Teachers' Unions in Germany, UK, USA and Canada Who Have Done Their Research Do Not Support WiFi in Schools

EdTech companies keep pushing for MORE wireless in classrooms, saying RF/EMF is safe when official agencies lack long-term data of health impact from exposure on children.

All these unions below have done their research about the health risks of WiFi and cellphones and are fighting to protect the health of their adult members in the workplace.

Why would school boards choose to increase the exposure to school children?

What kind of liabilities are school boards prepared to bear, for knowingly putting children under unnecessary and involuntary exposure to an IARC Class 2B Possible Carcinogen?

United Federation of Teachers - 200,000 teachers and educational professionals in New York City (2014)

Advisory: Wireless radiation is emitted by the myriad of wireless devices we encounter every day. It was once thought to be relatively harmless. However, we now know that wireless radiation can cause non-thermal biological effects as well, including damage to cells and DNA, even at low levels.

Reducing Your Exposure to Wireless Radiation
Some tips to reduce your exposure to wireless radiation.

What You Need to Know About Wireless Radiation and Your Baby
Taking certain precautions around wireless radiation is appropriate for our most vulnerable populations, including pregnant women.

http://www.uft.org/our-rights/wireless-radiation

Canadian Teachers' Federation - over 200,000 teachers across Canada (2013)
Recommendations

• That Safety Code 6 include a recommendation for prudent use of Wi-Fi whenever possible including the recommendation to limit consistent exposure in schools by turning off wireless access points when not in use.
• That Safety Code 6 exposure thresholds be based upon both thermal and biological effects of exposure to Wi-Fi
• That the Expert Panel recommend an education program regarding the relative safety of Wi-Fi exposure and that appropriate resources be developed to educate the public regarding ways to avoid potential exposure risks of Wi-Fi access points and devices.”
  

http://www.ctf-fce.ca/Research-Library/BrieftoExpertpanel.pdf


Elementary Teacher's Federation of Ontario - over 76,000 teachers (2013):
ETFO's adopted resolutions:
 "That ETFO study the impact of non-ionizing electromagnetic radiation, including the possible implications for schools and members, with a report with recommendations to the February 2014 Representative Council.
 Rationale:
There are growing health and safety concerns regarding the widespread use of technologies which produce and emit non-ionizing electromagnetic radiation. It is estimated that over one million Canadians have an environmental sensitivity to this radiation and experience serious physical and biological effects. As has been the case with other known societal health dangers, the health effects of long-term exposure to this radiation may not be known for some time. Widespread exposure to wireless communication devices and infrastructure in Ontario schools can be a potential workplace hazard. Further study is needed to ensure the safety of members."
 “That ETFO, through OTF, lobby the Ministry of Education, the Ministry or Labour, and the Ministry of Health to ensure that school boards:
 1. Follow the 'Right to Know" legislation under the Ontario’s Occupational Health and Safety Act by clearly labelling the location Of Wi-Fi access points
2. Develop a hazard control program related to wireless microwave radiation through the Joint Health and Safety Committee (JHSC).”
http://annualmeeting.ca/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/Session-71.pdf (#1 & 17)


British Columbia Teachers' Federation - 41,000 public school teachers (2013)
BCTF adopted resolution to protect teachers' health: "The BCTF supports members who are suffering from electromagnetic hypersensitivity by ensuring that their medical needs are accommodated in the workplace."


Greater Victoria Teachers' Association - 1,500 teachers (2013)
"The GVTA recommends a precautionary approach to the School District with regard to provision of wireless internet in schools.
The precautionary approach comes from the environmental movement and has been adopted as common practice in areas regarding potential environmental, ecological or biodiversity damage. It suggests that the lack of significant evidence is not enough of a reason to be unconcerned. The fact that many other countries have instituted regulations to protect children, seniors, pregnant women and other susceptible populations should be the guide for a District policy on WiFi installation and use in the worksites...”
http://gvta.net/index.php/health-safety/2013-02-20-23-22-17

United Teachers of Los Angeles - 40,000 teachers and staff (2013)

http://ehtrust.org/la-teachers-union-passes-resolution-to-ensure-safety-from-hazardous-electromagnetic-fields-emf-in-schools-including-emf-emissions-from-wireless-technology/

UTLA passed the following motion by a sweeping majority:

“I move that UTLA will abide by current National NEA Policy for Environmentally Safe Schools which states that all employees and stakeholders should be informed when there are changes in their exposure to environmental hazards including electromagnetic radiation and that all stakeholders and the public should be notified of any actual and potential hazards. UTLA will advocate for technological solutions that maintain technology upgrades while not increasing employees exposure to electromagnetic radiation.”

