An international team of researchers, many with close ties to ICNIRP, is trying to put to rest the very possibility that RF radiation can lead to brain cancer —and, by extension, any type of cancer.
On August 30, they published a detailed systematic review of RF and cell phone epidemiological studies, which concludes that there is little evidence to justify continued concern over a possible cancer link.
The review, commissioned by the World Health Organization‘s (WHO) EMF Project, appears in the journal Environment International.
A few days later, Ken Karipidis, the lead author, posted a short summary to serve as a press release for the journal manuscript, which takes up 52 typeset pages of the journal.
Camilla Rees Presents on Wireless Risks at Metro D.C. MENSA Conference, Calls on MENSA Members to Join the Fight for Safe Technologies
“The Wireless Elephant in the Room: The Biological and Health Effects of Electromagnetic Fields–and Steps We Can Take to Protect Our Health in a Wireless Age”
Camilla Rees presented on wireless tech risks Saturday at the Metropolitan Washington, D.C. MENSA conference. Her talk was titled, “The Wireless Elephant in the Room: The Biological and Health Effects of Electromagnetic Fields–and Steps We Can Take to Protect Our Health in a Wireless Age”.
Rees shared many studies with the high-IQ MENSA members showing biological and health risks from non-thermal (heating) exposures to wireless radiation, and mentioned several review studies by the U.S. government showing risk dating to the 1940s. They included studies by NASA, the Defense Intelligence Agency, EPA, U.S. Air Force, U.S. Naval Medical Research Institute, Department of the Army, NIH/DoE, NIH/National Toxicology Program, as well as communication from the Department of Interior to the National Telecommunications and Information Administration indicating present exposure guidelines are outmoded and are inadequate to protect wildlife.
IMPORTANT NOTE FROM ES-IRELAND. Rees and others call for Fibreoptic as an alternative to masts/towers.
However, many people have reported experiencing increased symptoms after fibreoptic internet cabling has been installed either to their homes or to their neighbours’ home, or even just in the area. Even with wifi disabled, people are still finding the installations are causing EMI interference or ‘dirty electricity’ and adding to their symptoms.
We therefore do not agree that Fibreoptic internet is a safe alternative to mobile/wireless masts, unless the EMI issue is addressed.
In addition even in areas where there is and has been good cabled broadband for years (ASDL and/or fibreoptic), people still use mobile and smartphones connected to masts and antennas, out and about in their cars, and at home.
Letter to the Editor of Environmental International from Michael Bevington, Chair of Trustees, Electrosensitivity UK, BM Box ES-UK, London WC1 3XX, United Kingdom
Letter to the Editor, Environment International ‘Available evidence shows adverse symptoms from acute non-thermal RF-EMF exposure’. Comment on: Bosch-Capblanch X et al., The effects of radiofrequency electromagnetic fields exposure on human self-reported symptoms: A systematic review of human experimental studies, Envir Int. vol. 187, May 2024, 108612
This review (Bosch-Capblanch et al., 2024) states in its Interpretation that “available evidence” suggests that acute non-thermal RF-EMF “does not cause symptoms”. However, this unqualified broad claim, while arguably valid if it had been limited to the 41 mainly negative studies reviewed, contradicts my experience over the last 16 years as a trustee of the charity Electrosensitivity UK, which since 2003 has sought to help people sensitised to RF-EMF. The review’s Interpretation is invalidated in three ways. Firstly, its parameters excluded much available evidence showing positive effects; secondly, the use of averaging hides individual cases which provide positive evidence; and, thirdly, its negative claim is contradicted by positive proof from other sources, including practical, judicial, legal and underwriting.
Posted inUncategorized|Comments Off on Letter to the Editor of Environment International – from Michael Bevington, Chair of Trustees, Electrosensitivity UK
The World Health Organization (WHO) in 2012 initiated an expert consultation about research on the health effects of radio-frequency electromagnetic fields (RF-EMF) for a WHO monograph that was last updated in 1993. The project was abandoned over concerns about the quality of the commissioned review papers. The WHO restarted the project in 2019 by commissioning 10 systematic reviews (SRs) of the research on RF-EMF exposure and adverse biological and health outcomes in laboratory animals, cell cultures, and human populations. The second of these SRs, published in 2024, addresses human observational studies of RF-EMF exposure and non-specific symptoms, including tinnitus, migraine/headache, and sleep disturbance. The present commentary is a critical appraisal of the scientific quality of this SR (SR7) employing criteria developed by the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine. Based upon our review, we call for a retraction of SR7 and an impartial investigation by unconflicted experts of the currently available evidence and future research priorities.
