Position Statement on low level electromagnetic fields upto 300 GHz provided by the Institution of Engineering and Technology

[news....@googlemail.com]

http://www.theiet.org/factfiles/bioeffects/emf-position-page.cfm

Position Statement on low level electromagnetic fields upto 300 GHz provided by the Institution of Engineering and Technology.

The Institution of Engineering and Technology (IET) has a special interest in any possible health effects of occupational exposure to electromagnetic fields (EMFs) as well as in any due to exposure of the population at large. The IET remains determined to be at the forefront of rigorously examining the scientific evidence for any such effects and identifying any hazards as early as possible. To this end it maintains its Biological Effects Policy Advisory Group on low-level electromagnetic fields (BEPAG).

BEPAG has concluded that the balance of scientific evidence to date still does not indicate that harmful effects* occur in humans due to low-level exposure to EMFs. This conclusion remains reassuringly the same as that reached in its previous position statements, the last being in May 2010, and has not been substantially altered by the peer-reviewed literature published in the past two years.**

http://www.theiet.org/factfiles/bioeffects/emf-position-page.cfm?type=pdf

* "...that the balance of scientific evidence to date still does not indicate that harmful effects...". No one would do like this if it came down to a professional (or private) risk analysis; this is not serious. It lends itself to thoughts of possible scam, spin and fraud!!!

** The sentence "This conclusion remains reassuringly the same as that reached in its previous position statements, the last being in May 2010, and has not been substantially altered by the peer-reviewed literature published in the past two years" does not reassure me at all. It instead makes me very worried. Are the persons employed in the BEPAG really in touch with the same reality as the rest of us, including the recent Italian Supreme Court reality?!

++++++

Always remember my words: "Another misunderstanding is the use of scientific publications (as the tobacco industry did for many years) as 'weights' to balance each other. But you can NEVER balance a report showing a negative health effect with one showing nothing! This is a misunderstanding which, unfortunately, is very often used both by the industrial representatives as well as official authorities. The general audience, naturally, easily is fooled by such an argumentation, but if you are bitten by a deadly poisonous snake, what good does it make for you that there are 100 million harmless snakes around?"

Olle Johansson, professor
The Experimental Dermatology Unit
Department of Neuroscience
Karolinska Institute
171 77 Stockholm
Sweden