The Press Ombudsman has upheld a complaint by Professor Tom Butler that The Irish Times breached Principle 1 (Truth and Accuracy) of the Code of Practice of the Press Council of Ireland.

On 5 September 2019 The Irish Times published online an article challenging concerns that there might be health risks associated with 5G technology. A sub-heading to the article stated that the blossoming anxiety over professed health risks of 5G “can be traced to a single scientist and a single chart”.

Professor Butler made a formal complaint to the Office of the Press Ombudsman claiming that Principle 1 (Truth and Accuracy) and Principle 2 (Distinguishing Fact and Comment) of the Code of Practice had been breached. Professor Butler challenged what he understood to be the subtext of the article which was, he said, that there were “no real links between wireless technology and health”. In particular, he disputed the accuracy of the sub-heading to the article, claiming that there was “significant scientific concern that dates back to the 1950s, at the very least”. He referenced many scientific papers and research findings which questioned the safety of microwave radiation, stating that “there is a significant body of scientific evidence on hazardous non-thermal levels of microwave radiation”. He questioned the statement of the author of the article that “mainstream scientists continue to see no evidence of harm from cell phone radio waves” which he described as “demonstrably false”.

The Irish Times responded by saying the article had been published in good faith and that its author had “twice won the Pulitzer prize and is a long-established science writer with the New York Times”. The Irish Times said that the article had been supplied by the syndication service of The New York Times and that it had been written by a “highly respected writer and commentator” who was expressing his opinions in the article. The editor stated that The Irish Times “does not have an opinion on whether there are links between wireless technology and health”. What was published, he said, was the author’s opinions on this subject. An offer of the publication of a letter that “would need to be not longer than 500-600 words” which would provide an opportunity to challenge the original article was made.

Professor Butler declined the offer of a letter of the length suggested as the “subject matter was not conducive to expression in a mere 500 words”.

As the complaint could not be resolved by conciliation it was forwarded to the Press Ombudsman for a decision.

It is not the function of the Press Ombudsman to evaluate the conflicting claims of the effects of wireless technology. The Press Ombudsman’s task is to decide if the Code of Practice of the Press Council has been breached. Principle 1 requires the press to strive at all times for truth and accuracy. In the article the author made assertions about the effects of wireless technology which Professor Butler claimed were inaccurate. His complaint, which included substantial supporting documentation and international research, contained sufficiently persuasive evidence to allow a decision that the article did not meet requirements in regard to Principle 1. It is a frequently repeated truism that everyone is entitled to his own opinion but not his own facts. An opinion piece in a newspaper has the same obligation to facts as any other part of a newspaper. I am upholding this complaint on the basis that the article, in not taking more account of scientific research that raised concerns about the impact on human health of radio waves, breached the accuracy requirements found in Principle 1.

In this instance The Irish Times offered Professor Butler an opportunity to publish a 500-600 word letter. In my opinion given the complex arguments on the effects of wireless technology this was not a sufficient response to resolve the complaint.

Other parts of the complaint were not upheld. The full decision can be accessed at https://pressombudsman.ie

https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/professor-tom-butler-and-the-irish-times

ALSO :

Sunday Times  16/2/2020  – Prof Tom Butler’s complaint upheld over wi-fi article in Irish Times  

SOURCE ARTICLE – ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH TRUST

Download Full Report Adverse health effects of 5G mobile networking technology under real-life conditions

WITH THANKS TO EM RADIATION RESEARCH

A link to the document containing the summary of the Turin court verdict confirming head cancer was caused by mobile phone exposure is now available via the Radiation Research Trust website.

Download full verdict in English: https://www.radiationresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/Turin-Verdict-ICNIRP_Judgment-SUMMARY-of-the-Turin-Court-of-Appeal-9042019_EN-min.pdf

The report highlights the fact that ICNIRP is a private organisation whose guidelines on radio frequencies have great economic and strategic importance for the telecom industry, with several ICNIRP members having links through consultancy relationships and potential links with the industry and should therefore refrain from assessing the health effects of radio frequency levels.

5G is also mentioned “5G is a slap on the face of democracy, of our data security, of our personal safety, with the risk of increase in exposure limits.”

SEE ALSO:

Two articles have appeared in the Farmers Weekly publication in the UK this week warning landowners with mobile phone masts on their land to be aware of the risks concerning radiation and the increased risks with the expansion of 5G.

26th January 2020 –  Landowners warned to be aware of phone mast radiation risk 

https://www.fwi.co.uk/business/compliance/landowners-warned-to-be-aware-of-phone-mast-radiation-risk

28th January 2020 – How to manage radiation exclusion zones for phone masts

https://www.fwi.co.uk/business/business-management/health-and-safety/how-to-manage-radiation-exclusion-zones-for-phone-masts

SOURCE ARTICLE: EMFANALYSIS.com

Author – Jeromy Johnson    September 2019

More information on why we need to be cautious about promoting fibre-optic cabling as a safe alternative to wireless and 5G :

Fiber Broadband and Small Cells: An Unholy Municipal Alliance by B. Blake Levitt

Arthur Firstenberg – 5G, Birds, Bees, & Humanity ….  “If you advocate for high speed fibre, you are advocating for 5G”

SOURCE ARTICLE :PHONEGATE ALERT, FRANCE

The Court of Appeal of Turin confirms in a full judgment published on 13 January 2020 (904/2019 of 3.12.2019 , Romeo v. INAIL) the decision of the Tribunal of Ivrea of 2017. Judge Fadda considers that the worker’s acoustic neuroma (benign tumour of the head) was indeed caused by the use of the mobile phone.

