedent setting ruling: UK child with Electromagnetic Hypersensitivity to be accommodated with educational low EMF environment

East Sussex, UK

Upper Tribunal requires council to secure EHCP for student who is hypersensitive to Wi-Fi signals

‘The Upper Tribunal has ruled that a council must secure special educational provision for a child who has electromagnetic hypersensitivity and is particularly sensitive to Wi-Fi signals.

In EAM v East Sussex County Council (Special educational needs) [2022] UKUT 193 (AAC), on appeal from the First-tier Tribunal, Upper Tribunal judge Jacobs found that the child should be considered disabled by her condition under the Equality Act 2010 and that she required an Education, Health and Care Plan (EHCP).

The child’s parents – who argue that their daughter needs to be schooled in a ‘low electromagnetic environment’ – have been attempting to secure an EHCP that acknowledges her condition since 2017….’

Tribunal decision:

Screenshot 2022-08-18 at 13-53-46 ua-2022-000328-hs__002_.pdf

ART Honours Dr. Joel Moskowitz with Leadership Award for Outstanding Contributions to Public Health 

Americans for Responsible Technology

Americans For Responsible Technology is pleased to recognize Dr. Joel Moskowitz as the recipient of the organization’s Leadership Award for his outstanding service and contributions to public health.
In making the announcement, ART National Director Doug Wood cited Dr. Moskowitz’s dedication to ensuring that the supporters of safe technology were armed with the best science available. ” Joel has been unparalleled in his work keeping us informed about the latest research from the scientific community,” said Wood. “He has helped us immensely in our efforts to bring awareness to the issue of RF radiation and its impact on human health.” “The world is a better place because of the vitally important efforts of Dr. Joel Moskowitz to promote public understanding of the growing scientific evidence detailing the public health impacts of wireless radiation,” said Dr. Devra Davis, renowned epidemiologist and founder and President of the Environmental Health Trust.
“Joel performs an enormous service to the scientific community as well as to the general public and global governments in documenting the progress made worldwide through study of the harmful effects of exposure to electromagnetic radiation,” said Dr. David Carpenter, Director of the Institute for Health and the Environment at the University at Albany. “We all owe him a major debt of gratitude.”
Dr. Kent Chamberlin, former Chair of the University of New Hampshire’s Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering noted, “I became involved with wireless radiation issues in 2019, having little background knowledge about it. Fortunately, Dr. Moskowitz has paved the way for me and others by making well-vetted information available and by responding in detail to questions posed to him. He has clearly ‘moved the needle’ with his work.”
“Joel has provided the world and the electromagnetic field health impact assessment community a rare commodity: poise and intellectual brilliance in the middle of a storm,” said Dr. Paul Héroux, Professor of Toxicology & Health Effects of Electromagnetism at McGill University in Montreal. “He has also immensely contributed to the selfless spreading of critical scientific information within the community of researchers.”
Elizabeth Kelley, Director of the International EMF Scientist Appeal Campaign, agreed. “I am grateful to Joel Moskowitz for his many effective contributions that add depth and clarity to our messages about EMF’s biological and health effects and support our urgent call for policy and practical solutions aimed at ensuring greater health protections for people and wildlife,” she said. About Joel Moskowitz
Joel M. Moskowitz, Ph.D. is the Director of the Center for Family and Community Health at the School of Public Health, University of California, Berkeley. Dr. Moskowitz has published research on health promotion and disease prevention for more than 40 years, most recently focusing on the adverse health effects of radiofrequency radiation (RFR). His peer-reviewed publications on RFR address the tumor risk from mobile phone use, environmental exposure to RFR, and electromagnetic hypersensitivity (EHS).

He is a founding member and advisor to the International EMF Scientist AppealPhysicians for Safe Technology, and the International Commission on the Biological Effects of Electromagnetic Fields.

He provided pro bono expertise on RFR to help the cities of San Francisco and Berkeley defend their cell phone “right to know” laws in two Federal lawsuits: CTIA v City and County of SanFrancisco, and CTIA v Berkeley.

In 2018, he received The James Madison Freedom of Information Award from the Society of Professional Journalists (Northern California Chapter) for a successful lawsuit that resulted in the California Department of Public Health releasing its cell phone safety guidance document previously suppressed for eight years.
Since 2009 he has been a source for hundreds of news stories on RFR. He has disseminated research on electromagnetic fields on a monthly basis since 2016. His Electromagnetic Radiation Safety website, which has received more three million page views, has served as a valuable resource for scientists, journalists. and the public since 2013.


Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on ART Honours Dr. Joel Moskowitz with Leadership Award for Outstanding Contributions to Public Health 


Written in 2016 by Professor Franz Adlkofer, on the third anniversary of the death of Carsten Häublein

Source: PDF – Pandora – Adlkofer/Häublein

Electrosensitivity: as experienced by an electrosensitive person and assessed by scientists

by Franz Adlkofer

Electrosensitivity experienced by an electrosensitive person

On February 13, 2013, the body of Carsten Häublein a former pastor from Ammertal, was recovered from the river Schlei in Schleswig-Holstein (Germany). From the available evidence, it was concluded that he had taken his own life. After seven years of suffering whenever he was exposed to mobile communication radiation (RFEMF), he obviously had lost the courage to continue this way of life. Half a year before he died, on September 13, 2012, I received a mail from him at 2:46 a.m. in which he described his state of health as follows:

My formerly radiation-free home in the North of Schleswig-Holstein, where I took shelter after fleeing from Bavaria and where I became free of symptoms and again socially acceptable, has turned into a buzzing, whizzing, and burning inferno precisely at the same time when the horror “LTE” was introduced nation-wide …

I only hold out by lying for about 3-4 hours each day in a tub filled with salt water, afterwards covering myself with piles of emergency blankets and winding a canopy around my head – just enough not to suffocate. Then I find several, a few hours of sleep …

The brutal nocturnal charge, which I do not get rid off during the day in any other place but in the water, causes an increasing intolerance of also this PC, the stove, the phone, the car’s electrics, and so on – something I did not experience at all until July this year. To write a letter like this one I am perhaps able every other two days. For some people this is a sort of death sentence.

Yet, I still seem to be able to regenerate: After each swim in the salt containing river Schlei and after each bath in the tub I feel free from symptoms. This is the proof for me that all the wild turbulences are of exogenous nature, owed to a noxious state hostile to life which from the outside attacks and tortures my body. The wellbeing, though, does not last very long …

A second mail followed a few hours later:

Dear Prof. Franz Adlkofer,
Carsten Häublein is writing – but this time not with a substantial message but in very deep distress because of new EMF stress. If you can arrange it, please call me – xxxxx. Whatever we exchange, please treat it with absolute discretion – many greetings
Carsten Häublein

Both mails give evidence that the pastor Häublein must have been in an emotional state marked by despair, bitterness, and hopelessness. His enemies, who from the beginning thought of him as a mentally ill person, will probably feel fully supported in their view by the description of his suffering, and they will not even wonder at all what made him so very ill. But the answer clearly lies in his move from South to North Germany. Between 2006 and 2009, he was ill in the radiation-exposed Ammertal, he then felt well again in 2009 after moving to a radiation-free spot at the Baltic Sea. When the radiation finally reached his new home in 2012, his illness not only returned, but was worse than before. With his long ordeal and his reoccurrances when confronted with new exposures, he proved that his electrosensitivity was caused by electromagnetic fields.

Since 2006, pastor Häublein was strongly committed to have electrosensitivity regarded as an environmental illness. He did not want and could not approve that German politicians responsible for taking care of the health of the people, would sit back and watch how a minority of people are deprived of their right to health. As science obviously could not help him and the many other persons concerned, he intended to have a court decision on this matter and he wanted to hear my opinion. I believe it is in his interest that on the occasion of the third anniversary of his death I write this report.

I told pastor Häublein that in my opinion a court action to have electrosensitivity recognized as an environmental disease would be doomed to fail. The judge would refer to the safety limits of RF-EMF, which the German Commission on Radiological Protection (SSK) and the Federal Office for Radiation Protection (BfS) – opposite to my view – claim to reliably protect the people against any health risk. It could also to be added that the radiation emitted by base stations and other radiating devices fall well below the safety limits. The prospects of convincing a judge that the BfS hardly knows anything about the biological effects of mobile communication radiation and, therefore, uses the “expertise” of “experts” from the mobile communication industry are certainly rather poor. Furthermore, should indeed a courageous judge be found who believes that the plaintiff’s personal history and the causes behind his illness may be true, he would probably be set right latest in the second instance.