The Ontario English Catholic Teachers Association - 37,000 teachers (2012)
A position regarding the use of Non-Ionizing Electromagnetic Radiation, including WiFi, in the workplace:
Summary
1. We do not know what the long-term effects of low-level non-ionizing radiation are on those who are exposed (workers and students). No form of radiation can be deemed ‘safe’ as it depends on the constitution of the individual exposed, the amount of exposure as well as a sufficient amount of time to pass to observe any health effects that have a long latency period (i.e. cancer).
  2. The WHO has classified low-level non-ionizing radiation in the microwave band associated with celluar phones as a class 2b carcinogen (possible carcinogen) and Health Canada has warned about limiting the use of handheld personal electronic equipment such as cellular phones among youth. Initializing WiFi for personal electronic equipment will result in an unpredictable exposure as use varies.
 3. A segment of the population are environmentally sensitive (a disability according to the Canadian Human Rights Commission) to low level non-ionizing radiation and may experience immediate physical/biological reactions when exposed.
 4. Employers including School Boards have the duty to accommodate persons with disabilities including that of electro-hypersensitivity. A widespread investment in a redundant WiFi network may limit the ability to reduce WiFi exposure thereby accommodating workers with an electro-hypersensitivity disability.
 5. The safety of this technology has not thoroughly been researched and therefore the precautionary principle and prudent avoidance of exposure should be practiced.
 6. The purposeful introduction of non-ionizing radiation transmitters, such as WiFi, into the work place is considered to be the introduction of new equipment that presents a potential health and safety hazard for workers. As such, it is the duty of the Joint Health and Safety Committee to develop a hazard control program to; assess the risk of injury from the potential hazard, recommend controls to be applied to address the hazards, and to monitor the effectiveness of the applied controls.
 7. Administrative and physical control methods to address the hazards of non-ionizing radiation, such as WiFi, in the workplace are readily available and relatively easy to apply. Application of controls would be completely consistent with the ALARA (As Low As Reasonably Achievable) approach and the precautionary principles as well as the general duty clause, Section 25 (2)(h) of the Occupational Health and Safety Act.
 Recommendations
 I. OECTA recognizes that there is a growing concern regarding the potential adverse health effects of the use of wireless technology which requires the broadcasting of non-ionizing electromagnetic radiation, typically in the radio/microwave frequency band.
 II. OECTA recognizes that the installation of WiFi microwave transmitters and the expanded use of wireless devices in Catholic schools and educational facilities across the Province of Ontario may present a potential Health and Safety risk or hazard in the workplace.
 III. OECTA recognizes the need to provide information to the Joint Health and Safety Committee(s) at the local Unit level regarding the potential hazards and prudent avoidance control measures regarding the presence of non-ionizing radiation (WiFi) in the workplace such that they may exercise their powers as established under S. 9(18) the Occupational Health and Safety Act (OHSA).
 IV. OECTA post this position paper on the OECTA website.
http://www.oecta.on.ca/wps/wcm/connect/6a665c0049fedbee85919db62552ca8d/WiFipositionpaper2.pdf?MOD=AJPERES

UK: Voice - The Union for Education Professionals - 20,000 members

http://www.voicetheunion.org.uk/index.cfm?cid=495 (2009) 
http://blog.voicetheunion.org.uk/?p=1097 (2013)

 “In the last few years there has been a great weight of evidence from around the world which suggests that exposure to electromagnetic radiation can have long-term health impacts, particularly on children, and that exposing young children (from birth to 12) to electromagnetic radiation (EMR) can produce changes in cell formation, genetic changes, and potential cancers.

Exposure levels are only half the story; length of exposure is crucial too. Long exposures at lower intensity levels may be as damaging as high exposure levels for short periods hence our concern about wireless networks in schools and nurseries.

It is a considerable concern that in schools we are installing wi-fi systems and we have no clear evidence that they are safe. Our concern is that until they are declared to be safe and proven to be safe we should not be installing them in schools.

The difficulty is that once installed in schools, they are switched on constantly. Whether the children are using them or not, they are exposed to that level of radiation.

Voice has advocated that new wi-fi systems should not be installed in schools, that existing systems should be turned off when not required and that schools should consider whether they really need to use wi-fi, which was developed to facilitate Internet access on the move rather than to be used as a convenient alternative to cables in dedicated IT facilities.”

UK ATL: Association of Teachers and Lecturers - more than 160,000 members (2009) http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/educationnews/5125161/Wifi-in-school-should-be-stopped-say-teachers.html


UK PAT: Professional Association of Teachers - 35,000 members (2007) http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1549419/Teachers-voice-fears-of-Wi-Fi-health-risk.html


Germany GEW: Gewerkschaft Erziehung und Wissenschaft (Education and Science Workers’ Union) - 260,000 members
2003 http://t.co/EQaUodrq7W
2006 http://t.co/7S0gOWoPkN

* * *

(2013) Members of 5 major unions in France which represented workers of the following large corporations and organizations protested to demand reduction of electromagnetic radiation in their work place.
http://www.20minutes.fr/ledirect/1096131/appel-syndicalistes-reduire-ondes-travail

The Bank of France

France Telecom Orange

L'Oréal (Cosmetics giant)

The City of Paris

RATP (Autonomous Operator of Parisian Transports - a state-owned public transport operation)

Geodis (A leading Transport and Logistics company in Europe)

The Bibliothèque Nationale de France (National Library of France)

American Academy of Pediatrics: New Media Policy & Call for Protection of Children and Pregnant Women from Wireless Radiation

The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP ) just updated their policy statement on media usage by children and youth. The new policy statement offers recommendations for parents:

• Parents can model effective “media diets” to help their children learn to be selective and healthy in what they consume. Take an active role in children’s media education by co-viewing programs with them and discussing values.  
• Make a media use plan, including mealtime and bedtime curfews for media devices. Screens should be kept out of kids’ bedrooms.  
• Limit entertainment screen time to less than one or two hours per day; in children under 2, discourage screen media exposure. 

Read more: http://www.aap.org/en-us/about-the-aap/aap-press-room/pages/Managing-Media-We-Need-a-Plan.aspx

As well, the American Academy of Pediatrics has published 3 letters in the past 2 years calling for the adoption of the Precautionary Principle by protecting children and pregnant women from radiation emitted by cellphones and wireless devices. They also demand that the FCC revises its inadequate and outdated exposure guidelines and testing protocols (which happens to be the same as Health Canada's). 

The AAP represents 60,000 pediatricians and pediatric surgeons. 

