Electromagnetic Sense Ireland

SOURCE : BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL https://jech.bmj.com/content/early/2021/01/04/jech-2019-213595.full

Please share this information from the source article links above.

Facebook are blocking this website.

Holland – Administrative judge acknowledges increased health risks to wireless technology well below exposure limits.

Message from Wilma de Jong:  24 Dec 2020

Lovely people,

With great gratitude I address you the day before Christmas with great news! The administrative judge declared my appeal well-founded [1] . On the basis of my notice of appeal [2] and the hearing of October 20, 2020 [3] , the court classified me as an interested party and ruled that increased health risks, when installing an antenna mast approximately 650 meters from my home, cannot be excluded.

This means we can speak of a huge breakthrough since more than two decades ago citizens started asking the courts for attention for the health risks of antenna installations. In other words, the administrative judge has given us citizens back our voice in the radiation debate. A “Christmas present” that I didn’t want to keep from you the day before Christmas.

What does this ruling of the administrative judge mean?
If the law that speaks of this verdict is victorious, this verdict will have a huge impact. This statement means in any case that:

Municipalities must consider the health interests of citizens who are sensitive to radiation in their local antenna policy.
“The health interests of local residents who are sensitive to radiation must also be included in the weighing of interests to be made by the respondent.”

(ECLI ruling: NL: RBGEL: 2020: 6702 [4] , claim 8, with reference (in consideration 4.2.) To the decision on my appeal: ECLI: NL: RBGEL: 2020: 6699 [1] , consideration 4.4.)

The (false) safety claim for exposure limits ICNIRP has been removed.
“In the opinion of the court, considering all arguments, with reference to scientific literature, it cannot be ruled out that even at a field strength lower than 1 V / m, and therefore also in the plaintiff’s case, there will be increased health risks. ”

(ECLI verdict: NL: RBGEL: 2020: 6699 [1] , consideration 4.4.) As you may know, the ICNIRP exposure limits run up to 61 V / m (volts per meter).

From which it follows that:

The national determination of the ICNIRP limits in the intended ‘Amendment to Frequency Decree 2013 to protect public health against radio frequency fields’ [5] is contrary to this ruling.
Even if a fictitious safety margin of a factor of 50 is used, the ICNIRP limits are well above 1 V / m, while the administrative judge has ruled (see 2.) that increased health risks at a field strength below 1 V / m are not excluded. .

In addition, if the ICNIRP limits are set nationally, the municipalities are denied the opportunity to weigh up and promote the health interests of citizens locally (which is also contrary to the decision of the administrative judge, see 1.). After all, if this amendment decision is adopted, municipalities may not deviate locally from the ICNIRP limits by applying lower exposure limits [6] , even if the health interests of citizens demand this.

Recommendations Health Council inadequate

Already during the session on 20 October 2020, the administrative judge, on the basis of the recent report of the EMV Committee of the Health Council [7], came to the conclusion that the Health Council ‘simply does not know’ [8] [9] .

According to the Scientific Council for Government Policy, ignorance indicates ‘uncertain risk problems’ that require precaution [10] . We also find this point of view repeatedly in EU case law on the precautionary principle. [11] Although the Health Council suggests that it recommends precaution with regard to EMF, this is not actually the case.

In the first place, the recommendation of the Health Council to continue to take the ICNIRP exposure limits as a starting point, in view of the scientific and social controversy surrounding these limits, is contrary to precaution. [12] Second, the recommendation to apply the ALARA principle (ALARA is abbreviated from ‘As Low As Reasonably Achievable’) is meaningless, given the extreme height of the field strengths allowed under the ICNIRP limits. As early as 2003, RIVM reported the controversy surrounding this principle, because ALARA can be translated into ‘As Large As Regulators Allow’. [13] The energetic way in which 5G is currently being rolled out nationally as if there were no risks whatsoever is illustrative of not taking protective measures by the government.

Local and national antenna policy must be overhauled
I cannot yet foresee how the verdict will affect at national level. But I do see, as law and truth winning over power politics and technocracy, that antenna policy must be overhauled both locally and nationally. Violations of integrity, such as the Health Council’s conflict of interest with the ICNIRP and the obfuscation (defactualization) of scientific evidence [14] , must be brought to light.

