Historically, corporations remain blind to health concerns raised against their products. Many examples exist of products & services which are later confirmed as very harmful.
- Asbestos, and Lead to name a few
There was once a time when the cumulative effect of smoking was denied by health authorities on the basis of flawed industry funded research. The same is now happening with wireless devices.
Despite a plethora of scientific literature demonstrating the risks associated with exposure to various EMR emitting devices companies with vested interests refuse to take precautionary measures in an effort to maintain their profits margins. The cherry pick the data and deny the results of any contradictory research.
It is no surprise that scientific reviews assessing the influence of financial interests in environmental health research have found strong associations between industry funded research and pro-industry conclusions.
Dr Martin Blank reports in his book Overpowered: “Since 1990, Dr Herny Lai has been tracking the studies of health effects of RF radiation on humans published around the world. He has hundreds of studies in his database. Approximately 30% of the studies are funded by the wireless industry and 70% are funded by other sources that are presumably more independent. Of the industry-funded studies, 27% demonstrated a biological effect in humans resulting from RF exposure; whereas independently funded studies found such effects in 68% of the studies.”
"A lot of studies that are done right now are done purely as PR tools for the industry."
-Dr Henry Lai
Is Industry Aware of the Health Effects?
Yes. For example, the 2000 Ecolog report commissioned by T-Mobile and Deutsche Telecom MobilNet GmbH describes the science showing biological effects from cell phone radiation including gene toxicity, cellular processes, effects on the immune system, central nervous system, hormone systems and connections with cancer and infertility. The report states that:
- “Given the results of the present epidemiological studies, it can be concluded that electromagnetic fields with frequencies in the mobile telecommunications range do play a role in the development of cancer.”
- “Impairment of cognitive functions was found in animal experiments at power flux densities of 2W/m2. In humans, there are indications that brain functions are influenced by fields such as they occur when using a mobile telephone.”“An epidemiological study of children who had been exposed to pulsed high frequency fields, found a decrease in the capability to concentrate and an increase in reaction times.”
- “Effects of high frequency electromagnetic fields on the central nervous system are proven for intensities well below the current guidelines.”
The following investigative reports on industry influence summarise the issue:
- The Harvard Press Book “Captured Agency: How the Federal Communications Commission is Dominated by the Industries it Presumably Regulates, by Norm Alster, documents the financial ties between the US federal government’s Federal communications Commission (FCC) and how, as a result, the wireless industry has bought inordinate access to—and power over—a major US regulatory agency.
- “The Disinformation Campaign—And Massive Radiation Increase—Behind The 5G Rollout” by Mark Hertsgaard And Mark Dowie in The Nation April 23, 2018.
- “Health and Cellphones: How Wireless Made Us Think Cell Phones Are Safe” Your Call, KALW 91.7FM San Francisco explores “how big wireless companies used the same playbook as big oil and big tobacco to deceive the public” with guests Dr. Devra Davis and Mark Hertsgaard.
Does Industry Funding Influence Research Results?
Huss, Anke, et al. “Source of Funding and Results of Studies of Health Effects of Mobile Phone Use: Systematic Review of Experimental Studies.”Environmental Health Perspectives, vol. 115, no. 1, 2007, pp. 1-4.
This 2007 systematic review examined whether the source of funding of studies of the effects of low-level radiofrequency radiation is associated with the results of studies and found industry funded studies were substantially less likely to report effects.
“We examined the methodologic quality and results of experimental studies investigating the effects of the type of radiofrequency radiation emitted by handheld cellular telephones. We hypothesized that studies would be less likely to show an effect of the exposure if funded by the telecommunications industry, which has a vested interest in portraying the use of mobile phones as safe. We found that the studies funded exclusively by industry were indeed substantially less likely to report statistically significant effects on a range of end points that may be relevant to health. Conclusions: The interpretation of results from studies of health effects of radiofrequency radiation should take sponsorship into account.”
Prasad, M., et al. “Mobile phone use and risk of brain tumours: a systematic review of association between study quality, source of funding, and research outcomes.” Neurological Sciences, 2017.