August 29, 2013:

http://bemri.org/component/docman/cat_view/2-publications/5-biological-effects-of-non-ionizing-radiation/14-mobile-phones.html?limit=20&order=hits&dir=ASC&limitstart=0

July 12, 2012:

http://www.citizensforsafetechnology.org/uploads/scribd/AAP_07-12-12%20FCC%20cell%20phone%20radiation%20ltr.pdf

December 12, 2012:

http://citizensforsafetechnology.org/uploads/scribd/AAP_Letter%20to%20Kucinich_Dec%202012%20(1).pdf

iPads: How Safe Are Our Children?

TheGreenGazette July-August 2013

In the past few years, iPad has become many adults’ best friend and children’s babysitter. It is used as a computer, eBook reader, camera, video/music player, word processor, communication device, drawing tool, game pad, and more.

Apple says, “Read all safety information below and operating instructions before using iPad to avoid injury.” The safety information provided with purchase is a small booklet of 3 1/4" x 5", with text so tiny it is practically illegible without magnifying glasses. As a result, most people have never read the following:

“iPad contains radio transmitters and receivers. When on, iPad sends and receives radio frequency (RF) energy through its antenna. The Wi-Fi and Bluetooth® antennas are located behind the screen to the left of the Home button, and behind the Apple logo... A cellular antenna is located at the top edge of iPad Wi-Fi+3G, when oriented with the Home button at the bottom.”

When ifixit.com dissected a Wi-Fi+3G iPad, they discovered not three but five antennas, including the frame of the LCD screen being a giant antenna.

“... to be sure that human exposure to RF energy does not exceed the FCC, IC, and European Union guidelines, always follow these instructions and precautions: Orient the device in portrait mode with the Home button at the bottom of the display, or in landscape mode with the cellular antenna (located under the black edge at the top of the device) away from your body or other objects...”

This means if you don’t handle the iPad exactly as instructed, the RF radiation can exceed governments’ limits for human exposure. Unfortunately, most parents and teachers have no idea about this, and have never communicated the manufacturer’s instructions to children who are using iPads.

The user manual recommends: “you can further limit your exposure by limiting the amount of time using iPad Wi-Fi+3G in wireless mode, since time is a factor in how much exposure a person receives, and by placing more distance between your body and iPad Wi-Fi + 3G, since exposure level drops off dramatically with distance.”

RF/EMF: 2B Possible Carcinogen

In 2011, the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) of the World Health Organization (WHO) classified radiofrequency electromagnetic fields emitted by wireless communication devices as Type 2B Possible Carcinogen to Humans. The monograph states: “The general population receives the highest exposure from transmitters close to the body... In children... deposition of RF energy may be two times higher in the brain and up to ten times higher in the bone marrow of the skull than in adult users.” The WHO report concluded that additional research is important and advised the public, particularly young adults and children, to take pragmatic measures to reduce exposure.

Comparison between iPad and cellphone radiation

The published radiation level of mobile devices is called Specific Absorption Rate (SAR). An iPad on WiFi/3G has an SAR of 0.76-1.19 W/kg, compared to the SAR of an iPhone on GSM/CDMA at 0.547-1.18 W/kg. Many other cellphones have even lower SAR value than the iPhone.

Governments of some countries including Canada have issued warnings on children’s use of cellphones. With iPad’s radiation level being similar to cellphones, the same caution should be taken. Health Canada, “encourages parents to reduce children’s RF exposure... since children are typically more sensitive” and “there is currently a lack of scientific information regarding the potential health impacts of cellphones on children.”

Health Canada advises the following: Limit the length of cellphone calls; replace cellphone calls with text messages or use hands-free devices; and encourage children under the age of 18 to limit their cell phone usage.

Just as we would not put an actively transmitting cellphone against a child’s head for hours a day, we should not put an actively transmitting iPad against the reproductive organ or other parts of a child’s body for hours a day.

900 blasts of radiofrequency per hour

When the WiFi antenna in an iPad is turned on, it emits a burst of radiofrequency approximately every four seconds. That makes 900 blasts per hour in the child’s hands, on his lap, or at his face. This does not include any additional data signals resulting from uploading and downloading activities. Moreover, the blasts at four-second intervals occur even when the user is not accessing the Internet. In other words, even if a child is only using the iPad to draw or to play a game, he still receives 900 blasts an hour as long as the WiFi antenna is left on.

Between 2008 and 2011, the European Union Parliament and the Council of Europe passed multiple resolutions against the “early, ill-considered, and prolonged use of mobiles and other devices emitting microwaves.” Many medical associations in North America and Europe have also issued public statements to warn about the serious health risks associated with using wireless devices. Among them, the American Academy of Environmental Medicine wrote:

“In September 2010, the Journal of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine - Fertility and Sterility reported that only four hours of exposure to a standard laptop using WiFi caused DNA damage to human sperm.”

“Multiple studies correlate radiofrequency exposure with diseases such as cancer, neurological disease, reproductive disorders, immune dysfunction, and electromagnetic hypersensitivity... Other neurological and cognitive disorders such as headaches, dizziness, tremors, decreased memory and attention, autonomic nervous system dysfunction, decreased reaction times, sleep disturbances, and visual disruptions have been reported to be statistically significant in multiple epidemiological studies with radiofrequency exposure occurring non-locally.”

