World-News

Bad Science » Ben Goldacre’s Bad Science column from the Guardian

Our response to Ben Goldacre's comments re. Panorama, WiFi, etc.
https://www.powerwatch.org.uk/news/20070529_panorama_extra.asp

You may also like to link this page. Ben Goldacre et al claims have been widely circulated around the world. It is helpful if my response is easily available to people. Thanks

Alasdair



Ben Goldacre aka "Bad Science" and MOA / 'New' Labour link

I have just discovered that he was an invited guest speaker by the Mobile Phone Operators Association at last year's Labour party Conference (with Labour's favourite grocer Lord Sainsbury) - the title "Science fact or science fiction: How should politicians respond to media scare stories?".

His bias and affiliation is now obvious to everyone.

Some very good posts against Ben Goldacre. See
https://members5.boardhost.com/medialens/msg/1180716048.html
https://www.bmj.com/cgi/eletters/334/7606/1249#168843


Martin



ITS ALL IN THE MIND !

Letter from Sarah Dacre to Ben Goldacre for info.

Vivienne


To: Dr Ben Goldacre
16.6.07

I have a copy of your response to Paul and other individuals linked to the ES debate and your stance.

For the record, as an electro sensitive (medically proven overseas) I shall restrict my already limited computer access time to assisting the burgeoning number of ES/EHS cases from around the world by circulating solutions, which can help the condition. There are many thousands of ES logged onto various data bases and we all know what worsens the condition, it is such a simple process of elimination.

You would be well advised to study the relevant scientists such as Dr George Carlo's studies and those of Professor Olle Johansson rather than haranguing various ES individuals. I don't notice any appreciation from you for any correspondence from individuals already limited in their daily exposure to EMR. Many others are completely unable to access computers at all, 100% of the time and cannot respond to you or even participate in ludicrous psychologically driven experiments. The emphasis once placed on seeking subtle biological effects will find an explanation for ES.

I shall leave the banter about provocation studies (aka what will keep ES in a box for another 5-8 years) to those who are more able to spend hours on a computer.

Please do not expect to hear from me again.


With kind regards

S A Dacre

--------

----- Original Message -----
From: David Fancy
To: bengoldacre@gmail.com
Sent: Tuesday, June 19, 2007 12:21 PM
Subject: EHS in Canada


Hello Ben,

Please allow me to share my experience with you. I am a unversity lecturer in drama and postcolonial studies at a Canadian University, with a PhD from Trinity College, Dublin. I understand from some colleagues here that although you are advocating compassion for people living with EHS, you are also suggesting that there is no evidence to link non-thermal effects of radiofrequency or other electromagnetic emissions to any adverse effects on human health.

Although I would happily send you research that confirms such effects
(and please let me know if you haven't seen any studies and I can point you in the right direction: the abstracts page at https://www.emfacts.com is a good place to start), I think what I would like to tell you is based on my own experience: I have had to literally move from house and home to live in the wilderness so as to simply be able to sleep at night as a result of sensitivity to cell phone tower signals.

I personally know many other people who have the same experience.

I have invested in expensive detection equipment chosen for me by engineering colleagues that have confirmed which spots are 'hot' and which not. Although I do not presume to fully understand the biophysiology of the matter, I am a trained researcher and know false positive correlations when I see them. In fact, I was very cautious 'coming out' as it were with my own experience in case I was somehow invoking a hypochondriac response to supposed sources of incitants. Five years of experience, as well as various improvements as a result of certain health regimes, have taught me that my initial intuitions on the subject were correct.

Another source of testimonials is the Black on White document geenrated by the Swedish Association for Electrosensitivity at https://www.feb.se/index_int.htm . It includes 400 testimonials form EHS sufferers. Please note that Gro Harlem Bruntland, a former World Health Organization director left her post there as a result of her electrosensitivity. The man who developed the cell phone for Ericsson is now living in northern scandinavia out of radio and cell tower range as a result of the EHS he developed on the job.

Although it may go against current orthodoxy, I am convinced that before long, more studies that demonstrate non-thermal effects will find their way to the media. Again, thanks for the compassion, but if there's anything I can do to lead to to studies different than the ones you are reading, please let me know.


Dr David Fancy
Department of Dramatic Arts
Brock University
St Catharines
Ontario
Canada


Informant: Martin Weatherall

--------

Clinical Data on EMR Exposures

I send in a response to the BMJ!! Don't know if they will publish it. Lets see!!

Sarah


https://www.bmj.com/cgi/eletters/334/7606/1249#168843

Has anyone read the results of the REFLEX report, 2004? Twelve institutes in seven countries have found genotoxic effects and modified expressions on numerous genes and proteins after Radio frequency and extremely low frequency EMF exposure at low levels, below current international safety guidance, to living cells in-vitro. These results confirm the likelihood of long-term genetic damage in the blood and brains of users of mobile phones and other sources of electromagnetic fields. The idea behind the REFLEX study was to attempt replicate damage already reported to see if the effects were real and whether, or not, more money should be spent of research into the possible adverse health effects of EMF exposure. They concluded that in-vitro damage is real and that it is important to carry out much more research, especially monitoring the long-term health of people. https://www.verum-foundation.de/cgi-bin/content.cgi?id=euprojekte01

Dr Lai and Singh had previously found double strand DNA breaks in rat brains exposed to 2.45 GHz radiation Lai H, Singh NP. (1996) DNA Single- and double-strand DNA breaks in rat brain cells after acute exposure to low-level radiofrequency electromagnetic radiation. Int J Radiat Biol 69:513-521

Then there's the Ecolog report, 2000. A review of 220 pieces of peer reviewed and published research showing clear evidence for cancer and genetic damage from exposures below the guidelines. https://www.hese-project.org/hese-uk/en/niemr/ecologsum.php

Not to mention the Stewart Report, 2000, itself which states
1.18 ..there is now evidence, however , which suggests that there may be biological effects occurring at exposures below these guidelines..;

More evidence has accumulated since then. I ask you if microwave radiation were a drug and in lab tests it was found that double strand DNA breaks were occurring as a result of exposure in vitro and to animals in vivo, would it be ethical/allowed under guidelines to go on and test humans?