Electrosensitivity assessed by scientists

The Häublein case is an example of a tragedy in Europe, where thousands of people suffering from the aftereffects of electrosensitivity are classified as psychologically peculiar or even mentally disturbed. The sole reason of this claim is to deny RF-EMF being the cause of this suffering. The German SSK made a statement on this issue in 2011 in an especially perfidious way:

Thus, looking at the international literature altogether the conclusion can be drawn despite the different definition of target groups and recruitments that “electrosensitivity” in the sense of being causally connected to EMF exposition most probably does not exist. Further research therefore should be carried out in a subject area outside EMF research.

The way the issue of electrosensitivity is dealt with arouses the suspicion that the ignoring of any effects is based on an arrangement between industry and politics.

Scientists, who are selected for this kind of research by industry and politics because they know a lot about psychology and psychiatry, but often nothing about RF-EMF, try to find out – endowed with ample funds – if there are any differences in behaviour and sensitivity between non-electrosensitive and electrosensitive people. With the statistical evaluation of experimental or questionnaire data, they come to the conclusion that the electrosensitive persons suffer significantly more from somatoform disorders, without finding an adequate physical cause for the symptoms described. Unanimously, the researchers then state that the suffering of these people can be very severe due to these somatoform disorders and that this has to be taken seriously. Yet, unanimously they are of the opinion that the research results obtained cannot confirm RF-EMF being a cause of the electrosensitivity. Thus, the way for the so-called risk communication is paved for which the mobile communication industry has a special group of “experts” on stand-by. Regularly, it informs the public that based on the available investigations it is scientifically proven that electrosensitivity occurs quite independently from RF-EMF exposure and that, too, it has nothing to do with it, because, they believe that below the safety limits there are no relevant biological effects causing a health risk.

In his report on the BioEM2015 (1) , Prof. Dariusz Leszczynski states that all studies concerning the question of electrosensitivity, which are quoted as proof against electromagnetic fields causing health disorders, are from their approach inadequate to justify this conclusion. He talks of a standstill in science because for years it has been limited to the questions “how do you feel” and “what do you feel” instead of impartially searching with molecular-biological techniques for the physiological differences between electrosensitive and healthy persons. The biggest obstacle to advancing knowledge in this field, according to Leszczynski, is that scientists obviously lack ideas for new research approaches. What he hides is the fact that industry and government, the only ones having the necessary funds, do not support the research approach he proposes. His professional experience is the best proof that this assumption is correct: His research division at the national STUK in Finland was closed in 2012 and he lost his job apparently because he had started to turn to this neglected research area (2) .

The reason that there is no real explanation for electrosensitivity caused by mobile communication radiation is not at all a proof against the assumption that electrosensitivity is a special form of the radiation illness known for a long time. The argument also turns into air because there are other diseases with a pathogenesis only partly or not at all understood, but without anyone doubting their existence. Pastor Häublein – by the way not the only one – claims that the symptoms of electrosensitivity disappeared all the sudden after moving to a radiation-free place, but returned all the sudden when the place was connected to radio network via LTE. Furthermore, he has shown himself that protection from the external radiation is possible under certain conditions. If this is true, and we do not have any reason to doubt, any further proof of the causality of an interaction would not be necessary – quite independently from knowing the mechanisms.

In the meantime it is well known that radiation effects exist also below the safety limits, which industry and politics categorically ruled out so far. Further proof was recently provided by Professor Alexander Lerchl from the private Jacobs University Bremen, a former member of SSK – even if just by accident. For many years, Alexander Lerchl ensured the harmlessness of RF-EMF with exclusively negative results. Recently, however, he was forced to confirm – based on the outcome of a study financed by industry and politics and carried out by his research group – something which he had vehemently denied before: RF-EMF in form of UMTS can increase tumour growth in mice below the safety limits (3) . By the way, the mechanism of this process is still a mystery just as the one of electrosensitivity. Tumour promotion is with a high probability accompanied by tumour initiation. The genotoxic potential of RF-EMF as demonstrated in laboratory studies and the outcome of several epidemiological studies speak in favour of this assumption. Altogether, the conclusion can be drawn that biological organisms of any nature, be it single cells, animals or humans, may be at risk in some way due to RFEMF exposure. If this is possible, inevitably the question arises why it should not be responsible for the symptoms of electrosensitivity also.

