SOURCE ARTICLE:   PRIARTEM.FR

EHS – New judicial advance in France – Recognition of electrosensitivity as an occupational disease

13th January 2019

Investigate Europe 

“Big Promises, Unknown Risks”

In a series of ongoing news publications, a team of investigative journalists examines the risks of 5G deployment.

https://www.investigate-europe.eu/publications/the-5g-mass-experiment/

“A judge recognises the occupational nature –work accident– of an employee’s temporary disabilities derived from electrohypersensitivity”

Zaragoza, 8 January 2019. A ruling recently issued by the Juzgado de lo Social (Labour Court) No. 1 of Zaragoza, Spain, established that the sole and exclusive cause of the electrohypersensitivity suffered by an Endesa employee was his work activity. The occupational nature of the temporary disabilities granted to this employee since 2014 is therefore ascertained and said temporary disabilities are to be considered work-related accidents.  Ruling 203/2018

The aforementioned ruling was ratified by the High Court of Justice of Aragon. Ruling 691/2018

It is the first time that a Spanish judge recognises the occupational nature -work accident- of an employee’s temporary disabilities derived from electrohypersensitivity.

The JIMENEZ-MAINAR&ROSEL S.L. law firm from Zaragoza handled the case.

This Senior Systems and Telecommunications Technician is an Endesa-Enel-Group employee whose workplace is located on C / Aznar Molina 2-8, Zaragoza, Spain.

Upon receipt of an administrative request to change the status of the employee’s temporary disabilities from common illness to work-related accident, the National Social Security Institute (INSS) resolved that said temporary disabilities should be considered common contingencies.

A lawsuit was then filed to request the above change of contingency to work-related accident through the aforementioned Labour Court.

Since 2009 the plaintiff started to develop a specific biological response when exposed to non-ionizing electromagnetic fields —both high and low frequency (e.g. Wi-Fi, mobile telecommunications, WiMAX, computers, power lines, electrical transformers, etc.)—, due to limbic dysfunction. He was diagnosed with electrohypersensitivity in 2014, and thereafter every time a temporary disability took place, he was discharged from the public health system (SALUD) with the diagnosis of electrohypersensitivity as a common illness.

A work-related accident is any bodily injury that an employee suffers on occasion or as a consequence of paid employment economic activities.

This is a significant ruling as it highlights the importance of protecting particularly sensitive employees and contributes to the correct application of Article 25 of the General Law on the Prevention of Occupational Risks. Article 25 LGPRL

According to the latest estimates for modern societies, electrohypersensitive population ranges between 3 to 5%, bringing the total figure of people suffering from this condition in Europe to around 13 million.

On 27 May 2011 the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe passed Resolution 1815 entitled The potential dangers of electromagnetic fields and their effect on the environment. Resolution 1815

Media Articles on the Ruling:

http://www.avaate.org/spip.php?article2792&fbclid=IwAR1oO2LYVRMnBqACAfOwProPSpYW9XddtddaBhvMRVdsPDENZg4hGN6Gtlk

http://www.finanzas.com/noticias/empleo/20190108/tsja-vincula-electrosensibilidad-accidentes-3974225_age.html?fbclid=IwAR1jnCguMz1hOrv_Og5PQ_rGU6YSLn0HQvWg2Ii6uNvyegITtstz7L0HaQI

SOURCE ARTICLE: THE LANCET  1st December 2018 

Planetary electromagnetic pollution: it is time to assess its impact

Priyanka Bandara, David O Carpenter

EXCERPT: As the Planetary Health Alliance moves forward after a productive second annual meeting, a discussion on the rapid global proliferation of artificial electromagnetic fields would now be apt. The most notable is the blanket of radiofrequency electromagnetic radiation, largely microwave radiation generated for wireless communication and surveillance technologies, as mounting scientific evidence suggests that prolonged exposure to radiofrequency electromagnetic radiation has serious biological and health effects. However, public exposure regulations in most countries continue to be based on the guidelines of the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection 1 and Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, 2 which were established in the 1990s on the belief that only acute thermal effects are hazardous. Prevention of tissue heating by radiofrequency electromagnetic radiation is now proven to be ineffective in preventing biochemical and physiological interference. For example, acute non-thermal exposure has been shown to alter human brain metabolism by NIH scientists, ³ electrical activity in the brain,⁴ and systemic immune responses.⁵ Chronic exposure has been associated with increased oxidative stress and DNA damage ^{6,  7} and cancer risk. ⁸ Laboratory studies, including large rodent studies by the US National Toxicology Program ⁹ and Ramazzini Institute of Italy, ¹⁰ confirm these biological and health effects in vivo. As we address the threats to human health from the changing environmental conditions due to human activity, ¹¹ the increasing exposure to artificial electromagnetic radiation needs to be included in this discussion.