Moreover even if one did decide to go ahead and do provocation studies, wouldn't it be rather unusual to subject test subjects 'claiming EHS' to signals in an unshielded room in the centre of London as was the case in the Rubin study?

Provocation studies may have their place if properly done but this is merely tinkering at the edges. There is plenty of research (not mentioned here) including new epidemiological evidence showing adverse health effects from exposure to microwave radiation at current levels to justify reducing exposure levels as has been done in other countries.

--------

Re: [Masts] FW: BMJ

The position being taken by Goldacre in his commentary that provocation studies are definitive in assessing electromagnetic radiation (EMR) health risks is simply incorrect. Current information on the pathological mechanism involved in EMR-related disease makes clear that laboratory constructs that do not have close approximation to real-world exposures are of little value in assessing these risks.

For the past five years, through our Safe Wireless Initiative project, we have operated the only post-market surveillance database in the world systematically collecting symptom information from thousands of patients suffering from the effects of various types of EMR exposure. In addition, we coordinate a network of clinicians who regularly share information about their experiences treating patients with these conditions, another important and unique resource. Thus, we do not rely solely on self-reported information but have corroboration from treating doctors. It is noteworthy that our post-market surveillance registry will open in the UK soon. This is an important public health step because in the UK, there are no reliable data on the incidence and prevalence of EMR- related conditions. With no real data, speculations are all the more misinformed.

We regularly share summary information from our registry database in various fora around the world, including a February 2007 presentation at the House of Commons, for the benefit of clinicians and patients alike. Goldacre seems to be relying only on one type of data in his assessment, while ignoring clinical realities.

Overall, our post-market surveillance data show patterns that suggest an emerging medical and public health problem.

There are symptom and pathology similarities among patients suffering from electro-hypersensitivity, multiple chemical sensitivities, alcohol- related disease as well as neuro-behavioral and learning disorders. We are now referring to the symptom constellations as Membrane Sensitivity Syndrome (MSS) and the increase in reports of symptoms consistent with MSS associated by patients with various EMR exposures has dramatically increased over the past 24 months.

It is noteworthy that concurrently in the past 24 months, the penetration of mobile phones has tripled globally, from one billion to three billion. WiFi has reached the highest penetration in history. Satellite radio is not far behind. All of these technologies rely on information-carrying radio waves, the trigger for non-thermal adverse biological responses and the cascade toward MSS.

In a majority of MSS cases, when EMR is removed from the patient’s environment, their acute symptoms subside. This is an important observation and indeed represents one of the Koch-Henle postulates for causation: If when the exposure is removed, the effect is diminished, there is evidence for cause and effect.

Pathology and experimental findings support a mechanistic underpinning: an environmentally induced genetic change that renders daughter cells to carry membrane sensitivity characteristics with most symptoms directly or indirectly the result of consequent disrupt of intercellular communication.

Therapeutic intervention regimens designed around known EMR mechanisms of harm have positively shown varying degrees of clinical symptom amelioration, another support for the causal hypothesis, but more importantly, a ray of hope for those afflicted and debilitated by these conditions.

It is a fact that every serious public health problem man has faced has first been identified through clinical observations, the historically confirmed first line of evidence for preventing epidemic spread of disease. It is a disservice to clinicians and patients when uninformed speculation serves to lessen the acuity with which important early signs that can alleviate suffering are seen and heeded.

Dr. George L. Carlo Science and Public Policy Institute 1101 Pennsylvania Ave. NW -- 7th Floor Washington, D.C. 20004
https://www.sppionline.org
https://www.safewireless.org 202-756-7744

--------

BMJ new contra comment

Dr Elliott at Manchester University has been working for a number of years on Calcium receptors (and one of his published papers actually reports an electrical effect). I think those claiming the existence of EHS should point him to the studies at Loma Linda in the 1970s (e.g. Bawin, Adey et al 1976) which first showed that exposure to weak power frequency and RF electric fields caused significant calcium efflux in live cat brains. This approach is likely to be more persuasive than slagging off Mr Goldacre, a non scientist whose value judgements are not likely to be well supported by the peer reviewed literature. One plausible explanation for the disturbance to cognitive and neurological function alleged by EHS EMF-exposees is that disruption of calcium homeostasis may lead to neurological bioeffects, since [Ca2+]i is an accepted first and second messenger, and for that reason its cytosolic concentration is normally very low compared with other biological ions. Enforced release from calcium stores such as calmodulin could therefore have adverse and possibly hyperaesthetic effects.

Let's try to bring a little science into this debate!

Roger Coghill MA(Cantab), C Biol MI Biol MA (Environ Mgt)
sometime Senior Visitor, Emmanuel College, Cambridge

--------

Rod Read ES-UK v Ben Goldacre
https://www.buergerwelle.de/pdf/rod_read_v_ben_oldacre.htm

--------

Why don't journalists mention the data?
https://www.bmj.com/cgi/eletters/334/7606/1249