…….
Conclusions
To summarize, the way in which any epidemiologically unsophisticated reader is likely to be misled by this SR is clear. It appears to conclude unequivocally that the body of scientific evidence reviewed supports the safety of current (e.g. ICNIRP-based) population exposure limits for RF-EMF [10]. We reiterate that, on the contrary, this body of evidence is not adequate to either support or refute the safety of current exposure limits – largely due to the very small number and low methodological quality of the relevant primary studies to date, and the fundamental inappropriateness of meta-analysis for the handful of very heterogeneous primary studies identified by Röösli et al. [3] for each of the exposure/outcome combinations analysed.
We therefore call for a retraction of the SR by Röösli et al., and an impartial international investigation, by unconflicted experts, of both the currently available evidence base on these issues, as well as related research priorities for the future. That investigation should particularly address, above and beyond the topic of priority health outcomes to be researched (which was already assessed in the international expert consultation by WHO in 2018) [2] the need for improved methods of accurately measuring RF-EMF exposures, suitable for large human observational studies in the general population – the Achilles heel of the current literature.
WHO to build neglect of RF-EMF exposure hazards on flawed EHC reviews? Case study demonstrates how “no hazards” conclusion is drawn from data showing hazards
Posted inUncategorized|Comments Off on A critical appraisal of the WHO 2024 systematic review of the effects of RF-EMF exposure on tinnitus, migraine/headache, and non-specific symptoms
Electromagnetic hypersensitivity (EHS) is a serious, often debilitating condition resulting in a diverse array of adverse health symptoms in individuals exposed to man-made electromagnetic fields (EMFs). Highly disparate symptoms may include sleep disorders, asthenia, headaches, memory loss, difficulties in concentration, dizziness, musculoskeletal pain, acute and chronic inflammation, gastrointestinal disorders, skin conditions and mood disorders. These occur in the presence of EMF emitted by various devices, including mobile phone base stations and handsets, Wi-Fi routers, DECT telephones, household appliances, compact fluorescent and halogen light bulbs, power lines, power transformers, or smart meters [Citation1,Citation2]. These devices moreover induce symptoms at far below current reference exposure levels [Citation3–6]. As a consequence, EHS cases may be forced to discard personal electronic devices and avoid highly exposed areas such as shopping centers, public transportation or even hospitals. Some have resorted to wearing EMF-shielding clothes, and living in isolated areas distant from sources of EMF exposure such as countryside, woods and caves [Citation2]. Available epidemiological data points to increasing numbers of cases of EMF sensitivity, ranging from 1.6% (Finland) to 10.3% (Germany) in European countries, for example [Citation2]. Because EMF devices are virtually ubiquitous in the modern world, EHS syndrome detracts significantly from the quality of life and productivity of these individuals.
Posted inUncategorized|Comments Off on HYPERSENSITIVITY TO MAN-MADE ELECTROMAGNETIC FIELDS (EHS) CORRELATES WITH IMMUNE RESPONSIVITY TO OXIDATIVE STRESS: A CASE REPORT
‘In our experiment, with a short [Wi-Fi and DECT cordless phone] exposure of 10 minutes, EMF effects on HRV were found even though the power flux density was only 0.000275% of the ICNIRP limit…’
Posted inUncategorized|Comments Off on Evaluating the Effect on Heart Rate Variability of Adults Exposed to Radio-Frequency Electromagnetic Fields in Modern Office Environment
ICBE-EMF is dedicated to the protection of humans and other species from the harmful effects of non-ionizing radiation. Of highest concern are children, pregnant women, and those with chronic health conditions including those who are Electromagnetically Hypersensitive (EHS). We attribute the growth of EHS to the rapid expansion in anthropogenic (human-caused) electromagnetic fields. EHS symptoms may occur through use of devices or exposure to infrastructure, such as mobile phones, DECT cordless landlines, Wi-Fi/Bluetooth enabled computers, Wi-Fi routers, smart meters, base station antennas, electric vehicles, power lines, household electrical appliances and other low intensity exposures.