With the proliferation of the wireless industry, it might not be possible to eliminate all sources of RF radiation. However, a good start is to follow the European parliaments’ advice for an exposure level called A.L.A.R.A. (as low as reasonably achievable). The following resolution was adopted by the BC Confederation of Parent Advisory Council this year. While these steps were proposed for schools, they are also useful for reduction of unnecessary exposure at home:

1. to provide on/off switches to WiFi routers; 

2. to establish a protocol of use that 
    (i) WiFi routers and WiFi/3G functions of computers/laptops/tablets are to be turned on only when they are  needed for access to the Internet via the wireless network; and, 
    (ii) Bluetooth function is to be turned on only if it is needed for accessing other Bluetooth-enabled devices. 

3. to observe safety warnings and follow safety instructions in the user manual of iPad by reducing the duration of use under wireless mode and keeping the iPads away from the students’ bodies. 

Note that putting an iPad on airplane mode will initially turn off all antennas on the iPad. However, WiFi and bluetooth antennas can be re-enabled without switching off the airplane mode. Therefore, an iPad showing airplane mode “on” is not a guarantee that all the antennas are off. It is important to check the antennas separately. In addition, when the WiFi function on an iPad shows “Not Connected,” it does not mean the antenna is off. It only means the iPad is not logged onto any available wireless network. To ensure the WiFi antenna is turned off, the WiFi function must read “off.”

Differences between the iPad and an AM/FM Radio

The “radio” frequency emitted by iPad is often confused with AM/FM radio waves. The two actually differ in the following ways: (1) AM/FM radio utilizes analogue signals with a continuous waveform (see diagram below). iPad (via 3G or WiFi) emits digital signals in the form of pulsed microwave, similar to cellphone and DECT cordless phones. Pulsed microwave digital signal has sharp spikes in its waveform. (2) AM/FM radio is one-way transmission, with the listeners at the receiving end only. iPad antennas, on the other hand, work in constant two-way communication. iPad is not only a receiver but also a transmitter of pulsed microwave. The user of an iPad on wireless mode is in direct or close contact with the pulsed microwave signal at its source, which is the strongest.

 Graphic adapted from EMfields.

Reference for this article: http://goo.gl/AHE1Z For more information on wireless radiation, its health effects and scientific basis, and video of RF measurements, please visit the following websites: www.safeinschool.org, www.wiredchild.org, www.citizensforsafetechnology.org

TheGreenGazette

Solutions for living green and achieving self-sufficiency https://interactivepdf.uniflip.com/2/60627/289518/pub/

Lisa Bland, Publisher / Editor-in-Chief:  info@thegreengazette.ca

Download this article in a flyer format: 
http://citizensforsafetechnology.org/uploads/scribd/iPads-are-they-safe-for-children-Flyer.pdf

More Health and Safety Warnings from the iPad User Manual:

Seizures, Blackouts, and Eyestrain

A small percentage of people may be susceptible to blackouts or seizures (even if they have never had one before) when exposed to flashing lights or light patterns such as when playing games or watching video. If you have experienced seizures

or blackouts or have a family history of such occurrences, you should consult a physician before playing games or watching videos on your iPad. Discontinue use of iPad and consult a physician if you experience headaches, blackouts, seizures, convulsion, eye or muscle twitching, loss of awareness, involuntary movement, or disorientation. To reduce risk of headaches, blackouts, seizures, and eyestrain, avoid prolonged use, hold iPad some distance from your eyes, use iPad in a well-lit room, and take frequent breaks.

Glass Parts

The outside cover of the iPad screen is made of glass. This glass could break if iPad is dropped on a hard surface or receives a substantial impact. If the glass chips or cracks, do not touch or attempt to remove the broken glass and stop using iPad. Glass cracked due to misuse or abuse is not covered under the warranty.

Radio Frequency Interference

Radio-frequency emissions from electronic equipment can negatively affect the operation of other electronic equipment, causing them to malfunction... the wireless transmitters and electrical circuits in iPad Wi-Fi + 3G may cause interference in other electronic equipment. Therefore, please take the following precautions:

Aircraft

Use of iPad may be prohibited while traveling in aircraft.

For more information about using Airplane Mode to turn off the iPad wireless transmitters, see the iPad User Guide.

Vehicles

Radio frequency emissions from iPad may affect electronic systems in motor vehicles. Check with the manufacturer or its representative regarding your vehicle.

Pacemakers

The Health Industry Manufacturers Association recommends that a minimum separation of 15 cm (6 inches) be maintained between a handheld wireless phone and a pacemaker to avoid potential interference with the pacemaker.

Persons with pacemakers: Should always keep iPad more than 15 cm (6 inches) from the pacemaker when the wireless device is turned on.

If you have any reason to suspect that interference is taking place, turn iPad off

immediately (press and hold the Sleep/Wake button, and then slide the onscreen slider).

Other Medical Devices

If you use any other personal medical device, consult the device manufacturer or your physician to determine if it is adequately shielded from radio frequency emissions from iPad.

Health Care Facilities

Hospitals and health care facilities may use equipment that is particularly sensitive to external radio frequency emissions. Turn iPad off when staff or posted signs instruct you to do so.

Blasting Areas and Posted Facilities

To avoid interfering with blasting operations, turn off iPad when in a “blasting area” or in areas posted “Turn off two-way radio.” Obey all signs and instructions.

Read more: 

http://manuals.info.apple.com/MANUALS/1000/MA1562/en_US/iPad_iOS4_Important_Product_Info.pdf

New WiFi Resolution Adopted by BCCPAC AGM 2013

1. BCCPAC 2013 Resolution: On/Off Switches for WiFi Routers and Protocol for Use of Wireless Devices

Adopted by strong majority votes (140-94) on May 4, 2013. Last year, the two resolutions passed by BCCPAC called for a halt in installing wireless network where other networking solutions are feasible, and for the creation of at least one fully-wired school at each level per school district. This 2013.11 resolution focuses on schools which already have WiFi installed and cannot get it removed right now. The British Columbia Confederation of Parent Advisory Councils (BCCPAC) represents 670+ public school PACs and district PACs in the province in 2013.