Informant: Sandi

--------

Blood boil
https://www.buergerwelle.de/pdf/blood_boil.htm



https://members5.boardhost.com/medialens/msg/1180714970.html
https://members5.boardhost.com/medialens/msg/1180715598.html
https://mastsanity.blogspot.com/2007/05/bad-science-goes-bananas.html
https://freepage.twoday.net/search?q=Panorama
https://freepage.twoday.net/search?q=Wi-Fi
https://omega.twoday.net/search?q=Wi-Fi
https://omega.twoday.net/search?q=EHS
https://omega.twoday.net/search?q=non-thermal+effects
https://omega.twoday.net/search?q=Coghill
https://omega.twoday.net/search?q=calcium+efflux
https://freepage.twoday.net/search?q=Goldacre
https://omega.twoday.net/search?q=Goldacre
https://omega.twoday.net/search?q=Carlo
https://omega.twoday.net/search?q=Johansson

https://freepage.twoday.net/search?q=Wi-Fi
https://omega.twoday.net/search?q=Wi-Fi

https://www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=7933

(how like our own mighty opponents )

artjar

Interesting one!

https://www.injurywatch.co.uk/inbound/manx-doctors-concern-over-phone-masts-2857656

David


Manx doctors' concern over phone masts

von Conrad Murray

A medical practice is considering moving to new premises amid concerns about possible health risks posed by mobile phone masts on their building.

There are now five masts on the roof of the Health Centre in Village Walk, Onchan - two operated by Manx Telecom, the other three by Cable and Wireless. The doctors are still not convinced that emissions from the masts pose no risk to health. They are particularly concerned about possible risks to children.

The Island's Public Health consultant, Dr Paul Emmerson, said there was still no proof that exposure to electromagnetic radiation from the masts caused any illness.

GP Dr Jim McAllister said he would rather err on the side of caution.

--------

Ban for Manx mobile phone masts
https://omega.twoday.net/stories/3823636/

The following item appears in June's issue of the radical activist Worthing newsletter The Porkbolter, which is an excellent mouthpiece against microwave technology. The link at the end can be used for getting stuff in future issues.

Best
gary


Suffocated by Wi-Fi electrosmog

A DANGEROUS modern "electrosmog" is putting our health and our environment at risk, it is rapidly emerging.

After the evidence in our last issue about passive mobile phone use, the national spotlight has now fallen on Wi-Fi, the microwave fields that allow people to log on to the internet without being plugged into a phone line.

Reported The Independent on Sunday (April 22): "Britain's top health protection watchdog is pressing for a formal investigation into the hazards of using wireless communication networks in schools amid mounting concern that they may be damaging children's health." It added: "Virtually no studies have been carred out into Wi-Fi's effects on pupils, but it gives off radiation similar to emissions from mobile phones and phone masts. Recent research has linked radiation from mobiles to cancer and to brain damange. And many studies have found disturbing symptoms in people near masts."

After we sent a link to this story to readers on our email list (just ask if you want to be included on it!), we had response from a woman in East Worthing. She wrote: "That's interesting about the Wi-Fi - I got a wireless set up at home about four months ago and have had to stop using it because after about 20 minutes it gives me headaches, and after that I get pins and needles in my feet and hands and I start to feel really light headed and sick. I've gone back to a wired connection. I could feel when it was on or off, even when not in the same room.

"The headache feels like there's a sort of electrical thing going on between my ears, and it's very painful between the eyes, like there's pressure building there. It's actually very similar to a problem a friend of mine had a few years ago with a Nokia phone, she had the same headaches and also a metallic taste in her mouth, when she changed phones it was OK again.

"It's a very strange thing because it's not all Wi-Fi that does this to me, I can sit in a hot spot and feel fine, but my home set up is really unpleasant, maybe because it's at such close range. I do also get the same symptoms if I visit Lyons Farm Sainsbury's so maybe there's some kind of Wi-Fi thing going on up there too - I went there a few months ago for the first time in a about a year and had to leave sharpish.

"When I can feel it, it's like the air is heavy and thick, and I find it hard to think clearly, it's quite hard to put into words. I heard on the news today that some expert is recommending that children don't hold Wi-Fi devices on their lap, there's definitely something very wrong with Wi-Fi."

Meanwhile, it has also emerged that both bees and birds are being affected by the electrosmog from mobile masts, as it is believed they use electromagnetism to navigate (Independent on Sunday, April 29). This has already led Eastbourne's council to block a new mast because of fears about the bees (IoS, May 6). Any chance that Worthing will wake up to this as well?

Have you had any experiences of Wi-Fi or other types of radiation? Let us know via porkbolter @eco-action.org or porkbolter @hushmail.com



https://freepage.twoday.net/search?q=Wi-Fi
https://omega.twoday.net/search?q=Wi-Fi

I just saw this article.

Martin


https://www.contractoruk.com/news/003268.html

Fears about ill-effects from using wireless internet technology have prompted an unprecedented number of Londoners to dismantle their systems.

A City-wide computer call-out service yesterday reported that almost half of its recent enquiries were from people wanting WiFi removed.

The news comes after a televised probe by the BBC found WiFi frequency radiation levels in some schools emit three times the intensity found in the main beam of mobile phone masts.

The findings, from the broadcaster’s Panorama programme, have since been disputed by leading scientists, who claim BBC journalists failed to employ a sound methodology.

Yet for the chairman of the Health Protection Agency, which reports of‘no consistent evidence’ of health risks to WiFi users, the Beeb's findings are grounds for closer scrutiny.

Sir William Stewart, a senior advisor to the government, said: "I believe that there is a need for a review of the WiFi and other areas... I think it's timely for it to be done now."

Scientists generally agree that WiFi should be safer than mobile phone radiation because WiFi devices transmit over shorter distances, and so can operate at lower power.

A survey cited by the World Health Organisation shows the RF exposures from base stations range from 0.002% to 2% of the levels of international exposure guidelines, depending on factors such as the proximity to the antenna and the surrounding area.

This is lower or comparable to RF exposures from radio or television broadcast transmitters.

However the consensus that WiFi ought to be safer than mobile phone radiation is based only on “current knowledge,” the HPA said.

The caution comes as an aggressive roll-out of the technology continues nationwide: in London, the fear of what the WHO calls ‘unknown hazards’ has compelled users to act.