Moral responsibility

I would like to express the wish – also a nice Christmas thought – that the governments and other involved (medical) institutions take not only their legal, but also their moral responsibility as a result of this decision and recognize that there are limits to ignoring or fighting the rights of citizens.

Regardless, I feel great gratitude that my research over the past 4 years and the appeal I was able to write has paid off. I would like to thank everyone who supported me in this.

On Monday December 28 I will be sending a press release to the media. In addition, I will also offer this information, in modified form, in response to the internet consultation (draft regulation) ‘Amendment to Frequency Decree 2013 to protect public health against radiofrequency electromagnetic fields’, so that the government can adjust its decision making accordingly.

I wish you a Merry Christmas. May the light (of consciousness) dissipate the darkness (of ignorance). I would like to continue to make my contribution.

Greetings,
Wilma de Jong

Footnotes :

[1] ECLI verdict: NL: RBGEL: 2020: 6699. https://uitspraken.rechtspraak.nl/inziendocument?id=ECLI:NL:RBGEL:2020:6699&showbutton=true .

[2] https://stralingsbewust.info/wp-content/uploads/Beroepschrift-WJ-de-Jong-zaaknummer-ARN-19-2184-WABOA-Rechtbank-Arnhem.pdf . For ‘Further explanation and substantiation: https://stralingsbewust.info/wp-content/uploads/Nadere-toelichting-en-onderbouwing-WJ-de-Jong-ARN-19-2184-WABAO-Rechtbank-Arnhem.pdf .

[3] https://stralingsbewust.info/2020/10/27/verslag-van-beroep-wilma-de-jong-bij-de-bestuurswacht-in-arnhem/ .

[4] ECLI verdict: NL: RBGEL: 2020: 6702. https://uitspraken.rechtspraak.nl/inziendocument?id=ECLI:NL:RBGEL:2020:6702&showbutton=true .

[5] https://www.internetconsultatie.nl/emvbesluit .
See also: https://stralingsbewust.info/2020/12/18/mona-keijzer-wil-discutabele-icnirp-limieten-landelijk-vastreken-en-gemeenten-buitenspel-stellen/ .

[6] ‘In Article 1.4. However, the Environmental Act stipulates that the Environmental Act will withdraw if a specific act provides for an exhaustive regulation in the field of the physical living environment. Such an exhaustive regulation is intended with this amendment decision. This means that local authorities such as provinces, municipalities and water boards will not be able to impose deviating or additional regulations with regard to electromagnetic fields under the Environmental Act. ‘ Article 5.2., Draft scheme. Consultation version ‘Decision to amend the Frequency Decree 2013 in connection with the establishment of national rules for the protection of public health against the electromagnetic fields resulting from the use of frequency space’. (See also article 5.1. Draft scheme.)https://www.internetconsultatie.nl/emvbesluit .

[7] https://www.gezondheidheidsraad.nl/documenten/adviezen/2020/09/02/5g-en-gezondheid .

[8] https://stralingsbewust.info/2020/10/27/verslag-van-beroep-wilma-de-jong-bij-de-bestuurswacht-in-arnhem/

[9] See also: https://stralingsbewust.info/2020/10/11/gezondheidheidsraad-versluiert-stralingsrisicos-chter-moet-burgers-stem-terugvragen/ .

[10] Scientific Council for Government Policy (2008). Uncertain security. Responsibilities around physical safety. Pages 119–120.

[11] Commission Notice on the Precautionary Principle, Section 6.3.1. Proportionality. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/NL/TXT/?uri=celex%3A52000DC0001 .

[12] The Scientific Council for Government Policy writes in its report ‘Uncertain security. Responsibility for physical safety ‘(page 121):
‘ Ambiguous risks arise where scientific or social controversies about risks arise. ‘ Precaution is necessary for ambiguous risks, according to the WRR. Since the ICNIRP limits are controversial, this precaution cannot be based on these limits at the same time.

[13] RIVM (2003). Dealing with risks soberly. Environment and Nature Plan (MNP). RIVM report 2510701047/2003, page 35.