Please read the resolution along with the rationale which contains important safety information not just for the school environment, but for homes as well. Please share this information with parents, grandparents, teachers, school administrators and school board trustees. We demand that safety protocol be put in place.

http://citizensforsafetechnology.org/BCCPAC-Resolution-Passed-OnOff-Switches-for-WiFi-Routers-and-Protocol-for-the-Use-of-Wireless-Devices-in-Schools,19,3111

2. SD8 respects Winlaw Parents - turns off WiFi

http://www.nelsonstar.com/news/206826071.html

3. Former Microsoft Canada President agrees School WiFi is a Potential Health Hazard

http://www.bizjournals.com/prnewswire/press_releases/2013/05/09/C5138

4. Neuroscientist Baroness Susan Greenfield: 

Increased Screen Time associated with Negative Changes to Children's Brains 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ri4_CW9P41s&feature=youtu.be&t=10m6s&noredirect=1

5. WiFi in Schools - a Teacher's Perspective

http://www.staffroomconfidential.com/2013/04/wifi-in-schools.html

6. Canada's Spokesperson for WiFi Safety is Funded by Wireless Telecom Industry

http://www.safeinschool.org/2013/04/conflict-of-interest-influences-emf.html

7. Dr. Devra Davis addresses the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS) on Cellphone Radiation

http://goo.gl/I9OOi

8. Experts Adopted New Resolutions on Pulsed Radiofrequency Radiation:

"WiFi should not be placed in schools..."

http://saferemr.blogspot.ca/2013/04/experts-adopt-two-resolutions-about.html

Conflict of Interest Influences EMF Science

INDUSTRY-FUNDED SCIENCE (Updated)

Dr. Daniel Krewski and McLaughlin Centre (a.k.a. RFcom.ca or Wireless Information Resource Centre)

Dr Krewski -Spokesperson on the “safety" of WiFi in this Health Canada video. His voice echoes the stance of the wireless industry.

http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/ahc-asc/media/video/wifi-eng.php

Dan Krewski is the Head of McLaughlin Centre for Population Health Risk Assessment, previously known as Wireless Information Resource Centre (WIRC).

http://www.rfcom.ca/welcome/index

McLaughlin Centre (WIRC) was founded & funded by the Canadian Wireless Telecommunications Association (CWTA). See Press Release: http://tinyurl.com/3pyuljr

Canadian Wireless Telecommunications Association's former President Poirier still manages McLaughlin Centre's projects. CBC Marketplace exposed that the wireless industry, CWTA, funds both the research and salary of Dr. Krewski who promotes that WiFi is “safe”.

Dr. Krewski represented Canada in the Interphone Study. Out of 13 countries, Dr. Krewski's Canadian team is the only research group which accepted direct funding ($1 million) from the wireless industry.

http://www.cbc.ca/marketplace/pre-2007/files/health/iarc/pagetwo.html

Industry Doesn't Give You a Free Lunch

Paul Kleihues, Head of the World Health Organization's International Agency on the Research of Cancer (IARC) said, "Industry doesn't give you a free lunch...". http://www.cbc.ca/marketplace/pre-2007/files/health/iarc/pagetwo.html

There are lies after lies behind cellphone and wireless radiation which the mainstream media rarely reports. As in the tobacco industry, one major reason for a lack of definitive scientific opinion is that industry-funded studies have mostly reported no health effects, but non-industry-funded studies have mostly (up to 9 times as often) reported adverse biological effects from EMF exposure. Even a prominent agency such as UK's HPA ignored the conflict of interest and let somebody like Prof. Swerdlow chair their review panel. Even though Prof. Swerdlow and his wife are shareholders of multi telecom companies, he was given the chance to "defend" the "safety" of this technology and then label the report "independent".  This is simply unacceptable.

Harvard lecture at the Centre for Ethics:
Cell Phone Radiation and Institutional Corruption 

November 18, 2011

On Nov. 3, Dr. Franz Adlkofer, former executive director of the VERUM Foundation for Behavior and Environment, spoke to a Harvard Law School audience as part of the lectures and events series hosted by the Edmond J. Safra Center for Ethics. 

In his lecture, “Protection Against Radiation is in Conflict with Science,” Adlkofer discussed the difficulties he and other scientists face when presenting research on the carcinogenic effects of electromagnetic fields emanating from cell phones. He also discussed the institutional corruption which he says obstructs their research.

Adlkofer described his experience with the EU-funded study REFLEX, which aimed to explore the effects of cell-phone radiation on the brain. The study’s conclusions demonstrated that low frequency as well as radiofrequency electromagnetic fields below the allowed exposure limits displayed gene-damaging potential.

In 2004, shortly after releasing those findings, Adlkofer was the target of allegations questioning the validity of the findings and even accusing him of fraud. While an ethics panel eventually dismissed the accusations, his struggle against slander continues, he said.

In May 2011, the International Agency for Research on Cancer classified high frequency electromagnetic fields including cell phone radiation as merely “possibly carcinogenic” for humans, Adlkofer said, but he pointed out that studies such as REFLEX were not taken into account in reaching that determination. Had they been, he said, the classification likely would have changed from “possibly” carcinogenic to “probably.”

