There are no studies proving that cell phone radiation affect humans in the first place?

[news....@googlemail.com]

Regarding Prof' Dariusz Leszczynski's blog/ column:

This sentence alone, should raise a red flag  in the mind of any activist regarding the difference between debating science and doubting science:

 

"There are no studies proving that cell phone radiation affect humans in the first place."  

 

It should raise a red flag regarding the influence of this "critique" on public knowledge, understanding of the body of evidence and awareness of the effects of their cell phones on them - the innocent, unsuspecting readers. Who does this serve? the industry, of course.

 

Who should lead public debate? this message advanced like a brainwash,  by the columns and blog,

or the Bioinitiative report?

 

"we have variety of  indications of  possible health effects"  - 

Is this the actual situation? since the '60- there are "indications" only, on this type of radiation? 

is this a joke?

 

"Hardell studies, known for their limited usefulness" -  Really? to whom?

 

"There is not much knowledge [on humans]  besides effects on blood pressure or heart beat, functions of human body that can be easily affected by experimental setting." 

 

This is a denial, attributing effects to experimental settings, and ignoring other effects.

Please activists notice -  are you being led to believe this is a pure unbiased scientific debate? 

 

"The primary reason for recommending precautionary action is not what we know but rather what we do not know"

 

This is a denial that there is a scientific basis for precaution, and it's what we know, not what we don't know. The professor presents what we don't know as the basis for precaution. Why? why deny already achieved knowledge?   

 

The new report is very important:  a. it is non industry funding (rare)

b. it is mainstream medical people calling for precaution- this is a precedent.

This is great, not something to smash several days after it's published. This is something to advance because it brings public awareness.

 

http://communities.washingtontimes.com/neighborhood/between-rock-and-hard-place/2012/feb/4/new-nothing-new-cell-phone-report/

 

"Authors bring attention to the controversy surrounding studies published in REFLEX project."

Below more info on the REFLEX,  against the seeding of confusion.

Regarding REFLEX

 

Mr. Jakob from Gigaherz was present at the meeting of June 29, 2006. Mr. Jakob insisted in knowing whether Prof. Primo Schär could confirm Adlkofer’s finding re the »number of single- and double-strand breaks in the DNA as a result of high [6] and extremely low-frequency electromagnetic fields«. Reluctantly, Prof. Schär admitted that the counting made at Novartis’ laboratories found an even greater number of strand breaks in the DNA. »At this point in time (my remark: in 2006) these research results are unpublished; but, when published, we will report on them here in ERCIM News«. Most probably these results will never be published: Prof. Primo Schär receives research funding from FSM …

 ----- Original Message -----

*From:* Eileen O'Connor
*Sent:* Thursday, November 08, 2007 12:39 PM
*Subject:* Adlkofer suggests connection between ERK-cascade and
DNA-damage by EMF

Adlkofer was the leader of the Reflex-project (?Risk evaluation of
potential environmental hazards from low energy electromagnetic fields
exposure using sensitive in vitro methods'). The research found a
significant increase of DNA-breaking and micro-nuclei in certain cells
influenced by non-thermal high frequency fields. The Chinese researcher
Xu (a member of a committee of ICNIRP) had found the same before in
2005. The observations were confirmed by Schär of the University of
Basel, Switzerland, but could not be confirmed by Speit of the
University of Ulm, Germany. Why not, is unclear. As a matter of fact,
many more scientists found a significant increase of DNA-breaking, among
them Gandhi in India, who tested in vivo (living people with and without
mobile phone)

 

Source: www.microwavenews.com, 15 November 2010

Just last year, Switzerland's Primo Schär reported significant DNA fragmentation at 1mT. (See also "Faulty DNA Repair May Explain EMF Role in Childhood Leukemia.") Is anyone going to hold ICNIRP accountable for these errors and biases?

 Meanwhile, the REFLEX study under Professor F. Adlkofer, was making measurements on isolated cells to see if these were effected by a high or low-frequency (power-line frequency) EMF (electro-magnetic field). Quoting from the report: "The main goal of the REFLEX project was to investigate the effects of EMF on single cells in vitro at the molecular level below the energy density reflected by the present safety levels."[5] The study showed that in certain human cell types there was indeed a significant increase in the number of single- and double-strand breaks in the DNA as a result of high [6] and extremely low-frequency electromagnetic fields [5].

These results fascinated Professor Primo Schaer at the Center for Biomedicine at the University of Basel. In a talk at a meeting on June 29 of this year, organized by the Swiss Research Foundation for Mobile Communication (my remark: funded by the phone industry), Professor Schaer gave a preliminary report on his own experiments which confirm the work in Vienna, showing that intermittent extremely low frequency fields can result in damage to DNA. At this point in time these research results are unpublished; but, when published, we will report on them here in ERCIM News. Professor Schaer emphasized that some DNA damages are repaired by the DNA repair mechanism. Thus, the observed genotoxic effects do not necessarily mean that EMF is carcinogenic for the human.

Ercim News 67, October 2006