[14] See my appeal: https://stralingsbewust.info/wp-content/uploads/Beroepschrift-WJ-de-Jong-zaaknummer-ARN-19-2184-WABOA-Rechtbank-Arnhem.pdf . For ‘Further explanation and substantiation: https://stralingsbewust.info/wp-content/uploads/Nadere-toelichting-en-onderbouwing-WJ-de-Jong-ARN-19-2184-WABAO-Rechtbank-Arnhem.pdf .

ORIGINAL ARTICLE : Dafna Tachover for Children’s Health Defense

Researcher Zorach Glaser, Ph.D. spent decades archiving studies that examine the link between certain health issues and exposure to microwave and radio frequencies. Scholars and the public are now invited to help review Glaser’s documents.

Link copied

The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of Children’s Health Defense.

Dafna Tachover, Esq

Dafna Tachover is the director of Stop 5G and Wireless Harms Project for Children’s Health Defense. She is an attorney…

SOURCE ARTICLE : CHILDREN’S HEALTH DEFENSE

A meta-analysis of eight studies reveals that exposure to radiation from cell phones, iPads and laptops significantly increases the risk of breast cancer, especially for women over 50.

By Dafna Tachover

A new meta-analysis study reveals that exposure to radiation from wireless devices such as cell phones, iPads and laptops significantly increases the risk of breast cancer. 

The meta-analysis study (a statistical analysis that combines the results of multiple scientific studies) examined eight studies that were published between 1996-2015. The highest risk was found in women over 50. 

There are many studies that can provide a causal mechanism. For example, it has been shown that exposure to radio frequency (RF) radiation (the radiation emitted from wireless devices) may cause a decrease in melatonin production, and studies have demonstrated that reduced melatonin levels may lead to breast cancer. 

Dr. John West, a breast cancer specialist, has published case studies which provide clinical support to these findings. West published some of these cases in a 2013 paper, “Multifocal Breast Cancer in Young Women with Prolonged Contact between Their Breasts and Their Cellular Phones.” These cases reveal breast cancer in women under 40 even though breast cancer is rare in women that young when there is no family history or genetic predisposition.

Four cases of women ages 21 to 39 show multifocal invasive breast cancer. The spread of the tumors and the fact that all of these women reported carrying their smartphones in their bra suggests a possible association with exposure to radiation from cell phones. 

West recently joined the advisory board of Physicians for Safe Technology, an organization of physicians and health professionals whose mission is to provide trusted leadership in promoting safer use of technology.

Other doctors report similar findings. In a video posted by Kevin Kunze, producer of the movie “Mobilize,” Dr. Robert Nagourney presents the case of one of his patients, Donna, a young healthy athletic woman who kept her cell phone in her bra and developed breast cancer. The spread of the tumors in her breast resembles the shape of the cell phone. 

A 10-year study by the U.S. government found clear evidence that cell phones cause  cancer. The study was conducted by the National Toxicology Program (NTP), the U.S. expert agency on toxins, and it was the biggest study of its kind. The results were confirmed by another major study by a leading scientific body, the Ramazzini Institute.

Nevertheless, the Federal Communication Commission (FCC), which is entrusted with regulating the impact of wireless technology on health,, dismissed the results of the study and refused to review its 1996 guidelines that deny adverse health effects of wireless technology.In February 2020, Children’s Health Defense filed a lawsuit against the FCC challenging the FCC’s decision not to review the guidelines. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit will hear oral arguments in the case on Jan. 25, 2021.

Dafna Tachover, Esq

Dafna Tachover is the director of Stop 5G and Wireless Harms Project for Children’s Health Defense. She is an attorney…

READ FULL ARTICLE AND SHARE FROM HERE

The National Academy of Sciences (NAS) Report “An Assessment of Illness in U.S. Government Employees and Their Families at Overseas Embassies” commissioned by the US State Department was released  by a committee of 19 experts citing “directed, pulsed radiofrequency energy” as “the most plausible mechanism” to explain the mystery illness suffered by  U.S. Embassy personnel. The New York Times describes how the report “provides the most definitive explanation yet of the illness that struck scores of government employees, first at the U.S. Embassy in Havana in 2016, and then in China and other countries. Many of the officers suffered from dizziness, fatigue, headaches, and loss of hearing, memory and balance, and some were forced into permanent retirement.”