Dariusz Leszczynski criticizes in his report on the BioEM2015 that during the conference a vast number of bioelectromagnetic topics were dealt with, yet biological effects on humans were sparsely presented. However, without such investigations it is nearly impossible to prove that electromagnetic fields cause physiological changes in human organisms that are relevant for the development of diseases. He suspects that this kind of research is more or less blocked by decision-makers in politics and industry who may be afraid of the possibly awkward consequences from the results. That Dariusz Leszcynski’s suspicion is more than justified reflects the dealing with the REFLEX-Study, a research project designed as required by him. In this study financed by the European Union and coordinated by me we found genotoxic effects of RF-EMF far below the safety limits. To get rid of these results, in 2008, Alexander Lerchl – who no doubt acted in the interest of the industry – suddenly claimed that the REFLEX results would be faked. With this kind of emergency brake, he obviously intended to prevent the support for the REFLEX link-up study on which the decision of the European Union was pending. He adhered to this allegation for years until finally in 2015 the Hamburg District Court forced him to recant and convicted him of defamation and libel.


As it currently appears, politicians responsible for the health of people seem to rank the business of the mobile communication industry higher than they rank the protection of the people suffering from electrosensitivity. This is illustrated especially by the government-funded pseudo-research in this area, the pseudo-results of which make it possible to play down the relevance of electrosensitivity for the health of people. Upon the invitation by members of the EU Parliament, a hearing took place on January 12, 2016, which dealt with electrosensitivity. The outcome remains to be seen. In preparation of the hearing the Initiative Citizens of the World called attention to the International Electromagnetic Field Scientist Appeal signed by 218 scientists from 40 countries in 2015 which states among others:

Numerous recent scientific publications have shown that EMF affects living organisms at levels well below most international and national guidelines.

Effects include increased cancer risk, cellular stress, increase in harmful free radicals, genetic damages, structural and functional changes of the reproductive system, learning and memory deficits, neurological disorders, and negative impacts on general well-being in humans.

Damage goes well beyond the human race, as there is growing evidence of harmful effects to both plant and animal life.

In the meantime there are first signs that the policy of playing down the environmental radiation exposure as harmless may slowly come to an end. A court in Toulouse, France, considered it proven based on medical certificates that Ms Marine R. just as pastor Häublein is suffering from gnawing aches in head and spine and sleep disorders near base stations, smartphones, and even TVs. Therefore, it classified the plaintiff 85% severely handicapped and awarded her with a monthly pension of 800 € for three years. In order to avoid any exposure to electromagnetic fields Ms Marine R. now lives in an old stone house in the Pyrenees near the Spanish border without electricity and running water, and of course without mobile phones.

Let us hope that courageous judges will be found not only in France who understand the basis for electrosensitivity, who question the rationale for the safety limits and who provide justice to electrosensitive people.

Pandora – Foundation for independent research 2016




In Memory of Professor Franz Adlkofer who died in June 2022

image-1Professor Franz Adlkofer was co-ordinator of the REFLEX Project, funded by the European Commission from 2000 to 2004.  It was considered at that time to be the most important project in basic research investigating the biological effects of Electromagnetic Fields (EMF) on cell systems, below present safety levels i.e. those produced by the ICNIRP (International Commission for Non-ionising Radiation Protection).  The REFLEX results summarised the effects of exposures to various EMF frequencies and found, in short, powerful genotoxic effects, DNA strand breaks, chromosomal aberrations and intracellular free radicals. 

The REFLEX Project results, which emerged at a time when UMTS (3G) mobile phone systems were being deployed around Europe, led to an unexpected antagonistic response from the media, political agencies and particularly from the Telecom industry.  Allegations regarding the validity of the results and accusations of data falsification and scientific misconduct were made from the time the study was released, in spite of the fact that the study had been carried out by 12 research groups from seven European Countries.

One of Professor Adlkofer’s persistent critics, Professor Alexander Lerchl, was taken to Court for spreading falsifications about the findings of the study.  The case eventually ended up being heard before the Hanseatic Higher Regional Court of Bremen in 2021, where a final ban on Professor Lerchl making allegations of fraud and campaigning against the findings of the REFLEX Study was issued.  Throughout the intervening years it appears Professor Lerchl had performed a ‘U-Turn’ (Microwave News March 13, 2015) when, on leading a study himself, higher rates of cancer among mice exposed to EMF was discovered. 

Despite the findings of genotoxiciity and DNA damage in the REFLEX Study, the UMTS (3G) system continued to be ‘rolled out’ across Europe.