Due to the exponential increase in the use of wireless personal communication devices (eg, mobile or cordless phones and WiFi or Bluetooth-enabled devices) and the infrastructure facilitating them, levels of exposure to radiofrequency electromagnetic radiation around the 1 GHz frequency band, which is mostly used for modern wireless communications, have increased from extremely low natural levels by about 10¹⁸ times (figure). Radiofrequency electromagnetic radiation is also used for radar, security scanners, smart meters, and medical equipment (MRI, diathermy, and radiofrequency ablation). It is plausibly the most rapidly increasing anthropogenic environmental exposure since the mid-20th century, and levels will surge considerably again, as technologies like the Internet of Things and 5G add millions more radiofrequency transmitters around us.

READ FULL ARTICLE HERE

3rd November 2018

Source Article : We are the Evidence – Wireless Technology Injured Advocacy Group

https://wearetheevidence.org/another-french-court-recognizes-ehs-microwave-sickness/

5th November 2018

SOURCE ARTICLE: US Brain Tumour Association PRNewsWire  

NTP architect insists the FDA is misleading the public – Risk of Brain Tumors is Real

WASHINGTON, Nov. 5, 2018 /PRNewswire/ — American Brain Tumor Study finds brain cancer to be the #1 cancer for children 15-19 years old; meanwhile, FDA releases statement distorting and minimizing the significance of a landmark study $30 Million NIH National Toxicology Program Study which found Clear Evidence that wireless non-ionizing radiation causes brain cancer, heart cancer and DNA damage non-thermally below current FCC safety guidelines.

“What most people do not understand is that THE FDA DOES NOT DO SAFETY TESTING OF WIRELESS DEVICES BEFORE THEY ARE RELEASED ONTO THE MARKET EXPOSING MILLIONS OF PEOPLE.  The FDA does not do post market safety surveying to see how heavy users are developing more cancer and neurological disorders like they do with drugs and medical devices.  We are seeing a dramatic increase in brain tumors in the three areas of the brain that get the most radiation from cell phones: frontal lobe, temporal lobe, and cerebellum.  The Italian Supreme court has already ruled that cell phones can cause brain cancer.  In essence without premarket safety testing, we have become the lab rats in a massive human experiment of nonionizing radiation health effects,” insists President of US Brain Tumor Association Kevin Mottus.

According to Ron Melnick PhD, former Senior Scientist and Leader of the team that designed the National Toxicology Program Study, “For the FDA to dismiss the findings of the NTP study saying exposure levels were 50 times allowable whole body exposures limits for humans is misleading the public because it is local exposure limits which are more relevant to human risk and this study was designed to test the effect of local exposures levels on the brain and other organs.  The highest exposure levels were only 4 times as high as the local exposure limits for humans and yet there was still tumor growth at the lowest exposures which were slightly below FCC local exposure limits.

In toxicology and cancer studies like those conducted by the NTP, we need higher exposure levels so we can extrapolate these findings to the larger population and to better understand the relationships between dose and health effects.  This is standard practice in Toxicology and the FDA is taking advantage of the public not understanding this.  We chose wireless radiation levels that would create radiation levels in the brain of rats comparable to those permitted by current FCC exposure guidelines.

Rat studies have been the gold standard for predicting toxicity and carcinogenicity in humans for decades even by the FDA’s in their own studies so why now is there no direct relationship between the results of this study and human cell phone use?  Why then did the FDA nominate this study which cost $30 million of tax payer money and took 16 years if they thought it was irrelevant to humans?  The NTP study was qualitative research and it did its job–it proved that wireless nonionizing radiation can cause cancer and DNA damage nonthermally which was previously believed to be impossible by proponents of the wireless industry and others.  Now the FDA is suppose to do its Quantative Risk Assessment to determine its health risk to humans but it refuses to do so and insists on making these misleading statements that mask the conclusive findings of this study.

The important lesson we should learn from the NTP studies is that we can no longer assume that any current or future wireless technology is safe without adequate safety testing” (ron.melnick@gmail.com).

The Italian Supreme Court has ruled that cell phones can cause brain tumors.  In this country, we can no longer pretend the evidence is inconclusive; the NTP study provides conclusive evidence that wireless radiation can cause cancer and other serious effects.  The FDA statement failed to take into consideration the fact that no one is only exposed to one source of wireless radiation today as in the NTP study.  Most of us are exposed to a multitude of low and higher frequencies at varying distances for most if not all of the day.

Yes WiFi and 5G do have different frequencies and modulations; they pulse more and 5G will be more highly modulated to carry more data.  Pulsation and modulation are both factors which our scientists believe contribute to the bioactivity of wireless radiation rather than power and heating which has been proven by the NTP study as an incorrect assumptions when determining the safety of wireless radiation and our safety guidelines which are based on this false assumption must be updated immediately.

“Action must be taken to protect our population and minimize our exposure to carcinogenic wireless radiation; obviously the FDA is shirking their responsibility to protect us based on their statement released Thursday.  This is unacceptable and the FDA should be held responsible for the unnecessary sickness and death caused by harmful wireless radiation exposure,” insists Kevin Mottus President of US Brain Tumor Association.

For more information contact: USbraintumorassociation@gmail.com

SOURCE US Brain Tumor Association

Related Links

http://usbraintumorassociation.com

National Toxicology Program – Cell Phone Radiation Study