All biology uses electromagnetic fields as well as chemical signalling. Widely used EMF (electrical and magnetic fields) are new and very different from those found in nature, making them disruptive to normal biological functioning, even at what are labelled as low levels.
EHS is a multisystemic physical response, with symptoms that can vary among individuals due to anatomical and physiological differences. Symptoms can include sleep problems, fatigue, headache, dizziness, heart palpitation, tinnitus (ringing in the ear), skin rash, chemical sensitivity, visual, sensory, and mood disturbances. The US National Council on Disability’s 2022 Health Equity Framework, recognizes that “electrical hypersensitivity is associated with the use of wireless communications and electrical technologies and other sources of non-ionizing radiation, which may trigger disabling and life-threatening cardiac, respiratory, neurological, and other adverse physical reactions.”
The distress and disability associated with EHS is recognised by numerous social, scientific and medical organisations (WHO, 2004[I]). According to the European Commission’s EESC 2019 Report on Digitalization: Challenge for Europe, “Each day the number of EHS sufferers increases: according to new estimates, between 3% and 5% of the population are electro-sensitive, meaning that some 13 million Europeans may suffer from this syndrome, which has various names: electro-sensitivity, Wi-Fi syndrome, microwave syndrome, electromagnetic hypersensitivity, etc.”[II] As these technologies continue to expand, the incidence of EHS will grow.
Many of these exposures are involuntary and now inescapable. Common outcomes of this are job, school and home loss, separation from family and friends, inability to access medical care and general lack of access to all areas of the public domain. The unmitigated, neglected widespread disruption of lives [III], [IV] is inhumane and deeply troubling.
Our serious concern: EHS is an escalating humanitarian crisis
The European Academy for Environmental Medicine (EUROPAEM)[V] reports that EHS symptoms are occurring in response to low intensity exposures, which are orders of magnitude below the exposure limits currently supported by many governments. Current exposure limits do not protect those with EHS and there are no medical registries or trainings to facilitate appropriate registration or support for this group. Government regulatory agencies should–but do not—investigate claims of harm and update policies to ensure greater protection for, not only the health and welfare of the population[VI], but for plants and animals and their habitats as well[VII]. Due to low medical awareness, most cases of EHS are unrecognized or misdiagnosed, wasting healthcare resources due to inappropriate treatment.
ICBE-EMF has been reviewing multiple types of scientific evidence and individual case reports[VIII] closely and contributing to Electromagnetic Hypersensitivity science. Our goal is to see EHS formally recognized as an EMF-induced external cause of injury by public health agencies worldwide, and greater recognition of the needs of those who are EHS-disabled, so they have access to safer homes, healthcare, education, employment, opportunities, amenities, and equity of access in all public domains. Such recognition should lead to increased public awareness, research funding, and strengthened calls for lower EMF exposure limits. EHS persons must be provided with low EMF spaces for residence, work, school and general public domain access. Low EMF essential spaces need to be urgently established—not just to reduce severity for people with EHS, but to broadly reduce the incidence of EHS.
References:
[i] Electromagnetic hypersensitivity: proceedings, International Workshop on Electromagnetic Field Hypersensitivity, Prague, Czech Republic, October 25-27, 2004, Meeting report, 13 May 2006. https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789241594127
[vi] International Commission on the Biological Effects of Electromagnetic Fields (ICBE-EMF). Scientific evidence invalidates health assumptions underlying the FCC and ICNIRP exposure limit determinations for radiofrequency radiation: implications for 5G. Environ Health. 2022 Oct 18;21(1):92. doi: 10.1186/s12940-022-00900-9. PMID: 36253855; PMCID: PMC9576312. https://icbe-emf.org/wpcontent/uploads/2022/10/ICBE-EMF-paper-12940_2022_900_OnlinePDF_Patched-1.pdf
Posted inUncategorized|Comments Off on ELECTROMAGNETIC HYPERSENSITIVITY (EHS) IS A HUMANITARIAN CRISIS THAT REQUIRES AN URGENT RESPONSE – ICBE-EMF PRESS RELEASE
Senior European scientists are reporting that people living near cell phone towers show significant changes in their genetic makeup. This is the first time that chronic exposure to cell tower radiation has been linked to unrepairable genetic damage.