The NAS report states that “overall, directed pulsed RF (radio frequency) energy, especially in those with the distinct early manifestations, appears to be the most plausible mechanism in explaining these cases among those that the committee considered.”

In 2018, Dr. Beatrice Golomb shared her published  paper  with the US State Department entitled “Diplomats’ Mystery Illness and Pulsed Radiofrequency/Microwave Radiation  which states, “A tremendous number of physicians and scientists and entities and scientific studies and government reports, in many nations, over many decades, have identified that RF/MW causes symptoms consistent with the spectrum now described for diplomats.” Her paper concludes that “Reported facts appear consistent with radiofrequency microwave  as the source of injury in diplomats in Cuba. Non diplomats citing symptoms from radiofrequency microwave  often with an inciting pulsed-radio frequency microwave exposure, report compatible health conditions.”

In March of 2018, JAMA published a study on the diplomats as they experienced the following symptoms:

The National Academies of Sciences Engineering Medicine Report Here

Further Media Reports:

‘Sonic attacks’ suffered by US diplomats likely caused by microwave energy, government study says https://edition.cnn.com/2020/12/05/health/head-injuries-us-diplomats-government-

Havana syndrome: ‘directed’ radio frequency likely cause of illness – report – The Guardian https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/dec/06/havana-syndrome-directed-radio-frequency-likely-cause-of-illness

‘Havana Syndrome’ likely caused by directed microwaves – US report – BBC https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-55203844

‘Havana Syndrome’ likely caused by microwave energy – NBC https://www.nbcnews.com/news/all

Report Points to Microwave ‘Attack’ as Likely Source of Mystery Illnesses That Hit Diplomats and Spies – NY Times https://www.nytimes.com/2020/12/05/business/economy/havana-syndrome-microwave-attack.html

Michael Carlberg, Tarmo Koppel, Lena K. Hedendahl and Lennart Hardell

1 The Environment and Cancer Research Foundation, Studievägen 35, SE 702 17 Örebro, Sweden;lenahedendahl@telia.com (L.K.H.); lennart.hardell@environmentandcancer.com (L.H.)

2 School of Business and Governance, Tallinn University of Technology, SOC353 Ehitajate Tee 5,19086 Tallinn, Estonia; tarmo.koppel@taltech.ee

*Correspondence: michael.carlberg@environmentandcancer.com

Received: 29 October 2020; Accepted: 5 December 2020; Published: 7 December 2020

https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/17/23/9129

EXTRACT

Abstract: The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) at the World Health Organization(WHO) categorized in 2011 radiofrequency (RF) as a possible human carcinogen, Group 2B. During use of the handheld wireless phone, especially the smartphone, the thyroid gland is a target organ.During the 21st century, the incidence of thyroid cancer is increasing in many countries. We used the Swedish Cancer Register to study trends from 1970 to 2017. During that time period, the incidence increased statistically significantly in women with average annual percentage change (AAPC)+2.13%,95% confidence interval (CI)+1.43,+2.83%. The increase was especially pronounced during 2010–2017with annual percentage change (APC)+9.65%, 95% CI+6.68,+12.71%. In men, AAPC increased during 1970–2017 with+1.49%, 95% CI+0.71,+2.28%. Highest increase was found for the time period 2001–2017 with APC+5.26%, 95% CI+4.05,+6.49%. Similar results were found for all Nordic countries based on NORDCAN 1970–2016 with APC+5.83%, 95% CI+4.56,+7.12 in women from2006 to 2016 and APC+5.48%, 95% CI+3.92,+7.06% in men from 2005 to 2016. According to the Swedish Cancer Register, the increasing incidence was similar for tumors≤4 cm as for tumors>4 cm,indicating that the increase cannot be explained by over diagnosis. These results are in agreement with recent results on increased thyroid cancer risk associated with the use of mobile phones. We postulate that RF radiation is a causative factor for the increasing thyroid cancer incidence.