“The practices of institutional corruption in the area of wireless communication are of enormous concern,” said Adlkofer, “if one considers the still uncertain outcome of the ongoing field study with five billion participants. Based on the unjustified trivializing reports distributed by the mass media by order and on account of the wireless communication industry, the general public cannot understand that its future wellbeing and health may be at stake. The people even distrust those scientists who warn. In democracies, it is a basic principle that above power and their owners are laws, rules, and regulations. Since in the area of wireless communication this principle has been severely violated it is in the interest of a democratic society to insist on its compliance.”

—Sophy Bishop

 Orignal text: http://goo.gl/HD2Ja

UK HPA's AGNIR Report is NOT Independent

The Health Protection Agency's independent advisory group on non-ionising radiation (AGNIR) is an "important" institute to watch for signs of rising cancer cases, including monitoring national brain tumour trends. Recently, this group published a report "Health Effects from Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Fields". 

"There are still limitations to the published research that preclude a definitive judgement, but the evidence overall has not demonstrated any adverse effects on human health from exposure to radiofrequency fields below internationally accepted guideline levels," said Professor Anthony Swerdlow, chairman of the AGNIR and an epidemiologist at the Institute of Cancer Research."

This same paper attempted  to downplay the IARC RF classification.

Investigative journalist, Mona Nilsson, discovered that Professor Swerdlow is a shareholder of telecom companies Cable and Wireless Worldwide and Cable and Wireless Communications. His wife is a shareholder of BT group, a global telecommunications services company.

This conflict of interest was not disclosed in the report. Unbelievable that Mr. Swerdlow, with himself and his spouse being shareholders of telecom companies, are still permitted to chair this panel to defend the "safety" of wireless technology, then label the panel and the report  "independent"!

Original text: http://www.buergerwelle.de:8080/helma/twoday/bwnews/stories/3902/

Conflict of interest: http://ehp03.niehs.nih.gov/article/fetchArticle.action?articleURI=info%3Adoi%2F10.1289%2Fehp.1103693

Scientists Who Discovered that EMF Damaged DNA Were Oppressed by the Industry

http://www.washington.edu/alumni/columns/march05/wakeupcall03.html

Scientist Who Did Cell Phone Research For Motorola Speaks Of Interference and Control

http://youtu.be/8YBxyY8FoOs

Insurance Companies not Covering for Cell Phones and Wireless Carriers

http://youtu.be/GYvIHU0niDg

Philip Morris CEO Tells Pregnant Moms Smoking is Safe

http://youtu.be/VpwcF3Malj8

Harvard Health Policy Review

Profit and the Production of the Knowledge: The Impact of Industry on Representations of Research Results

Harvard Health Policy Review Vol. 8, No. 1, Spring 2007

"In Canada , for example, most of the national funding agencies explicitly encourage collaborations with industry. Even the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR), the primary public funding agency for biomedical work, has embraced this trend. In fact, the federal  legislation that created the CIHR has declared “commercialization of health research” and “economic development through health research” to be central goals of the agency... As a result, many of the relevant players are acting as expected and as market forces would dictate."

Impact of the Commercialization of Biotechnology Research on the Communication of Research Results: North American Perspective

Harvard Health Policy Review Vol. 8, No. 1, Spring 2007

"Evidence demonstrates that academic biotechnology research has become increasingly commercial in the last twenty years in Canada and in the US . This obvious realization does not only carry negative implications. Private funds have helped American universities remain on the cutting edge of scientific research and provide the best learning environment for their students. However, it would seem that this increasing emphasis on research commercialization has also created situations where university teachers and researchers could now find themselves in conflict between their traditional academic duties and the new commercial imperatives. This situation is especially worrisome in that it could lead researchers to delay the communication of  important findings over substantial periods of time in order to protect commercial interests. In our article, we first demonstrated the existence of a significant correlation between commercialization and withholding of information in the biotechnology research field in Canada and in the US . We then set out to find where and how, in the commercialization chain, the free dissemination of information was put in jeopardy. We conclude that policy changes may be required to improve the free flow of information."

Two prominent European scientists (Prof. Anders Ahlbom, Dr. Alexander Lerchl ) who have been instrumental in setting the "safety" standards on EMFs (with influence lasting till today), including chairing numerous EMF expert panels such as ICNIRP in the past decade, were recently rejected by WHO's IARC because of conflicts of interests with the Telecom industries. It was revealed that Ahlbom co-owned a telecom industry lobby group with his brother. Ahlbom also resigned from Chairmanship of the Swedish Radiation Safety Scientific Council while under investigation. Dr. Lerchl hosted the German Jurlich Research Centre Panel for EMF-Children Studies Review in 2007-2008, as head of the Committee of Non-ionizing Radiation in the German Radiation Protection Commission (the highest of such position in Germany) also works as consultant for the German Informationszentrum Mobilfunk (IZMF)!http://www.monanilsson.se/document/AhlbomConflictsIARCMay23.pdf
http://tinyurl.com/4xqandz
http://tinyurl.com/6xlzxc5

Funding for EMF Studies and its Influence on

Research Outcomes

Public or Charity-funded studies have  over 9 times the probability of reporting at least one statistically significant biological effect, compared to industry-funded studies.

 

http://ehp03.niehs.nih.gov/article/fetchArticle.action?articleURI=info%3Adoi%2F10.1289%2Fehp.9149

Source of Funding and Results of Studies of Health Effects of Mobile Phone Use: Systematic Review of Experimental Studies
Anke Huss1, Matthias Egger1,2, Kerstin Hug3, Karin Huwiler-Müntener1, Martin Röösli1
Department of Social and Preventive Medicine, University of Berne, Berne, Switzerland, Department of Social Medicine, University of Bristol, United Kingdom, Institute of Social and Preventive Medicine, University of Basle, Basle, Switzerland

Most non-industry funded studies found biological effects. Most industry-funded studies found no effect.

http://www.microwavenews.com/docs/mwn.7-06.RR.pdf

The Effects of Mobile Phones Electromagnetic Fields on Brain Electrical Activity: A Critical Analysis of the Literature.