” I have never seen such a reaction,” a spokesman for Scooter Computer, a PC repair service, told the Evening Standard yesterday.

“More than 40 per cent of enquiries from hundreds of customers in the last three days were from people worried about WiFi.”

Speaking before the BBC probe, the World Health Organisation cited “media announcements” about WiFi as adding to a “perception” of “undiscovered hazards.”

But it reassured: “Considering the very low exposure levels and research results collected to date, there is no convincing scientific evidence that the weak radio frequency signals from base stations and wireless networks cause adverse health effects.”

And the Health Protection Agency has braved a wider endorsement:” There is no consistent evidence of health effects from radio frequency exposures below guideline levels and therefore no reason why schools and others should not use WiFi equipment.”

Omega read https://omega.twoday.net/stories/771911/ and
"Competing interests, conflicts of interest: Who's funding WHO?"under: https://omega.twoday.net/stories/3347390/

May 25, 2007

All content © Contractor UK Limited

--------

Plans for WiFi covering London from 2004!!!

The state of wireless London!
https://informal.org.uk/people/julian/publications/the_state_of_wireless_london/



https://freepage.twoday.net/search?q=Wi-Fi
https://omega.twoday.net/search?q=Wi-Fi

Victoria Boutenko is one of the world's leading authorirties on living on raw vegan foods. She does a regular e-letter. In this month's, the following appears.

Gary.:


Radiation Protection

I would like to share with you my personal negative experience with cordless phones. Several months ago, I spent four hours participating in a teleconference using the cordless phone in my office. Later that night, as I got ready for bed, I experienced a distinct pressure inside my ear. A few days thereafter, I noticed an unusual growth on lobe of the same ear. Another week later, I happened to take part in a morning TV show directly after a professional dermatologist. I asked her about the growth which by that time had become the size of a pea, had turned red, and was painful to touch. She explained to me that a keloid scar had formed probably due to the excessive use of the wireless phone. To my dismay, she told me to immediately take out my earrings and permanently stop wearing them.

Since then I became a lot more careful. I went to store and bought two corded phones with 25 feet of additional cord, and use my cell phone only for emergencies. I am not going to get any “convenient” wireless devices for my home or office. By now, the growth on my ear is almost gone.

There is constantly more research available on the internet about the radiation these devices emit. I thought you might enjoy these pictures of what some creative Europeans are doing to protect themselves and their families from the rays coming from wireless equipment.

Follow this link to see the images:
https://www.next-up.org/Newsoftheworld/ProtectionsEmfCem.php#1


https://www.rawfamily.com



https://omega.twoday.net/search?q=cordless+phones

https://freepage.twoday.net/search?q=Wi-Fi
https://omega.twoday.net/search?q=Wi-Fi

Panorama: WI-FI: A Warning
[ https://omega.twoday.net/stories/3754101/ ]

A link to the recent BBC Panorama programme about Wi-Fi radiation and health:


https://video.google.nl/videoplay?docid=2243482823849327978&q=bbc+wifi

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

--------

Wi-Fi: A Warning Signal
https://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/panorama/6674675.stm


Informant: Martin



Watch Panorama online

Please email all your MPs, Councillors and school heads and governors to watch Panorama online here:

https://news.bbc.co.uk/player/nol/newsid_4120000/newsid_4124500/4124514.stm?bw=bb&mp=rm

or to catch or record the reruns:

Panorama BBC News 24 22 May at 00:30 WiFi: A Warning Signal
Panorama BBC News 24 22 May at 03:30 WiFi: A Warning Signal
Panorama BBC 1 25 May at 00:25 WiFi: A Warning Signal
I have got a Video tape and DVD of the programme if anyone can duplicate.

Now, that the Chair of the HPA has openly challenged the WHO and the government, we need to act quickly to harness this momentum.
Can we all write to our MPs and ask them to push for immediate action?

Andrea



BBC Panorama vote

So far 40,000 people have voted if they think wifi is safe its slightly more don't than do Add your votes!!

https://newsvote.bbc.co.uk/1/programmes/panorama/default.stm?dynamic_vote=ON

Sarah



The nay sayers

Do you want to know who the 'scientists' are who are doing the criticising?

Prof Malcolm Sperrin Director of medical physics and clinical engineering, Royal Berkshire NHS Trust. Could not find anything other than this link with the notorious Science Media Centre https://www.sciencemediacentre.org/press_releases/07-05-10_bmjctscans.htm
So, that's where the Guardian and the BBC get their scientists from.

Prof Will J Stewart UCL and University of Southampton https://www.theiet.org/publicaffairs/sectorpanels/communications/stewart.cfm
Member of The Institution of Engineering and Technology, Communication Sector Panel he is also a member of the IEEE Previously chief scientist at Marconi - a large Telecoms firm. Here is a link to some of the staff he was working on at Marconi https://www.iop.org/activity/policy/Events/Seminars/file_3502.doc

Dr Paddy Regan University of Surrey, Guildford Lecturer in nuclear and radiation physics. His expertise is clearly in the ionising part of the spectrum. Why they wheel him out to comment on Wi-Fi is a mystery to me. https://www.ph.surrey.ac.uk/cnrp/profiles/academics?s_id=21

Yes, he is the same Prof David Coggan indeed. He is a member of the Medical Research Council Epidemiology He seems to always be wheeled out when it comes to minimising the potential health effects of any pollutant. Last year it was antimony in plastic water bottles (see here https://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/health/dietfitness.html?in_article_id=379624&in_page_id=1798 A few years back, it was pesticides. He was the Chairman of the Independent Advisory Committee on Pesticides https://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/1893611.stm current members of this body are listed here https://www.pesticides.gov.uk/acp.asp?id=2060
He was also involved in at least one study financed by the MTHR in a supervisory role https://www.mthr.org.uk/research_projects/mthr_funded_projects/cartwright.htm

--------

Points of View, Panorama

I did fire out numerous comments yesterday on various sites but from memory I think it was the following:

The Panorama programme was an excellent, truthful expose of the dangers of this harmful technology.