READ FULL STUDY HERE

Submission to The Joint Committee on Disability Matters, Houses of the Oireachtas

12^th November 2020

As stated in the accompanying letter, the expertise of Electromagnetic Sense Ireland is based on real life experience, and many years of study and knowledge regarding the functional/environmental impairment Microwave Sickness/Electrohypersensitivity (EHS).  Dating back to its foundation as IERVN (Irish Electromagnetic Radiation Victims Network), ES-Ireland is a voluntary non-profit group comprised mainly of people suffering adverse health effects from Electromagnetic/Radiofrequency – WiFi (EMF/RF/WiFi) and in particular from pulsed Radiofrequency microwave emissions.  The website https://es-ireland.com is dedicated to creating awareness regarding the implications of this non-ionising radiation for the health of humans, wildlife and the environment based mainly on the  European Council Parliamentary Assembly Resolution 1815 (2011) The Potential Dangers of Electromagnetic Fields and Their Effect on the Environment. https://pace.coe.int/en/files/17994/html

Electrohypersensitivity (EHS) or electrosensitivity (ES) has been a health issue now for at least four decades.  A prime example of independent research on this issue is contained within the report BioInitiative: A Rationale for a Biologically-Based Public Exposure Standards for Electromagnetic Fields 2012 (Summary for the Public (2014 Supplement)). https://bioinitiative.org/wp-content/uploads/pdfs/sec01_2012_summary_for_public.pdf  This report produced by the BionItiative Working Group, an international collaboration of prestigious scientists and public health experts provides a summary of key scientific evidence, including EHS, from a total of 3,800 peer-reviewed research papers.   The daily lives of those who are actually suffering is seldom expressed and we take this opportunity to attempt a description of that.

The Daily Lives of those with Microwave Sickness/Electrohypersensitivity

People who are EHS are affected in different ways and to different extents but main effects have been identified as: severe crippling headaches, ‘brain fog’/loss of concentration, fatigue, dizziness, nausea, nose bleeds, ‘microwave hearing’, muscle tingling/sensation of crawling skin, abdominal cramps/digestive problems, heightened sensitivity to noise/light/chemicals, palpitations/arrhythmias, limb currents/ shooting pain, ‘chest tightness’, burning of skin, hand and leg dysfunction, immune problems, insomnia/sleep disruption.  Increased likelihood of long-term effects:  Cancer, neurological diseases, depression, significantly decreased sperm counts/genetic effects such as male sterility, miscarriage and birth defects.  (BioInitiative Report – Conclusions 2012).  In the year 2000 such symptoms were identified in the World Health Organisation’s International Classification of Diseases (ICD-10) Code of Diagnoses, version 10 (ICD-10; R68.8/now W90) and while some subjective symptoms may be treated by a medical physician the underlying cause still remains only the toxic environment.

Electromagnetic Hypersensitivity (EHS) and World Health Organization: A. International Classification of Diseases (ICD-10) B. International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) http://www.es-uk.info/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/06.4-Disability-ICD-10-codes-ICF-Func.Disab-2018.pdf

Through experience and observation sufferers learn that being away from sources of EMF/RF/WiFi gives them relief and in this way they self-diagnose in the absence of any expertise or medical professionals trained in this subject.

The main issue for sufferers lies in an inaccessible environment associated with unsustainable levels of EMF both within and outside of their homes. Although effects are accumulative, those with less severe symptoms can initially manage their lives by taking measures to shield rooms with specialist paint and materials and/or their bodies with protective clothing etc – at great expense to themselves. For others, symptoms become so severe that they have no option but to move house, others move from place to place continuously, some resort to living in sheds; sleeping in cars, avoid public/social service providers, hospitals, schools etc. Some become prisoners in their own homes.  Needs such as shopping, attending the doctor, using public transport, use of social services etc., become almost impossible. At the severe stage there is an inability to continue participating in society or the social activities considered necessary for health and wellbeing. The daily toil of survival is a 24/7/365 operation. Some personal accounts are accessible on our website at  https://es-ireland.com/ehs-stories/

In 1998 and 2005 a group of EHS sufferers made presentations before Oireachtas Committees as noted in the Joint Committee on Public Enterprise and Transport report on Non-ionising Microwave Radiation Emissions from Communications Masts (1998) http://archive.oireachtas.ie/1998/REPORT_26111998_0.html

and the Joint Committee on Communications, Marine and Natural Resources, Report on Non-ionising Radiation from Mobile Phone Handsets and Masts (2005). http://archive.oireachtas.ie/2005/REPORT_20050600_2.html

The suffering of these victims was, and continues to be, for those who have survived, completely ignored.

