The professor at the University of
Padua who, for years, has been fighting on
these issues. "The
legislation to protect the health degenerated
as too permissive." He
attacks the researchers of the Institute of
Health and the World Health organization:
"Too many conflicts of interests." "A Niscemi the permissible
limits are very high"
"In Italy,
with the progress of knowledge, the
legislation of the structures that should
protect the health has been gradually
degenerating into a permissiveness that is
giving rise to concerns appalling". Professor Angelo Gino Levis,
professor of environmental mutagenesis at the
University of Padua and one of the greatest
Italian experts on the health effects of
electromagnetic fields, is skeptical about the
institutions called upon to express an opinion
on the harmfulness of the plant to be built in
Niscemi Muos. Yet it is precisely on
the basis of the opinion given by the
Institute of Health (ISS) and the World Health
Organization (WHO), which depend not only on
the future of the new installation, but also
the largest radio station already exists. "For years these organizations refuse
to recognize what a vast scientific literature
has widely shown - he explains - not necessary
to have 100% certainty in order to establish
the link between the radio and the incidence
of some cancers."
Professor Levis, that opinion has
ISS and WHO?
"Terrible. I clashed
often with the ISS. Several members of the
institute were adverse parties in many
processes on the effects of electromagnetic
radiation on health. WHO then, is experiencing
the second major scandal after what he
suffered for tobacco smoke. has come
to establish the carcinogenicity of smoking
with 20 years behind on what had already been
established by an extensive scientific
literature. "
This is due to a
different opinion on the scientific data?
"No,
the figures speak for themselves, but there
are superstructures that affect these
institutions. Let me give an example: in the
department of WHO electromagnetic fields,
there is a project of the same name, directed
by Michael Repacholi. This scientist had to
admit in public hearings, as that the Australian Parliament, but also
on other occasions - last in order of time the
investigation of the "Report" - to be financed
by power companies and mobile phone. therefore
could not have picked a worse body to give an
opinion on Muos . Especially if you take into
account the numerous conflicts of interest. "
The WHO has not yet given an opinion,
however,
"Yes, but just
look at the classification of electromagnetic
emissions set by the IARC (International
Agency for Research on Cancer) - which is one
of the structures which refer to WHO - to
considerable doubt. Radiation at very low
frequencies and radio frequencies, such as have been
classified - the first in 2001, the second in
2011 - as a possible carcinogen. That is
significant enough evidence with the man, but
with a lack of data on animals and mechanisms
of action. But even here, having made a search on the
participants in research groups that led to
this classification, I found that about 60
percent of them had huge conflicts of
interest. I wrote and published in numerous
scientific journals, and have never been
challenged. In 2002, the founder and former
director of IARC, the Italian Lorenzo Tomatis,
denounced the increase between 10 and 30 per
cent of members of the research groups tainted
by conflicts of interest. "
How should
they be classified electromagnetic waves then?
"In Italy, Peter Comba, one of the best
epidemiologists in business, already in 1998
published reports, also certified by the ISS,
where these frequencies were classified as
probable carcinogens, that is, class 2A,
behind only to ionizing radiation, which are certain carcinogens.
Beyond the classifications, however, you
should always stick to the principle of
precaution, that is, if there are indications,
including non-reliable data, of harmful
effects on human health, we must opt for
zero risk. "
But there are limits
established by law, such as that of 6 volts
per meter, set for a certain range of
frequencies, which fall between the antennas
of the base radio Niscemi.
"Yes, but those limits are in
themselves already very high, because they
have included in the same threshold is the
value of caution that the quality objective,
namely that which one should aspire to avoid
any risk. Among other things, by now very time, especially
in the low frequency range, the principle of
the primacy of human health over commercial
interests was adopted by the Italian
judiciary. In practice, even if there are
limits set by law, the court must also take
into account what signals the expert appointed by him, on the
basis of scientific developments that occurred
in the meantime. limits for radio frequencies,
for example, has set them a decree of 2003,
ten years have passed since then and while
knowledge is advanced. One can not disregard . And then there are
the radar, which have a heavy effect on the
health and tumor incidence, but which are not
normed, ie not have exposure thresholds
because they have pulsed waves. "
In
the base there is also an antenna Nrtf low
frequency (46KHz) for which there is provided
a legal limit, but only a European opinion
that indicates a threshold of 86 V / m
"It's
exactly what I said. Limits are crazy, that
have nothing to do with the protection of
health. There are holes in the legislation and
the worst thing is that you end up choosing
the highest value. The 86 V / m is the limit for acute
effects, that is, those that occur in a short
time. The damage from prolonged exposure to
lower levels is not even taken into
consideration, but nearby there are housing
and is paradoxical only take account of that
value. Economic interests in the field
make these rules very lax. "
What are the limits for
exposure more confident in your opinion?
"The 6 V / m are by no means a
precautionary limit. The independent science
has long given very different opinions from
those followed by legislation. Regional laws
enacted in the late nineties and early 2000s,
for example, staring at a precautionary value of
0.5 V / m, which was then removed from the
Cabinet Decree of 2003. "
At
the official level the link between exposure
to electromagnetic waves and cancer incidence
has never been enshrined. "It is not true, as
claimed by the ISS and WHO colleagues, who do
not know the mechanisms of action. Today we
are well aware of at least 6-7 mechanisms that
can lead to the development of cancer, both
from low and high / high frequencies. When it comes
to the health of the people you can not only
take into account the 100% certainty, but also
of the higher probability. "
What do we know
of the effects of antennas installed in
Niscemi?
"I do
not have sufficient information to give an
answer. But I know that primary care
physicians in the country have launched a
mapping of tumor incidences. Epidemiological
data that I've seen have impressed me, but I
have no comparison with the data of overall
mortality of Sicily or
Italy by type of cancer. only way to tell if
these impacts are significant or not. Among
other things, there must take into account the
various factors pollutants, such as near Gela
petrochemical, and also the historical data on
mortality. "
The
antennas have a beam of Muos very powerful,
but very directional, so in the reports we
speak of "negligible effect" outside of the
bundle "It is true, or at
least it should be. But the scientific
literature is full of cases of cancers
contracted by people who live around the radar
and not directly exposed to the beam. A sign
that there is always some margin of error. But
this can be ascertain the
neutral experts that go to make measurements.
On this point you have to watch very
carefully. "