Professor Adlkofer’s experience of the hostility he received was echoed in lectures he gave at a number of later events including the Center for Ethics at Harvard Law School (2011), as Executive Director of the VERUM Foundation for Behaviour and Environment.  Here he raised the issues of “institutional corruption”, laying pressure on and obstructing scientific researchers in the field of EMF who were assessing its potential health effects.  In October 2018 Professor Adlkofer wrote an article for the Pandora foundation for Independent Research upon recognising a similar pattern of aggression from ICNIRP and industry-led scientists when the National Toxicology Program (NTP) results were released (2016).  This study demonstrated clear evidence of particular tumours and an increase in DNA damage after exposure to EMF. Professor Aldkofer’s article, “How the Mobile Communication Industry Deals with Science as Illustrated by ICNIRP versus NTP” voiced his awareness about the strategic placement of ‘compliant scientists, whose preferred opinion was more important than their qualifications’ {and who} were generously supported and, by using political connections, placed in national and international advisory and decision-making bodies.’  He criticised the ICNIRP set-up which, he stated, had ‘ensured that {the} mobile communication industry is not only dominating the technical research  …  but also the biological research – this at the expense of the human health.’

Despite the findings of the REFLEX and NTP studies, those in decision-making positions have continued to allow the exponential rise in 3G and 4G LTE along with WiFi, wireless radiation infrastructure and numerous usable devices.  Currently 5G is being deployed on every inch of the earth and is also being radiated onto the earth from satellites in space.   

Finally, Professor Adlkofer released the story of Paster Carsten Häublein who suffered from Electrohypersensitivity/Microwave sickness (EHS) for many years and for whom the continuous tortuous stress of the effects of EMF saw him take his own life in 2013.  This story was an important means of confirming the truth of the daily reality of EHS sufferers who are affected by EMF. Three years after the event Professor Adlkofer decided to publicise the story as an example of “Electrosensitivity experienced by an electrosensitive person”.

Rest in Peace Professor Adlkofer and Paster Carsten Häublein

Ethna Monks for Electromagnetic Sense Ireland    https://es-ireland.com


Sudden Passing of Professor Franz Adlkofer: https://betweenrockandhardplace.wordpress.com/2022/06/29/sudden-passing-of-professor-franz-adlkofer/

The REFLEX Study

Risk Evaluation of Potential Environmental Hazards From Low Frequency Electromagnetic Field Exposure Using Sensitive in vitro Methods

Funded by the EU under the programme Quality of Life and Management of Living Resources  –  Summary of results – page 241 https://itis.swiss/assets/Downloads/Papers-Reports/Reports/REFLEXFinal-Report171104.pdf

The REFLEX Project Controversy:  The IT’IS Foundation’s Position – March 26, 2020 https://itis.swiss/news-events/news/other-news/2020/reflex-controversy/

Harvard Law School:  At Center for Ethics event, cell phone radiation and institutional corruption addressed (video)  written by  Sophie Bishop, November 18, 2011 https://today.law.harvard.edu/at-center-for-ethics-event-cell-phone-radiation-and-institutional-corruption-addressed-video/

A Higher Regional Court in Germany Orders Professor Alexander Lerchl to Retract his Falsification Allegations Against the REFLEX Study.  By Redaktion  22.2.21 https://pandora-foundation.eu/2021/02/22/a-higher-regional-court-in-germany-orders-professor-alexander-lerchl-to-retract-his-falsification-allegations-against-the-reflex-study/

Microwave News March 13, 2015:  RF Cancer Promotion:  Animal Study Makes Waves.  Germany’s Alex Lerchl Does a U-Turn https://microwavenews.com/news-center/rf-animal-cancer-promotion

Tumor promotion by exposure to radiofrequency electromagnetic fields below exposure limits for humans – Alexander Lerchl et al https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0006291X15003988

How the Mobile Communication Industry Deals with Science as Illustrated by ICNIRP versus NTP https://pandora-foundation.eu/2018/10/26/how-the-mobile-communication-industry-deals-with-science-as-illustrated-by-icnirp-versus-ntp/

The National Toxicology Program

Regarding ICNIRP’S Evaluation of the National Toxicology Program’s Carcinogenicity Studies on Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Fields.

Ronald Melnick PhD – Lead Designer of the NTP https://ehtrust.org/new-paper-icnirp-misrepresents-the-national-toxicology-program-study-on-cell-phone-radiation/


Professor Franz Adlkofer: “ Electrosensitivity experienced by an electrosensitive person” https://www.elettrosensibili.it/2016/03/26/electrosensitivity-as-experienced-by-an-electrosensitive-person-and-assessed-by-scientists/

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on In Memory of Professor Franz Adlkofer who died in June 2022

USA – CHD Urges FCC to End Discrimination Against People Disabled by Electromagnetic Sensitivity

Source Article: Children’s Health Defense

Children’s Health Defense led advocacy groups in replying to the Federal Communications Commission’s request for comments on preventing digital discrimination by urging the commission to accommodate the electromagnetically sensitive.