One of the most debilitating symptoms of EHS i.e. ‘microwave hearing’ is caused by the absorption of continuous microwave radiation (Wi-Fi/3G/4G/ 5G) on the brain, resulting in a ‘thermoelastic wave of acoustic pressure’ that travels to the inner ear (Lin & Wang).  This tortuous effect is added to by the continuous resonance from telecommunication mast emissions and their cooling equipment. The European Council Recommendations 1999/519/EC on the limitation of exposure of the general public to EMF (0Hz to 300 GHz) have recommended limits for pulse duration in the frequency range 0.3 to 10 GHz and for localised exposure of the head, ‘in order to limit and avoid auditory effects.’  The phenomenon of ‘microwave hearing’ was studied and published in the Journal of Applied Physiology as far back as July 1962 by Allan Frey. Recommended reading: Auditory Perception of Radio-frequency Electromagnetic Fields by Chung-Kwang Chou and Arthur W. Guy – Journal of Acoustical Society of America, Vol 71 (6): 1321 – 1334, June 1982 (published online 1998).  https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org

For many, the notion of a percentage of the public being affected to such an extent from modern technology is unbelievable.  However, other real evidence comes from the Insurance Industry, which withholds cover for risks linked to EMF/RF-WiFi. Insurance Company specialists in Emerging Risks have warned the insurance industry about the impact of potential risks from the ‘unforeseen consequences of electromagnetic fields.’ ‘The Electromagnetic Fields Exclusion (Exclusion 32) is now a General Insurance Exclusion applied across the market as standard.’ Therefore liability coverage for claims ‘Directly or indirectly arising out of, resulting from or contributed to by electromagnetic fields, electromagnetic radiation, electromagnetism, radio waves or noise’ has now been excluded from public liability policies. https://www.jrseco.com/lloyds-insurance-company-does-not-cover-health-damage-caused-byelectromagnetic-radiation/

Recommendations to the Committee

Recognition of EHS as an environmental impairment

EHS needs to be officially recognised as an environmental impairment/functional impairment and as a disability in order to enable access to necessary resources and to live an equal life in a society based upon equality as per the E.U. Human Rights Act and the U.N. Convention on Human Rights for People with Disabilities. An action plan needs to be drawn up which will enable citizens who are electro-sensitive to live, socialise and work on an equal basis with others

Establishment of EHS Hotline

The Introduction of a ‘hotline’ for EHS sufferers where a registry could be kept that would give some indication as to the numbers, geographical areas and scale of effects. This should also provide access to ‘experts’ including e.g. building biologists, bio-physicists and engineers who have the ability, skills and knowledge needed to measure EMF pollution in the homes of sufferers and suggest protective steps, with resources provided by the State.

Creation of White (EMF Free) Zones

Sufficient evidence already exists regarding adverse health effects of EMF to warrant immediate intervention that could commence with the provision of ‘white zones’ i.e. an area free of EMF/RF-WiFi in each county and in public places such as libraries, public transport, hospitals etc.

Public Participation in Decision-Making and Information Campaigns

One of the consistent points made by the E.U., and also referred to in the Aarhus Convention, ratified by Ireland in 2012, is that information regarding the risks associated with EMF should be provided to the public and also that public participation in decision-making regarding the environment should be made a priority. The dangers to the public are not being given sufficient prominence. Direct public participation in the decision-making process is a Constitutional right.

Reduction of Electrosmog in Wireless Local Networks

A system may be available that would assist in the reduction of electrosmog from wireless local area networks designed to reduce the risk of damage to health. Swisscom’s patent application confirms adverse health effects and also confirms that health destruction is ‘not dependent upon temperature increases. This system offers an initial solution to a difficult situation.