According to the Court:

“there is protective scientific jurisprudence that supports the assertion of causation based on criteria of “more likely than not”. P.33.”

And to add:

“Epidemiological data, the results of experiments on animals (not contradicted, at present, by other experiments of the same type), the duration and intensity of exposure … which are particularly important in view of the dose-response relationship established – at the scientific level – between exposure to mobile phone radiofrequencies and the risk of acoustic neuroma, as well as the absence of any other factor which could have caused the disease”.

The scientific analysis by independent experts appointed by the Court confirms the causal link

All the scientific elements of the case were re-examined and re-analysed by two new experts appointed by the Court of Turin (Carolina Marino, Angelo D’Errico). The Court of Appeal fully accepted their conclusions and rejected INAIL’s* appeal, stating that CTU had provided:

“strong evidence to assert a causal role between the complainant’s occupational exposure, his exposure to radiation from mobile phones and the disease that occurred”.

This is the second Italian appeal judgment in favour of a worker after the Brescia judgment in 2010, which concluded with the confirmation of the Supreme Court in 2012, case of Marcolini v. INAIL. In this case, the Court of Bergamo had rejected the application in first instance.

A landmark judgment that will have international repercussions

The Romeo v. INAIL case is therefore historic. It is the first in world judicial history to have had two consecutive judgments in favour of the plaintiff. It is also historic because of the principles underlying this decision and particularly because it is written about the conflicts of interest of certain experts close to the mobile phone industry.

Conflicts of interest and the role of the ICNIRP pinpointed by the Tribunal

Indeed, the Tribunal recognizes that telephone industry-funded scientists, or members of the ICNIRP, are less reliable than independent scientists:

“Much of the scientific literature that excludes carcinogenicity from RF exposure, or at least argues that research to the contrary cannot be considered conclusive… is in a position of conflict of interest, which is not always asserted: see, in particular, on page 94 of the report, the Applicant’s defence (not contested by the other party) that the authors of the studies indicated by INAIL, who are mentioned by name, are members of ICNIRP and/or SCENIHR, which have received, directly or indirectly, funding from industry. P. 33.”

The Turin CTU states:

“It is considered that less weight should be given to studies published by authors who have not declared the existence of conflicts of interest. In this case, conflict of interest situations may arise in relation to the assessment of the effect of radio frequencies on health, for example :
1. cases where the author of the study advised the telephone industry or received funding for studies from the telephone industry
2. if the author himself is a member of the ICNIRP.”

For Dr. Marc Arazi, President of Phonegate Alert:

“Attorney Stefano Bertone’s determined fight to defend the victims of overexposure to our mobile phone waves and the consequences for their health is exemplary. He was one of the first lawyers to take the measure of the revelations linked to the Phonegate scandal. A year ago, together with his law firm and the Italian association APPEL, he and his firm condemned the Italian government to launch major information campaigns on the risks associated with the use of mobile phones. This new decision is all the more important and confirm the need for a moratorium on the deployment of 5G”.

*Istituto Nazionale per l’Assicurazione contro gli Infortuni sul Lavoro

To learn more on the same subject:

Italy: a landmark judgment requires the state to inform the population of the health risks due to mobile phones

Mobil World Congress: industrialists and public authorities urged to take into account the health effects of mobile technologies

Phonegate Alert invited to the International conference Stop 5G at the Italian Parliament

For More from PHONEGATE ALERT

SUMMARY-of-the-Turin-Court-of-Appeal-9042019 – Radiation Research Trust

SOURCE: astronomersappeal.wordpress.com

Safeguarding the Astronomical Sky

This Appeal can be signed by:

This is an international appeal by professional astronomers open for subscription to ask for an intervention from institutions and governments.

Astronomical observations from the ground can be greatly harmed by the ongoing deployment of large satellite fleets in preparation for the next generation of telecommunications.

For centuries the astronomical observations from the ground have led to exceptional progress in our scientific understanding of the Laws of Nature. Currently, the capability of astronomical instrumentation from the ground is endangered by the deployment of satellites fleets.

Through this international appeal and following the same concerns expressed by the International Astronomical Union, IAU [1] and other institutions, we raise a formal request for greater effective protection and safeguard for professional astronomical observations from the ground, guaranteeing the right to observe a sky free from unnecessary artificial polluting sources.

READ FULL APPEAL AND DETAILS ON HOW TO SIGN HERE

The Minister for Housing and Planning, Eoghan Murphy is proposing a new Bill which will essentially restrict citizens’ and environmental NGO’s ability to legally challenge planning applications and developments.

This Bill will have serious consequences for the fight against mobile phone masts and antennae, including 5G.

What you can do:

• Sign the petition to Block The Bill   https://www.change.org/p/department-of-environment-stop-eoghan-murphys-bill-which-will-stop-environmental-democracy

• Send a Submission to the Department of Housing and Planning Details Here

Closing date is 27th January 2020

Helpful templates available on Ireland for Safe Technology Website

More information:
Environmental groups outline shock at proposed planning Bill – https://environmentalpillar.ie

‘Draconian’ planning Bill would ‘set the clock back’ on access to justice – https://greennews.ie

Environmentalists say proposed Bill makes it harder to object to planning decisions – https://www.irishtimes.com