"WiFi emissions are similar to Mobile Phone Mast emissions. They have very similar carrier frequencies and pulsed digital amplitude modulation. The signal strength in a classroom with 15 WiFi enabled laptops will be very similar to the signal strength you would receive from a mobile phone mast 80 to 150 metres away. There is now considerable research associating serious health effects with living near a phone mast. Indeed the ill health and cancer clusters in the vicinity of phone masts are increasing at an ever alarming rate. If living near to mobile phone masts poses a health risk, then why are we actively putting wireless devices in schools that fill the classrooms with similar levels of pulsing microwave radiation"?

John E



An Opinion

As we all know there has been a considerable amount of gerrymandering in respect of the Panorama programme on WiFi in schools transmitted on Monday.

First we had various self-important people being wheeled out of their caves to denigrate the programme before it was aired - Professor Malcolm Sperrin (Director of Medical Physics & Clinical Engineering, Royal Berkshire NHS Trust), Professor Will J Stewart (Royal Academy of Engineering, University of Southampton and previously chief scientist with Marconi), Dr Paddy Regan (Centre for Nuclear Radiation and Physics), Professor David Coggan (Medical Research Council) and Mr Bill Thompson, to name but a few - all less than celebrated individuals but well-known when it comes to denigrating fears about emfs and the effects thereof. Afterwards, the Guardian went into overdrive to present the programme in the worst possible light, the voting system on the BBC's Panorama web page appeared to be mendaciously in favour of those who consider there to be no problem and the corporation's website 'Have Your Say' clearly decided not to accept reasoned comment from honest, and scientifically qualified, people who wrote in questioning WiFi safety. But none of this really matters.

Whatever you might think of him, Professor Sir William Stewart is Chairman of the Health Protection Agency (which, of course, incorporates the Radiological Protection Division). As Chairman of the NRPB, he was responsible for the report by the Independent Expert Group on Mobile Phones (IEGMP) issued in 2000, since known as the 'Stewart Report', and it was on his watch that the Advisory Group on Non-Ionising Radiation (AGNIR) produced a follow-up appraisal issued in January 2005. His comments when interviewed on the programme:

Stewart (on the results of research). "We found firstly that there may be changes in cognitive functions; secondly that there may be cancer induction and, thirdly, some molecular biological changes."

Stewart (when confronted with Sylvia Wilson who is electro-magnetically hypersensitive). "I sympathise with Sylvia because I suspect a problem. We do not know. It might not be worth worrying about. Or (people like her) might by the human canaries of the future".

Interviewer "The World Health Organisation says categorically that there are no adverse health effect from low-level long term exposure. Is that an accurate reflection?"

Stewart "I think they are wrong."

Interviewer "Why do you think it?"

Stewart "It is not an accurate assessment."

The interviewer went to great pains to express incredulity that HM Government should be taking the word of WHO and others against that of its own principle adviser.

It is the part played by Sir William that is the centrepoint of the debate, not the second-class 'scientists' who stand ready to criticise him at the slightest opportunity nor the number of votes registered on the Panorama website nor the nerds who use 'Have Your Say' as little more than a talking shop to expound their illiterate views. All attempts to cloud the issue by introducing peripheral aspects should be fiercely resisted. It is what the Chairman of the HPA has to say, and the decision by HM Government to ignore him, that matters - and this is what we should be shouting from the rooftops.

David



Read Geoff's comment on the Panorama page!!

sarah

https://newsforums.bbc.co.uk/nol/thread.jspa?threadID=6357&&&edition=1&ttl=20070522194711

Added: Tuesday, 22 May, 2007, 12:56 GMT 13:56

UK Your excellent programme really speaks for itself. Credit must go to your researchers. How anyone viewing could doubt the intergrity of the presentation and the risk to health, is beyond my comprehension. I spoke with an employee of a leading Telecommunication Company this morning and he admitted that his company had, in fact,encouraged employees to vote that the Wi Fi computer system offered no danger to health, as part of the BBC survey. This is typical of the tactics these companies will use to defend their business interests and win public support. Lack of transparency and honesty and a high dependancy on the profit motive is the name of their game.

Geoff Williams, Southport



Re: The nay sayers

Re Prof M Sperrin, 2 of the Science Media Centre's sponsors are the Mobile Operators Association and Vodaphone.

John E



Support Panorama!!!

I urge everyone to go to https://www.bbc.co.uk/complaints/make_complaint_step1.shtml and select the "send praise" option in support of Panorama.

I have supported the Panorama with the following comment (thanks to others who supplied some of the text!!):-

This excellent programme really speaks for itself. Credit must go to Panorama's researchers, and to Paul Kenyon, the presenter. How anyone viewing could doubt the integrity of the presentation and the risk to health, is beyond my comprehension. The most important fact to come out of this programme is the stance being taken by Professor Sir William Stewart, Chairman of the Health Protection Agency. It is he who states quite categorically that there may well be a problem with WiFi technology and that an immediate review is called for. Whatever the so-called experts (many of whom are sponsored by the Mobile Phone Operators and whom are giving their opinions out of their fields of expertise) might think, Sir William is a past Chairman of the NRPB (National Radiological Protection Board) and his credentials give him the greatest credibility in this debate. Thus, this is a very worthy subject which was covered correctly, and bravely on the part of the Researchers and the Presenter. I wish that more programmes covered this topic since Panorama has just scratched the surface.

Don't waste time - Do it NOW!