Ref: WIPO Patentscope, 1. (W02004075583) Reduction of Electrosmog in Wireless Local Networks.   https://patentscope.wipo.int/search/en/detail.jsf;jsessionid

Other Supporting Information: 

1. In 2011 the WHO’s International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) classified EMF as Group 2B, a possible human carcinogen (page 419), (Vol 102)

Press Release: https://www.iarc.fr/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/pr208_E.pdf

2. The National Toxicology Program (NTP) (USA), which, under the National Institutes of Health, have completed the largest ever animal study on cell phone radiation and cancer. The results were consistent with findings in humans of increased risk of glioma and acoustic neuroma (cancers of the brain) and of malignant schwannomas – cancer of the heart (a rare cancer), as well as DNA damage. These effects occurred even within threshold levels currently allowable. The NTP study has now (2018) been peer-reviewed and accepted by independent experts.   https://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/whatwestudy/topics/cellphones/index.html

3. The second recent study is a corresponding large Animal Study on Base Station/Cell Tower Radiofrequency Radiation undertaken by the Ramazzini Institute (Italy). The importance of the key conclusions of this study is that they are consistent with and therefore reinforce the findings of the National Toxicology Program. Key findings attest to an increase in the incidence of glioma, acoustic neuromas (cancers of the brain) and rare malignant tumours such as schwannomas of the heart.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0013935118300367

4. The recent review by Professor Martin Pall, a winner of eight international awards, entitled Wi-Fi is an important threat to human health, and published in Environmental Research 164 (2018) 405 – 416 considers repeated studies on Wi- Fi and other microwave frequency EMFs. He identifies seven effects that are consistently accepted as proven in 10 to 16 studies and which can therefore be scientifically referred to as established. These established effects are oxidative stress, sperm/testicular damage, neuropsychiatric effects including EEG changes, apoptosis, cellular DNA damage, endocrine changes and calcium overload. The review informs that EMF effects are often cumulative and irreversible, and that EMFs may impact young people more than adults.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29573716/

Thank you again for this opportunity,

Ethna Monks

Member of Electromagnetic Sense Ireland, (ES-Ireland), https://es-ireland.com

 Additional Information

 Some ES-Ireland submissions:

January 2016 United Nations Convention on Rights of People with Disabilities (UNCRPD) – on rights to inclusive education, article 24 https://es-ireland.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/un-response-2016.pdf

October 2019 United Nations Human Rights Council Advisory Committee.  Response to Questions on New and Emerging Digital Technology and Human Rights.

https://es-ireland.com/submission-to-un-human-rights-council-october-2019/

Open Submission (June 2018) to Government Departments and Agencies regarding Public Health and Wellbeing Protection in Ireland in respect of Electromagnetic Fields – Request for a Public Inquiry on behalf of the public, especially children and vulnerable groups.

Link: https://es-ireland.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/jun18submissiongovtem.pdf

Electrohypersensitivity: a functional impairment due to an inaccessible environment Professor Olle Johansson   REV ENVIRON HEALTH:  2015;30(4):311-21.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26613327/

ELECTROMAGNETIC  RADIATION AND HEALTH FOR CHILDREN 2013 PRESENTATION SUMMARY:

Electromagnetic Hypersensitivity A Summary by Dr Erica Mallery-Blythe December 2014 WORKING DRAFT Version 1

https://ecfsapi.fcc.gov/file/1070795887708/Dr_Erica_Mallery-Blythe_EHS_A_Summary_Working_Draft_Version_1_Dec_2014_for_EESC_Brussels_(3)%20(1).pdf

Electromagnetic Hypersensitivity and Human Rights    Commentary to the EU Economic and Social Committee (EESC).

https://es-ireland.com/2014/12/12/ehs-human-rights-dr-isaac-jamieson-2014/

BEES, BIRDS AND MANKIND – Destroying Nature by ‘Electrosmog’