A team led by Wilhelm Mosgöller of the Medical University of Vienna and Igor Belyaev of the Slovak Academy of Sciences in Bratislava contend that years of low-dose RF exposure can increase the incidence of a number of different types of chromosomal aberrations. Such changes could lead to serious, though uncertain, health consequences, including cancer and neurological disease. (Chromosomes are strands of DNA coiled around proteins.)
The new study is small —but provocative. It’s persuaded Mosgöller and Belyaev that they may have identified a “biologically plausible mechanism” for how RF radiation can cause cancer.
The research team recruited 24 healthy adults with homes in rural Germany. Half lived near a mobile phone base station transmitting LTE/GSM signals at frequencies below 2.5 GHz. They were compared to 12 others, similar in most respects except for their proximity to the tower.
Blood samples were taken from the participants and were assayed for oxidative stress, DNA breaks and chromosomal damage in Belyaev’s lab in Bratislava. A double-blind protocol was followed to guard against potential biases.
The most notable finding is a statistically significant higher incidence of chromosomal aberrations among those living near the tower —the link held for exposures based on both RF measurements and distance from the transmitters.
DNA breaks and oxidative stress were found to be elevated, but neither change reached statistical significance. (Single-strand DNA breaks were significantly higher.) Mosgöller maintains that they could lead to chromosomal damage over the long-term. “It accumulates slowly over time because natural processes cannot repair a broken chromosome,” Mosgöller told me in an extended interview. “The chromosomal aberrations may only become clearly visible after years of exposure.”
Examples of chromosomal aberrations from Mosgöller and Belyaev’s paper (click to expand)
In the paper they submitted for peer review in early February, Mosgöller and Belyaev concluded:
“The most likely cause for this higher rate of chromosomal aberrations in the exposed group appear[s] to be the chronic exposure to the RF-EMF signals GSM 900 and LTE.”
But that sentence does not appear in the paper released by the journal last month.
New paper by Peter Hensinger and Bernd I. Budzinski published in the journal umwelt-medizin-gesellschaft in February 2024 – “Why electrohypersensitivity (EHS) is a biologically expected reaction to harmful radiation”
A new paper by Peter Hensinger and Bernd I. Budzinski published in the journal umwelt-medizin-gesellschaft entitled “Why electrohypersensitivity (EHS) is a biologically expected reaction to harmful radiation” concludes that:
There is a science-based explanation as to why people become electrohypersensitive: The non-ionising radiation from wireless communication leads to oxidative cell stress, this is undisputed in science. Oxidative cell stress leads to inflammatory processes in the organism.
The claim that electrohypersensitivity cannot exist because the limit values protect against the harmful effects of electromagnetic fields is used to market digital products. The ICNIRP limits are scientifically untenable. The argument of a lack of causality is being instrumentalized to undermine the precautionary principle and thus a protection policy.
The effects of non-ionising radiation on the metabolism in the organism have been proven by over a thousand studies. These effects, triggered by EMF, are felt by people with electrohypersensitivity.
The arguments used to cast doubt on electrohypersensitivity are not based on medical-biological facts, but on business interests and expert opinions of convenience. It is damaging to the industry’s business if its products are associated with the consequences of illness. It created the “mental disorder” narrative, a marketing story to protect its products. The authorities continue to spread it and ignore the medical causes.
The letter discusses serious problems with a recent COSMOS paper that provided interim results about brain tumor risk from mobile phone use. The letter calls for a retraction of the paper’s conclusions and demands that the data set be made available to independent investigators who have no industry ties.
COSMOS (“Cohort Study on Mobile Phone Use and Health”) is a 20-30-year cohort study investigating the possible health effects of long-term use of mobile phones and other wireless technologies. The study enrolled over 290,000 mobile phone users from six European countries (Denmark, Finland, France, Sweden, the Netherlands, and the United Kingdom).
The ICBE-EMF is made up of a multidisciplinary consortium of scientists, doctors and related professionals who are involved with research related to the biological and health effects of electromagnetic frequencies up to and including 300 GHz. The organization makes recommendations that include and go beyond establishing numerical exposure guidelines based on the best peer-reviewed scientific research publications.