Adrian



This was my letter
Sarah

Feedback:

The programme on WiFi was outstanding. It was also very brave of the producers and editor to stick their necks out in the face of such opposition from people who don't 'believe' there is a problem. The fact that children are being exposed to significat levels of microwave radiation all day long in their school without parents consent is nothing short of a scandal. THere are many eminent scientists besides the ones interviewed in the programme who are speaking out againt this technology. The government gain £15 billion pa in tax revenue and are firmly in bed with the industry. We need programmes like this to expose what is going on and bring the scientific evidence to the fore. To quote Dr Neil Cherry, one of the foremost long-term researchers ŒŠ.the ICNIRP guideline exposure level is set many orders of magnitude too high to accomplish this (protection of public health). Š..This (view) has been intransigently maintained in the face of compelling laboratory and epidemiological evidence of adverse health effects that would have had a chemical declared carcinogenic, neuropathogenic, cardiogenic and teratogenic for humans many years ago.

--------

Submitted to BBC

to: Wi-Fi - A Warning Signal

Thank you! Really capable and professional made.

The scene, when Sir Stuart says, "I think, they are wrong", I'll never forget.

Our pain near base stations and mobile phones is too much...

Now Repacholi says: "I will only say, what science says."

In Geneve (2005 WHO-workshop Base Stations) he said:
( https://www.nirmed.org/Dokumente/WHO_base_stations_report.pdf )

"Evidence is, that fields from Base Stations cannot do anything to the molecules (of biological tissue). The fear that something might happen in the future causes the effect. WHO EMF is exactly telling what science says and will not help to propagate myths." Where is the evidence? There is not one study to substantiate!

See here: "The Lancet: WHO Ignored Evidence in Guidelines"
( https://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2007/5/8/155851.shtml )

But they search and he gave the direction they should take.

So may be, he would mean: "What the science will say, only I say."

That's over now, take a look at
https://userpage.chemie.fu-berlin.de/fb_chemie/ipc/illewww/www/publications.html

"Decomposition of thymidine by low energy electrons. Implications for the molecular mechanisms of single strand breaks in DNA" (VIP Article) S. Ptasinska, S. Denifl, P. Scheier, T.D. Märk, S. Gohlke, E. Illenberger Angew. Ch. Int. Ed. 2006, 45, 1893-1896

Best regards

Helmut Breunig
Germany

--------

Re: BBC Panorama program on WI-Fi irks industry

Thanks for the Panorama program regarding WiFi. A most excellent documentation about the hazards of equipment sending pulsed wireless radiation.

People can not see, feel or smell the danger, so most think there isn't any. Decades of science show there are serious dangers not only for human but also for animals and plants.

Today we live in a global microwave oven, with expositions no human being had to tolerate before. Official limits are not made to protect people, they just protect one from being cooked in 6 minutes. Even WHO acknowledges those limits aren't made to protect anyone from long term risks like cancer.

Yet, just to save a few bucks in terms of installation officials place WiFi inside schools, near children. Resulting in radiation 3 times higher then in the main beam of a mobile base stations within 100 Meter distance, as measured in your documentation.

Precaution is the first thing to apply as Sir William Stewart pointed out. Next step should be to rethink limits which are plain wrong according to many serious scientists and Sir William Stewart.

Peace

Tom



BBC Panorama program on WI-Fi irks industry
https://www.emfacts.com/weblog/index.php?p=732

More on the aftermath of the Panorama Wi-Fi program
https://www.emfacts.com/weblog/index.php?p=733

Panorama Program can be seen embedded in MS Website
https://www.mastsanity.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=132&Itemid=1

Panorama WiFi transcript
https://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/panorama/6683969.stm

Study questions Wi-Fi effect on children
https://www.earthtimes.org/articles/show/65574.html

Wi-Fi risks in schools 'must be reviewed'
https://freepage.twoday.net/stories/3749736/

WiFi: A Warning Signal
https://freepage.twoday.net/stories/3730481/

Microwaves are a hazard to life
https://omega.twoday.net/stories/189655/

Microwave–ovens cause cancer after all
https://omega.twoday.net/stories/189666/

Man turns the Earth into a Microwave–Oven
https://omega.twoday.net/stories/189645/

--------

UK press coverage about BBC1 Panorama (WiFi dangers)

Some Articles what the UK press thought about the most interesting BBC1 panorama WiFi documentation. BBC1 Panorama is the flagship BBC documentation, broadcast at prime time.

The most impressive comment from visitors I saw (The Times):

"Microwave transmitters are being used on the streets of Baghdad to disorientate and disperse crowds - this is known as the Active Denial System [ https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=Active+Denial+System&btnG=Google+Search ]. Similar tactics are also in operation in Brighton, England, to break up groups of vagrants on the streets. What other evidence do we require that microwave radiation is harmful? It is already being used as a weapon! Frankie Fox, Neston, UK"

Did anyone got an answer from BBC on his comment about the program? I was surprised to receive what looked like a non automated reply, perhaps they didn't got much positive comments?

It said they had put my reply on their board for program makers and senior management!