Children’s Health Defense (CHD) and a coalition of more than 80 nonprofits — including disability advocacy groups, safe technology groups and individuals — responded to the Federal Communications Commission’s (FCC) request for comments on how to “prevent and eliminate digital discrimination.”

The June 30 “Reply Comments of Advocates for the EMS-Disabled” summarized more than 330 comments submitted by the public since the comment period opened on March 17.

In addition to calling for acceptance, affirmation and inclusion of people for whom electromagnetic sensitivity (EMS) is a disability, the June 30 reply comments made these two key points:

  1. The FCC should always prioritize “to-the-premises” fiber solutions and rely on wireless only when wiring is technically or economically infeasible or the main purpose is mobility.
  2. If the FCC is sincere about achieving “diversity, equity and inclusion,” it must recognize the specific and profoundly deleterious effects of radiofrequency radiation (RFR) on the EMS-disabled and take immediate measures within its regulatory remit to address and solve this growing plight.

The proceeding was required by the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act and President Biden’s Executive Order 13985 — “Advancing Racial Equity and Support for Underserved Communities Through the Federal Government.”

On May 16, CHD and 50 cosigners submitted comments accompanied by a white paper.

People who are electromagnetically sensitive, or EMS-disabled, suffer from a sensitivity to wireless radiation that makes living in a wireless world intolerable.

As of June 28, FCC Docket 22-69 listed 333 comments. Among the 333 comments, 65.17% stated they suffered from EMS disability or their family members and/or friends experienced symptoms of EMS or electromagnetic hypersensitivity (EHS) or electrosensitivity.

More than 62% advocated that the EMS-disabled be accommodated with fiber to the premises and wireless-free zones, and 50.15% of respondents requested fiber to the premises.

EMS/EHS affects a growing segment of the population. Somewhere between 3% and 30% of the U.S. population, or between 9 million and 99 million people, are harmed by wireless technology.

Sensitivity to wireless technology usually is not limited to one device or one frequency.

EMS-disability is a constellation of neurological symptoms caused by sensitivity to cell phones, cell towers, smart meters, Wi-Fi and smart appliances.

EMS/EHS symptoms frequently include chronic headaches, cognitive impairment, extreme fatigue, trouble sleeping, ringing in the ears, rashes/hives, nausea, anxiety, depression and hyperactivity.

The U.S. Access Board, an independent federal agency that advises the government on guidelines for accommodation, recognized this disabling condition in 2002, and promised to develop accommodation guidelines but has failed to follow through.

“A rapidly increasing percentage of our population is suffering from a spectrum of EMS-disability,” said Mary Holland, CHD president and general counsel. “This condition and its disabling effects were acknowledged more than 20 years ago, but those who suffer are still not accepted by society, and are still routinely denied the accommodations they deserve.”

Holland added:

“There must be an allowance for radiofrequency radiation-free ‘safe zones’ in public spaces and buildings to ensure these individuals’ inclusion in public life. We must have fiber to and throughout the premises in every building accessed by the public, and fiber to the home in the United States.

“Refusing accommodation for this growing population of EMS-disabled is the direct opposite of the FCC’s stated goal of achieving diversity, equity and inclusion. The EMS-disabled cannot come to public meetings because of radiofrequency radiation saturation so we will advocate for them.”

Original article can be shared from here:

CHD Urges FCC to End Discrimination Against People Disabled by Electromagnetic Sensitivity

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on USA – CHD Urges FCC to End Discrimination Against People Disabled by Electromagnetic Sensitivity

Video : Invisible Poisoning — Wireless Radiation + Advocacy with Cece Doucette MA for Safe Technology Team

Children’s Health Defense



Are you aware of the dangers of the technology you use on a daily basis? Did you know about the correlation between Autism, ADHD, reproductive issues, insomnia, headaches and microwave radiation? Many people refuse to acknowledge the truth about the WIFI, 5G, EMF all around them and continue to use their phones, laptops, iPads, Smartboards, and other technology and put themselves and their children/future children at risk. Join guest Cece Doucette on today’s episode of “Good Morning CHD” to hear more!

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on Video : Invisible Poisoning — Wireless Radiation + Advocacy with Cece Doucette MA for Safe Technology Team