“In our review of the literature and meta-analysis of case–control studies, we found evidence linking mobile phone use and risk of brain tumours especially in long-term users (greater than 10 years). We also found a significantly positive correlation between study quality and outcome in the form of risk of brain tumour associated with use of mobile phones. Higher quality studies show a statistically significant association between mobile phone use and risk of brain tumour. Even the source of funding was found to affect the quality of results produced by the studies.”
Starkey, Sarah J. “Inaccurate official assessment of radiofrequency safety by the Advisory Group on Non-ionising Radiation” Reviews on Environmental Health, vol. 31, no. 4, 2016.
This review analyzes the Advisory Group on Non-ionising Radiation (AGNIR) 2012 report which guides Public Health England and details the inaccuracies, omissions and conflict of interest “which make it unsuitable for health risk assessment”. The review states that the “executive summary and overall conclusions did not accurately reflect the scientific evidence available” and the “conflict of interest critically needs to be addressed for the forthcoming World Health Organisation (WHO) Environmental Health Criteria Monograph on Radiofrequency Fields”.
Testra Chair Falls Prey to the Ad Hominem Fallacy
Ad hominem is a Latin word that means “against the man.” As the name suggests, it is a literary term that involves commenting on or against an opponent, to undermine him instead of his arguments.
In response to a question from a share holder, Telstra chair John Mullen said that “there is absolutely not one shred of evidence that 5G or for that matter, 4G, has any harmful effect on humans,” despite a plethora of academic evidence demonstratng the risk to health. Mullen then further likened those with concerns relating to 5G to “anti-vaxers” and “flat earthers” as a way of undermining their intellect and credibility.
In response to Mullen, the shareholder claimed they were “electrically sensitive”, therefore “don’t care what your studies may or may not approve, because I feel it”. “I can see you’re a very sensitive person and so am I to this issue,” Mullen said. “We will do the right thing I can assure you.”
Thousands of people are suffering from the effects of microwave exposures, yet it is clear industry is not listening or addressing the concerns of their consumers. Vested interests and financial pursuits prove to be more important, than the health and safety of the public.
Industry Influences Policy
Australian Advisory Organisations Are Biased
The several “conflict of interests” of both ICNIRP and ARPANSA members due to their relationships with telecommunications or electric companies undermine the impartiality that should govern the regulation of Public Exposure Standards for non-ionizing radiation.
How You Can Help
Telecom Companies, Device Manufacturers, Health Providers, Legal Advisers, Scientists, Media, Educators, Employers must all play their role in responding to EMR dangers. Industries knowingly promoting dangerous technologies and profiting off the ignorance of their consumers must be held accountable.
Locally, and internationally, the winds of change are in place. And whilst TelCos rush to deploy EMR Installations to cover dropping revenues (since its cheaper than digging holes and burying cables), the Public are clamouring for transparency and accountability. Just as they have done before with Cigarettes, Thalidomide, Asbestos, Lead Petrol, Mercury in Dental Amalgams and more.
Council & Community Awareness
As public exposure to wireless technology increases, so does the risk to public health. Although many are becoming aware of EMF, many communities do not fully understand the the risks associated with prolonged exposure. Learn how to protect your community by spreading awareness and lobbying local members of government to ensure the safety of their consitutents.
Object To An Installation
Is there an exisitng or proposed mobile phone tower/ small cell installation close to your home, school and/or workplace? You have the the right to object to wireless infrastructure that irriadiates you and your family. Follow our step by step guide to learn how.
EMR Legal Options
Its imperative to any legal action, (whether it goes to court or not) to be precise, keep records, cite all your authorities, research deeply and avoid quoting less-credible sources. Follow these steps to assist you and your solicitor in the pursuit of legal action against EMF exposure.
Become A Member
Become a member of Safe EMF Education Network Inc. for one-on-one guidance, access to info-packs, letter templates, 10% off merchandise, 50% off a professional EMF home assessment via the services of a qualified Building Biologist, and more! We are here to help protect you and your family from EMF expsoure in your home and throughout the community.