The Times, 21.05.07 School wi-fi radiation levels "three times that of phone masts" https://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/health/article1816571.ece

The Independent on Sunday Wif-Fi special: https://news.independent.co.uk/uk/health_medical/article2472133.ece https://news.independent.co.uk/uk/health_medical/article2472140.ece https://news.independent.co.uk/uk/health_medical/article2472139.ece https://comment.independent.co.uk/leading_articles/article2472074.ece https://news.independent.co.uk/uk/health_medical/article2472133.ece

Computer Weekly April https://www.computerweekly.com/Articles/2007/04/27/223493/calls-grow-for-investigation-into-health-effects-of.htm
17 May More Cities to have sity wide Wi-Fi https://www.computerweekly.com/Articles/2006/05/17/215980/bt-names-wi-fi-cities.htm

The Guardian critique of Panorama (before the programme was aired not after) https://technology.guardian.co.uk/news/story/0,,2084218,00.html https://education.guardian.co.uk/schools/story/0,,2084525,00.html

Retailers panic over BBC Wi-Fi scare 21.05.07 https://www.pcpro.co.uk/news/113614/retailers-panic-over-bbc-wifi-scare.html

Daily Mail 26.05.07 https://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=456534&in_page_id=1770&in_a_source=

The Telegraph 21.05.07 https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/05/21/nwifi21.xml

The Scotsman 21.05.07 https://news.scotsman.com/index.cfm?id=785562007

Times Wi-Fi in Schools article 11/06 https://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2-2461748,00.html

Times 280407 on Wifi https://technology.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/tech_and_web/personal_tech/article1718256.ece CBS News on Wi-Fi in schools, April 2007 https://www.cnsnews.com/news/viewstory.asp?Page=/Culture/archive/200704/CUL20070425e.html Daily Mail Wi-Fi Article 300407 https://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/health/healthmain.html?in_article_id=449981&in_page_id=1774

Ecologist on Wi-Fi https://www.theecologist.org/news_detail.asp?content_id=893

Norwich Wifi Regional Press https://omega.twoday.net/stories/3650200/

TES Mystery Headaches BECTA Story https://www.tes.co.uk/search/story/?story_id=2363923

Peace

Tom

--------

Praise for the Panorama Wi-Fi program and a warning for the future
https://www.emfacts.com/weblog/index.php?p=735



Praise for the Panorama Wi-Fi program and a warning for the future

With Sir William Stewart, head of the HPA calling for a review of the Wi-Fi network out of concern for our children, the BBC was right to air this program.

Any sensible and caring parent would want to know that there might be risks and that there is no conclusive scientific research into all this newer technology to date.

I personally thank the BBC for the warning. I need no convincing because I researched pulsed microwave radiation when I became electro hypersensitive without realising what it was in 2003.

It took me 14 months of trial & error and research before I was convinced and I have to say that the trial and error was the most effective. I became so sensitive that I knew when I was in the path of emissions and trial and error was the one thing that was absolutely conclusive every time.

However I have grandchildren with parents who don't want to believe these wonderful gadgets might cause harm to their more vulnerable children. For them and all the children in the world, I cannot praise the BBC and Panorama enough. Our children are the future.

Some of my grandchildren's parents are thinking hard right now.

On another note, as a lover of wildlife, I have to say this newer technology is causing problems, too.

Sandi

--------

More Panorama effects

----- Original Message -----
From: Eileen O'Connor
Sent: Tuesday, May 29, 2007 11:23 PM
Subject: Support for Professor Johansson

I have enclosed an open letter of support for Professor Olle Johansson following the shameful ridicule he has faced following the Panorama programme on Wifi.

BBC News 24 has apparently highlighted news from a Swedish blogger DennisJ who sent news to badscience.net saying that Johansson was the 2004 recipient of the Misleader of the Year award. I would like to know who voted for this award and who funds them.

Read the following quote from Dr Ian Gibson MP taken from Panorama:

‘Panorama -How seriously do you think the government is taking the precautionary approach right now, with respect to wi-fi?’

‘Dr IAN GIBSON MP Norwich North Oh, I don't think there's any doubt about it, they're not at all. wi-fi are just being rolled out as great big white heat of technology. Industry rules in this area and the precautionary principle and the safety of people who might benefit to some extent from the technology are completely dismissed. It's just it's Wild West country for the companies. They just put them where they want and say there's no evidence. Now, you know, five, ten years from now, as the evidence grows, there's enough now to be worried about it, but as the evidence grows, who knows what it might show? It might show that it's completely unsafe for certain groups of people.’

Professor Johansson’s important research is obviously causing problems for the government and industry with regards to wireless communication, mobile phones, phone masts, wifi etc. As you can see in the quote from Dr Ian Gibson MP there is a lack of political will as wireless communication is a huge money making machine for government, you know what the say ‘the best form of defence is attack’; we are up against the powerful forces of industry and government and we should defend the very people who are trying to protect public health as Johansson continues to expose the truth through his research.

Professor Olle Johansson continues to work against all odds to expose what I and many people including many doctors and scientists throughout the world now believe is one of the greatest threats to mankind in the 21st century. His work into the effects of low level, EMF/EMR (electromagnetic field/electromagnetic radiation) has lead the way and added strength to the campaign as we have been able to use over 450 pieces of published research produced by Olle Johansson.

The following quote is taken from an article written by UK journalist Kate Figes; she has written about her own sensitivity to wireless technology, this was reported in many UK national news papers. She has also faced ridicule from people who refuse to accept this problem is real.

“The government and the telecoms industry sit happily in each other's pockets and we have no say, no way to stem the tide or voice objection. It is left to a handful of scientists, such as Dr Johansson from the Karolinska Institute in Sweden who has found skin changes under the effects of low-level microwave exposure to fight for finance for his important research. Without any sense that we have a political party or government prepared to take this issue seriously, ordinary people have no choice but to become activists - campaigning against mobile phone masts that have been erected without planning permission in the heart of their communities and lobbying schools not to install Wi-Fi near where their children are supposed to be able to learn.”

Please read the enclosed interview with Professor Olle Johansson on "Mystery in Skin" https://www.feb.se/ARTICLES/OlleJ.html

It details many of Professor Johansson’s research papers and he also talks about the difficulties he faces. The BBC and news items that have published the ridicule from Swedish blogger DennisJ on badscience.net should be ashamed for reporting such rubbish against one of the greatest scientists on the planet; Olle Johansson will be remembered in history for alerting us through his research about electromagnetic fields and the dangers to public health. This man should be awarded the highest honours the world can give including major funding to continue this important research. He should not be ridiculed and starved of funds; for the sake of us all, especially our children the world needs his important work to continue.