“Overall, the doubt regarding the existence of reproducible mobile‐phone EMFs on brain activity.. it [the mobile phone industry] funded, partly or wholly, at least 87% of the reports. From an analysis of their cognitive framework, the common use of disclaimers, the absence of information concerning conflicts‐of‐interest, and the industry’s donations to the principal EMF journal, we inferred that the doubt was manufactured by the industry... Of the 48 studies supported by the MPI (mobile phone industry) 30 were positive and 18 were negative (38% negative)... all 7 studies not funded by the MPI were positive. Although the industry‐funded studies were significantly more likely to be negative... no two positive studies reported the same effect... Thus the apparent message of the studies dovetailed well with the MPI position that there are no reproducible biological effects, and did so without denying the existence of EMF‐induced bioeffects, which was the tactical error made by the electric power industry thirty years ago. If the investigators funded by the MPI had published only negative studies, the industry research program would not have passed the laugh test... Sixty‐two percent positive served to both protect the interests of the industry and still sustain the appearance that its position was based on scientific experiments... The legitimization process had the hallmark of a well‐designed legal strategy. Any peer‐reviewed report claiming to have shown that mobile‐phone EMFs affected brain electrical activity, particularly a report funded by the MPI, is potential evidence in a court case on behalf of a party adverse to the industry. Inclusion of a disclamatory statement in the original publication is a strategy that tends to blunt such uses by a plaintiff. Of the 30 MPI‐funded studies that were self‐designated as positive, 22 contained a disclamatory statement... From a scientific perspective the disclamatory statements were puerile, and it would be naive to suppose that so many investigators spontaneously decided to include them. More likely, the disclaimers were explicit or implicit requirements of the funder, with or without the agreement of the authors.”

http://andrewamarino.com/PDFs/CellphoneEMFs-Review.pdf

M.I.T. Scientists Union Expose How Corporations Corrupt Science at the Public's Expense

Federal decision makers need access to the best available science in order to craft policies that protect our health, safety, and environment.

Unfortunately, censorship of scientists and the manipulation, distortion, and suppression of scientific information have threatened federal science in recent years...

Methods of AbuseHow Do They Game the System?

Suppressing Research:
Hog Farm Emissions
After pork producers contacted his supervisors, a USDA microbiologist was prevented from publishing research showing that emissions from industrial hog farms contained antibiotic-resistant bacteria.

Corrupting Advisory Panels:
Childhood Lead Poisoning
A few weeks before a CDC advisory panel met to discuss revising federal lead standards, two scientists with ties to the lead industry were added to the panel. The committee voted against tightening the standards.

Ghostwriting Articles:
The Pharmaceutical Industry
A 2011 analysis found evidence of corporate authorship in research articles on a variety of drugs, including Avandia, Paxil, Tylenol, and Vioxx.

Methods of Abuse

Corrupting the Science. Corporations suppress research, intimidate scientists, manipulate study designs, ghostwrite scientific articles, and selectively publish results that suit their interests.

Shaping Public Perception. Private interests downplay evidence, exaggerate uncertainty, vilify scientists, hide behind front groups, and feed the media slanted news stories.

Restricting Agency Effectiveness. Companies attack the science behind agency policy, hinder the regulatory process, corrupt advisory panels, exploit the "revolving door" between corporate and government employment, censor scientists, and withhold information from the public.

Influencing Congress. By spending billions of dollars on lobbying and campaign contributions, corporate interests gain undue access to members of Congress, encouraging them to challenge scientific consensus, delay action on critical problems, and shape the use of science in policy making.

Exploiting Judicial Pathways. Corporate interests have expanded their influence on the judicial system, used the courts to undermine science, and exploited judicial processes to bully and silence scientists.

http://www.ucsusa.org/assets/documents/scientific_integrity/how-corporations-corrupt-science.pdfhttp://www.ucsusa.org/about/ucs-history-over-40-years.html

Excess Risk of Brain Cancer with 5 Years or More and/or Cellphone Use on Same Side of Head as Tumor Location or, Combinations of Wireless Phone Use: Interphone Results Versus Swedish Team Results

Independently-Funded Research (BLUE diamond) overwhelmingly found increasing risk of Brain Cancer, while Cellphone Industry-Funded Research found decreasing risk mostly.

On the original webpage, you can click on points on the graph to get the reference information.

Genetic Differences Ignored

Apart from industry funding, some scientists have pointed out that the reason for "inconclusive" results could be the difference in genetics of the test subjects, from study to study. Just like in the general population, not everyone who smokes gets lung cancer. As a result, one study on chicken might yield slightly different results compared to another study of the same substance, but on another batch of chicken. However, the difference in outcome should not NEGATE the fact that the substance has caused harm on the first batch, especially where it concerns a substance that is mandated for all. 

