Expert Viewpoints and Appeals


          back to: Viewpoints (overview)

          to: World Health Organization, ICNIRP

          to: Nocebo effect and Electrophobia

          to: other organisations

          to: pro-industry regulators

          to: Provocation test failures and problems

          to: Documentaries, Films, Humor


Introduction

The two different conditions, real physical ES/EHS, or Electrosensitivity, and psychological fear IEI-EMF, or Electrophobia, are often confused.


This confusion between real sensitivity (EHS) and psychological fear (IEI-EMF) pervades much of the modern literature. This includes the WHO Backgrounder 296 on EHS and the Wikipedia entry on EHS.


This confusion between real EHS and psychological fear IEI-EMF makes the WHO Backgrounder 296 on EHS of 2005 essentially invalid from a medical viewpoint. This WHO Backgrounder claims that real EHS no longer exists and defines IEI-EMF as a fear unrelated to real EHS. This reflects the WHO EMF Project's attempt to play down established adverse health effects from non-thermal electromagnetic exposure. The fact that the Backgrounder has not been updated with recent studies confirming real EHS established in the 1960s and 1970s, and that it does not include any reference to the thousands of people now diagnosed with real EHS based on objective medical markers in environmental clinics around the world, is said to indicate that the WHO EMF Project still remains subservient to pro-wireless activists.


1. Real, physical Electromagnetic Sensitivity (EHS)

Individual symptoms of human sensitivity to non-thermal electromagnetic exposure have been studied and recorded since ancient times. The defined condition with its specific symptoms, such as headaches, sleep effects, heart effects etc, was first published in 1932. It was established in detail, including the three stages in the progression of EHS, during the 1960s and 1970s.


In the 1980s, with the spread of cellphones, real EHS spread from being an occupational hazard for electricity, radar and radio workers, into the general population. The first support group for people with EHS was formed in Sweden in the 1980s, where cellphones were first developed. The first country, therefore, to recognise EHS as a functional impairment was also Sweden. 


Real EHS was recognised internationally by groups like the Nordic Council of Ministers in 2000. This group also allocated it an ICD-10 number. The WHO/ICNIRP recognised non-thermal ES effects and symptoms from 2001 and in 2002 advised goverments to adopt non-thermal limits to protect people vulnerable to non-thermal exposures. 


2. Psychological fear (IEI-EMF), or Electrophobia

This different condition, where a person develops Electrophobia, a fear of electromagnetic exposure, usually from information in the media, was defined in the 1990s. In 2004 the WHO EMF Project proposed the name IEI-EMF (Idiopathic Environmental Intolerance - Electromagnetic Fields) to label this fear. The WHO Backgrounder on this IEI-EMF, which it defined as a psychological fear, was misleadingly labelled "Electromagnetic hypersensitivity", a term most researchers reserve for the Real EHS, the physical condition. By defining EHS as IEI-EMF which in turn is defined as a fear which is not caused physically by EMF, the WHO has failed to provide  information on the established Real EHS.



International Commission on the Biological Effects of Electromagnetic Fields (ICBE-EMF)


Russian NCNIRP

The Russian National Committee on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection has called for biological standards and safety warnings, especially for Children and Pregnant Women.


The International EMF Scientist Appeal to the United Nations and World Health Organization

  • The International Electromagnetic Field Scientist Appeal was submitted on May 11 2015 to His Excellency Ban Ki-moon, Secretary-General of the United Nations; Honorable Dr. Margaret Chan, Director-General of the World Health Organization; Honorable Achim Steiner, Executive Director of the U.N. Environmental Programme; and U.N. Member Nations. 


5G Appeal

On September 13 2017, more than 180 scientists and doctors from 36 countries recommended a moratorium on the roll-out of the fifth generation, 5G, for telecommunication until potential hazards for human health and the environment are fully investigated by scientists independent from industry. 


International Society of Doctors for the Environment (ISDE)

(A global NGO of docotors, scientists and health professionals focused on the linkages between human health and environmental factors, founded in 1990, based at Basel, Switzerland, and possessing official consultative status with the UN and WHO.)