The following quote was taken from the Mystery in the Skin interview:

“Mr. Helge Tiainen, former head of the Nokia Consumer Electronics in Sweden, in February 23, 1994, said that "The results of Olle Johansson's research could very well deeply shake the world's electronics industry, but mankind still has to know!"


Eileen O’Connor
Trustee – EM Radiation Research Trust
https://www.radiationresearch.org


Informant: Iris Atzmon

--------

Please read support for Professor Olle Johansson from Dr George Carlo.

Eileen O’Connor
Trustee – EM Radiation Research Trust

Earlier today, I was appalled to read a blog site launching vicious personal attacks on Professor Olle Johansson of the Karolinska Institute in Stockholm deriving from a well-done news report by the BBC's Panorama program. It is especially distasteful because the work of Professor Johansson and the Panorama group that garnered the unwarranted criticisms was aimed at protecting children from the dangers of WiFi in schools. We have come to a very sad state of affairs where pressures from the mobile phone industry can be used to turn saving the lives of children into a perceived vice.

Professon Olle Johansson is truly a uniquely courageous scientist who for years has put the protection of public health above his own personal and professional reputation. His scientific work is honest and impeccable, published in the open, peer-reviewed literature and cited by myself and others in the field of EMR protection as definitive reference. Indeed, many of us in the field have had discussions where Professor Johansson's name has been raised in the context of nomination for a Nobel Prize. In reality, the people leveling these fraudulent and slanderous attacks on the reputation of Professor Johansson do not even warrant mention on the same page with him. Were it not for the fact that unsubstantiated criticism makes it instantaneously around the world via the Internet, even responding to such silliness would be unnecessary. It is the irony of ironies.

The measure of the man is reflected in how he is viewed by those professional colleagues who know him best. Professor Johansson is one of my personal heroes and I am proud to call him a friend. To be sure, the world owes a debt of gratitude to him.

The power of his work and message underscores why he is a major threat to those who stand to profit from the dangerous practices that he opposes. It is therefore important to make this context public. His message is far too important to be muted by the influence of vested interests.


Dr. George L. Carlo
Science and Public Policy Institute
1101 Pennsylvania Ave. NW -- 7th Floor Washington, D.C. 20004 https://www.sppionline.org
202-756-7744


Informant: Sandi



Dr. Carlo Offers Support Against Vicious Web Attacks on Professor Olle Johansson

These are typical tactics of the Cell Phone Industry's Bull Dogs to attack and attempt to discredit anyone who tries to warn us of the extreme dangers posed by this technology. I have seen the same kind of websites attacking and trying to discredit other researchers who try to tell us the truth about these dangers. Why? Because their words threaten a multi-billion dollar industry that cares more about profits and keeping people unconscious than it does about the fact that this technology is indeed making people sick and destroying people's lives.

Very typical and very unconscious. Unfortunately, the unconscious at the bottom of the food chain support - and even in many cases admire - the unconscious at the top of the food chain.


peace

paul

--------

Support for Olle Johansson

Assoc. Prof. Olle Johansson is a spokesperson "for the people" at great sacrifice, considerable stress and suffering as well as threats to his livelihood. He interacts with concerned persons around-the-world -- compassionately and selflessly offering support and advice re adverse health effects of toxic electromagnetic radiation -- often referred to as "ES/EHS" (electrosensitivity/electrohypersensitivity).

A man who would point fingers at such an "honorable, deserving person" for any reason at all, is one not to be trusted...... . Ridiculous challenges by "skeptics" -- the desperation exhibited only by the "most insecure," will do nothing to stop a courageous man from "following his heart.....!!!!" Prayers "for the children" and a better world - Joanne

Joanne C. Mueller Guinea Pigs R Us
731 - 123rd Avenue N.W. Minneapolis, Minnesota 55448-2127 USA Phone: 763-755-6114
Email: jcmpelican @aol.com (5-30-07)


All truth goes through three stages: first it is ridiculed: then it is violently opposed: finally it is accepted as self evident. - Schopenhauer

"When a man who is honestly mistaken hears the truth, he will either quit being mistaken or cease to be honest!" - Author Unknown

"Life's most persistent and urgent question is: What are you doing for others?..." Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.

--------

Panorama debate online

Noticed this on the Panorama debate site I wonder who this person is?!

Sarah


https://tinyurl.com/268oq8

Added: Tuesday, 22 May, 2007, 11:49 GMT 12:49 UK

It is surprising that there are so many people choosing to ignore the potential risks. I was a senior manager, in charge of the radio network, for a large wireless operator (some where in Europe) and was presented with such overwhelming evidence of biological effects, such as 100% correlation between base stations being powered (during commissioning) and epileptic fits from people near the masts. The company set up a committee, of which I was a member, to discredit the evidence and make sure it never reached the public domain. I'm worried about wifi, we all should be !

Anon, Europe

--------

Letter of support for Olle Johansson
https://www.emfacts.com/weblog/index.php?p=738

The Radiation Blob, Indeed
https://omega.twoday.net/stories/3796260/

Wireless Electro-Sensitivity: a physicist with ES replies to NewsWireless
https://www.newswireless.net/index.cfm/article/3434



https://freepage.twoday.net/search?q=Wi-Fi
https://omega.twoday.net/search?q=Wi-Fi
https://omega.twoday.net/search?q=Goldsworthy
https://omega.twoday.net/search?q=Johansson
https://omega.twoday.net/search?q=Carlo
https://omega.twoday.net/search?q=electrosensitivity
https://omega.twoday.net/search?q=Panorama

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=456534&in_page_id=1770&in_a_source=



https://freepage.twoday.net/search?q=+wi-fi+internet
https://omega.twoday.net/search?q=wi-fi+internet