Here is a U.S. Congressional Briefing by Dr. Theodore Litovitz, Professor Emertus, Physicist, research scientist http://youtu.be/MCe0rqqyBcw. Dr. Litovitz talked about Thalidomide which underwent pre-marketing testings in the lab. Some tests showed harm and some didn't. The health agencies approved it anyway, and authorized for it it to be sold the market. The result - more than 10,000 babies in 46 countries were born with severe birth defects because of this drug. "Canada was the last country to stop the sales of the drug, in early 1962.[23] It is not known exactly how many worldwide victims of the drug there have been, although estimates range from 10,000 to 20,000.[24] In 1962, the United States Congress enacted laws requiring tests for safety during pregnancy before a drug can receive approval for sale in the U.S.[25] Other countries enacted similar legislation, and thalidomide was not prescribed or sold for decades.  "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thalidomide#Birth_defects

Electrogate in Canada: Eliminating independent academic inquiry with $$$$$$$$$$$$$$

* This article contains information related to Lorne Trottier. Mr. Trottier has contacted us to clarify an error published on the McGill website which has caused some portion of the content of the article to be incorrect. We have inserted Mr. Trottier's comments below for readers' information. Mr. Don Maisch has removed this article (by anonymous author) posted on his website.

July 7, 2012 Corporate influence on Science by EMFacts

A recent 2012 report by the Union of Concerned Scientists examined the effect on scientific inquiry when powerful corporate interests are involved in academic research in the US. The report found that corporations “exert influence at every step of the scientific and policy-making processes, often to shape decisions in their favour or avoid regulation and monitoring of their products and by-products at the public’s expense”. To quote:

Federal decision makers need access to the best available science in order to craft policies that protect our health, safety, and environment. Unfortunately, censorship of scientists and the manipulation, distortion, and suppression of scientific information have threatened federal science in recent years. This problem has sparked much debate, but few have identified the key driver of political interference in federal science: the inappropriate influence of companies with a financial stake in the outcome. A new UCS report, Heads They Win, Tails We Lose, shows how corporations influence the use of science in federal decision making to serve their own interests.

Reference: Union of Concerned Scientists, Heads They Win, Tails We Lose: How Corporations Corrupt Science at the Public’s Expense, Feb. 2012, http://www.ucsusa.org/scientific_integrity/abuses_of_science/how-corporations-corrupt-science.html

Don Maisch PhD

Lorne Trottier’s Financial Ties to the Wireless/Mobile Industries

By Anonymous
5 July 2012

Following the World Health Organization’s classification of Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Fields (RF-EMF) as 2B Possible Carcinogen to Humans in 2011, this year the American Academy of Environmental Medicine, the Swiss Physicians’ MfE, the Austrian Medical Association and the French Health Research Group led by a Nobel Prize-winning scientist have all issued public statements calling for precaution against wireless radiation and proper treatment of electrohypersensitive (EHS) patients.

In Quebec, however, things go backwards. Electronics tycoon Lorne Trottier has financed an “urban-electro Brigade” operation to publicly deny the hazards of EMF and the validity of Electrohypersensitivity. Lorne (owner of Matrox) enlisted 60 academics, mostly from McGill University and École Polytechnique de Montréal to which he has donated tens of millions of dollars.

Lorne Trottier is a zealous critic of all the science that point to negative health effects of electromagnetic radiation. He has written numerous articles attacking scientists and scientific studies that do not support the “safety” of EMF/EMR which he promotes. His pro-EMF opinion is disseminated through his own website EMFandHealth.com, a host of “skeptic” websites which he is connected to. Even Amazon.com!

McGill University states that its “OSS [Office for Science and Society] “does not accept funding from any vested interest and is supported solely by McGill University and the Lorne Trotter Family Foundation.” http://www.mcgill.ca/oss/who-we-are

Below are Mr. Lorne Trottier's comments:

"First I would like to point out that Matrox, the company of which I am a co-founder, makes only a handful of products that incorporate are make use of wireless technology. These products represent less that 1% of our sales. The vast majority of our products are specialized video and graphics boards that are used in commercial and industrial computers. You can easily verify this by consulting our web site: www.matrox.com

The article on your web site also claims that I have made substantial investments in the wireless industry through my alleged association with iNova Capital. For your information I have never been a shareholder or administrator with this company. In fact I have no association whatsoever with iNova Capital. The only potential link, which is not really a link, is that I am a representative of McGill University on the Board of MSBiV, of which iNovia Capital is a shareholder. The role of MSBiV is to help professors at McGill to commercialize their research, the majority of which is in the medical area. I serve on the board of MSBiV on a pro bono basis and I have no financial interest in either iNovia Capital or MSBiV, nor any of the companies or startups they are associated with. The web site https://secureweb.mcgill.ca/boardofgovernors/other/non-board, had contained erroneous information that I was an administrator at iNovia Capital. This error has been corrected. In short, the claim that I have invested millions of dollars in wireless technology is simply false.

The article on your web site also contains false allegations concerning my association with the Centre for Inquiry Canada. In the article I am accused of making a financial donation to this organization in exchange for the employment of my nephew Justin Trottier. I have been a donor to CFI for several years and I plan to continue doing so, whether my nephew continues to work there or not. "

More on ICNIRP, the WHO's EMF Project and Conflict of Interest

Conflict of Interest & Bias in Health Advisory Committees: A case study of the WHO’s Electromagnetic Field (EMF) Task Group

By Dr. Don Maisch

Published in the Journal of the Australasian College of Nutritional & Environmental Medicine - April 2006

http://tinyurl.com/6ecuodr

Analysis of the WHO RW/MW exposure standards

Prepared for the New Zealand Ministries of Health and Environment

By Prof. Neil Cherry, Lincoln University, New Zealand

http://www.scribd.com/doc/3718366/Cherry-1

The Procrustean Approach Setting Exposure Standards for Telecommunications

Thesis by Dr. Don Maisch

http://www.bemri.org/publications/doc_view/313-dr-don-maischs-thesis-qthe-procrustean-approach-setting-exposure-standards-for-telecommunicationsq.raw?tmpl=component