Ulrich Warnke

Effects of Wireless Communication Technologies

A Brochure Series by the Competence Initiative for the Protection of Humanity,

Environment and Democracy

https://ecfsapi.fcc.gov/file/7521097894.pdf

2020 Consensus Statement of UK and International Medical and Scientific Experts and Practitioners on Health Effects of Non-Ionising Radiation (NIR) Press Release: Embargoed until 10/11/2020

https://phiremedical.org/2020-nir-consensus-statement-read/

PHIRE Medical UK Press Release Nov 2020 on Non-Ionising Radiation

https://phiremedical.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/Press-Release-2020-Non-Ionising-Radiation-Consensus-Statement.pdf

Source Article: https://www.emfsa.co.za  June 2020

Eric van Rongen “I’m the scientist who sets the global guidelines on 5G safety. Take it from me: 5G doesn’t cause cancer or spread COVID-19.” https://www.businessinsider.com/scientist-sets-guidelines-5g-safety-conspiracy-theories-debunked-2020-6?IR=T

Eric van Rongen:

“Contrary to many 5G conspiracy theories, phone radiation heats the human body the equivalent of having a cup of hot tea every two hours.”

“The science is really straightforward — there’s simply no solid evidence that anything other than a small amount of body heating may result from exposure to 5G radiofrequency fields.”

Andrew Goldsworthy (Biologist) responds to ICNIRP’s Eric van Rongen’s post featured above:

There are two main mechanisms by which non-ionising radiation such as that from cell-phones can damage living organisms. One is the heating effect and the other is the effect of low-frequency modulation.

1 The heating effect.

We cannot assume that the heating effect is uniformly distributed through living cells. The cells themselves are highly conductive, whereas the cell membranes have a very high resistance. Therefore, for any given current flowing through a tissue, nearly all of the heat will be generated in the cell membranes. Since these membranes constitute only about one thousandth of the total diameter of a typical cell and virtually all of the heat is being generated in them, the ICNIRP Guidelines, which are based on the assumption that cells and tissues are uniformly conductive, are approximately one thousand times too high.

2 The effect of modulation.

Living cell membranes are electrically non-linear and have a voltage across them of approximately 70mV. They are pierced by countless ion channels that behave like electrically biased Schottky diodes capable of rectifying and so demodulating any alternating signal (including microwave frequencies) with the demodulated low frequency components appearing between the inside and outside of the cell. This is what does most of the damage and here is why:

The cell membrane is mainly made of a lipid bilayer only about 10nM thick, with proteins such as ion channels “floating” in it. The membrane itself is negatively charged because it has outwardly directed negatively charged phosphate groups and is normally stabilised by divalent positive calcium and magnesium ions that cross-link them. But the demodulated cell-phone signal makes the negative membrane and its protective divalent ions move in opposite directions. This destabilizes the membrane and makes it more likely to perforate and collapse the voltage gradient across it. This, in turn, opens voltage-gated calcium ion channels in the membrane that let huge numbers of calcium ions into the cell down a massive 10,000:1 electrochemical gradient.

In nature, this increase in the internal calcium concentration is taken as an indicator to the cell that its membrane (and by implication, the whole cell) has been damaged and sets in train a series of repair mechanisms, which uses a great deal of metabolic energy. If it succeeds, the cell is repaired, if not, the cell dies, but either way a great deal of energy is used. This may in large part explain the chronic fatigue syndrome that was found in early mobile phone users (Yuppie flu) and is now much more widespread in the community due to our constant exposure to cordless phones, their base stations, WiFi and all the other wireless devices that current ICNIRP guidelines regard as safe.

Lastly, the relationship between 5G and COVID-19.

We cannot assume that because the 5G radiation is mainly absorbed by the skin that it cannot damage the rest of our bodies. If the energy of the radiation is disproportionately absorbed by the skin, then the damage to the skin and the blood and lymph circulating through it will also be disproportionately large. The effects of 5G on lymphocytes could be particularly damaging. They too will have their energy drained by the calcium influx caused by the radiation, have less to spare to generate their protective antibodies and so make the immune system less efficient. So, I guess you could say that 5G can promote the spread of COVID-19. That said, most other forms of information carrying (i.e.modulated) frequencies may be even more dangerous, particularly WiFi with its extremely low frequency (10Hz) beacon signal being possibly the most dangerous.

Dr Andrew Goldsworthy, Lecturer and Biological Safety Officer (retired) Imperial College London.