  • Appeal (June 16 2015) to the European Parliament:
            "Environment and health in Europe as human rights"

    Basic Principles:
        (1) Necessity of Best Health
        (2) The precautionary principle 
        (3) The priority of primary prevention

    Application domain:
        Electromagnetic Fields:
    "ISDE stresses the need to enact effective norms and measures to progressively reduce - next to schools, sports centres and densely inhabited areas - the exposure (of children and teens in particular) to this type of non-ionizing energy and that the rules concerning so-called "wireless areas" be carefully re-examined.
    The European Parliament should also strive to obtain that all European Countries draw up guidelines for the planning and the location of plants which emit non-ionising radiation, taking into account the IARC classification and adopting the precautionary principle."


The Paris Appeal

5th Congress, Belgium, May 2015


French Appeal

At the National Assembly, February 2016


Reykjavik Appeal

"Reykjavik Appeal on Wireless Technology in Schools" (February 24 2017)

This represents the current majority scientific viewpoint.

It was signed by 130 leading experts and adherents to the majority viewpoint on the dangers of low-level irradiation of children:

  • No wireless networks in preschool, kindergarten and schools.
  • A hard wired direct cable connection is recommended to each classroom for the teacher to use during lessons.
  • Prefer wired telephones for personnel in preschool, kindergarten and schools.
  • Prefer cabled connection to Internet and printers in schools and turn off Wi-Fi settings in all equipment.
  • Prefer laptops and tablets that can be connected by cable to Internet.
  • Students should not be allowed to use cell phones in schools. They can either leave them at home or the teacher collects them in turned off mode before first lesson in the morning.


Madrid International Scientific Declaration


2020 Consensus Statement of UK and International Medical and Scientific Experts and Practitioners on Health Effects of Non-Ionising Radiation (NIR)

Warnings about failure to take action


Austrian Medical Association

Protocol for diagnosing and treating EHS:


Athens Medical Association

Warnings to general public on need to reduce cellphone and WiFi radiation exposure:


Japan Pediatric Association & Japan Medical Association



Nicosia Declaration


Differing attitudes to Risk Management


Prof Trevor Marshall and immune diseases

Half of adults are EHS?


The USA's CDC says that 50% of US adults suffer from chronic disease. That 50% are potentially having  their disease symptoms made worse by Electrosmog from wireless communication devices. It seems that the primary harm from Radio Waves is not brain cancer, but exacerbation of the diseases people already have. 

At the 5th International Symposium on the "Interaction of Nervous and Immune Systems in Health and Disease" in St Petersburg, Russia, on June 26th 2015, Prof. Trevor Marshall of the Autoimmunity Research Foundation described two simple experiments which demonstrate that many patients with chronic disease also exhibit Electromagnetic Hyper-Sensitivity (EHS). The experiments  are easily replicated. 


Immune Sensitivity at -55 to -90 dBm

  • Healthy people show no adverse effects at a power level of 25nW, about 1 millionth of a cellphone,  but 90% of people with chronic inflammation disease mainly show effects (about 50% positive, 50% negative, about 8% show weak effects and 2% no effects).
  • The range of Immune Sensitivity is -55 to -90 dBm. The levels are about 1,000 times below most studies conducted on humans (at about -50 dBm).
  • Immune suppression occurs at above -55 dBm (perhaps about 0.002 V/m and under 1 uW/m2). 
  • 95% of Germans are exposed to this level or above, suggesting that 95% of Germans may also have immune dysfunction.
  • Immune dysfunction includes diseases such as CFS, MS, cancer, and premature ageing; chronic inflammation includes rheumatic arthritis, MS, and cirrhosis, All chronic diseases, such as CFS, Lyme, MS, etc involve demyelination, the electrical protection for human nerves and their axons.
  • A smartphone can already operate on 5 bars signal at -77 dBm, so it should be possible to produce technology to reduce the power of cellphones and make them operate below the Immune Suppression threshold, thus helping perhaps 50% of the adult population.  


Other



Case Studies


Electrosensitivity