(About the masts) "No conclusions can be drawn regarding long-term base station-like exposure on human health."
(About the mobile phones) "No conclusions can be drawn regarding short term-effects of cell phone exposure on human health."
".. various studies identified subtle effects regarding changes in brain activity or influences on cognitive function such as reaction times, working memory and attention ..".
(About the masts) A large epidemiologic study in Austria has found a strong relationship between headache and base stations.
Subjective symptoms, etcetera in subjects living near mobile phone stations.
H-P Hutter, H. Moshammer, P Wallner, M Kundi. Occup Environ Med 2006;63;307-313.
Omega see under: http://omega.twoday.net/stories/1840014/
(About the mobile phones) Recent research in India shows that people who use a mobile phone have 40% damaged cells, against 10% in people without a mobile phone. People who use a mobile phone have five times more micronuclei than people without a mobile phone. This relates to the findings about brain cancer and mobile phone use after ten years.
Genetic damage in mobile phone users.
Gursatej Gandhi. Indian Journal of Human Genetics. May-August 2005. Volume 11, Issue 2.
Omega see under: http://omega.twoday.net/stories/1960035/
Any conclusion from the Swiss study about health, permanent exposure and mobile phone use is false.
Swiss replica: founders, sponsors and the like
Just look at this:
Here is who founded the institute who made the Swiss study, the founders, sponsors and the lot.
The cloud of the industry is thicker than migrating birds in the autumn, and it is Their Own Foundation!
Talk about putting foxes to watch geese!
Note they write "All authors declare no conflict of interest". Oh yeah, tell me another one.
They are all here, the whole bloody lot of them, just look for your selves, nothing but the Industry!
No wonder the result was like this.
No wonder it took so long to deliver.
Lets hope the scientists who claim to have worked on this project can sleep at night, not because they feel guilty, but they have just gone out and ridiculed themselves in such a way, that they will never be taken seriously
Pls. also notice, there are No Graphs or Tables for frequencies, or beams as there were in the TNO report.
The only sketches and figures there are, are 1 with their supposed exposure chamber, and 1 with SAR db.
By now I do not believe this study ever took place, I think it is a Staged Show!
In the Dutch newspaper 'Reformatorisch Daglbad' an article appeared on 7 June 2006.
Prof. dr. ir. Peter Zwamborn criticizes the words of Minister Van Geel, who said the Swiss study showed unambiguously that UMTS (3G) radiation is safe.
Zwamborn, leader of the 2003 TNO Cofam study: "That is too short. The study is about short term effects. Nobody knows the long term effects yet."
He says the Swiss study is done well. But he would like to have more information about the corrective factors. "If a result does not fall within a certain range, it may be not used, because of the thought the observation is false. How this study manages this aspect, is not clear to me."
The University press release:
"The researchers accentuate [emphasise] however that the results only allow drawing conclusions about the effects of a short-term UMTS base station-like exposure on well being and cognitive function. «We can’t draw any conclusions regarding other short-term effects or the effects of a long-term, chronic exposure from UMTS base stations on potential health hazards», Peter Achermann points out. For a more conclusive evaluation of the questions at hand other follow up studies must be awaited and more research is needed." [as ever!]
But, yes, always watch out for "improvements" in replication studies. More people, that's fine; a better sample size. But different signal levels are not strictly replication, bearing non-linearity in mind.
Nor am I sure why beaming a mini-signal at a distance, 45 degrees to the back of the head is the chosen exposure method.
But "EHP online" seems a robust medium for publication, rather than a colluder, so serious follow-up comment can go that way.
Very interesting for a number of reasons is this other article published recently on EHP:
"The Chernobyl Accident 20 Years On: an Assessment of the Health Consequences and the International Response." Keith Baverstock and Dillwyn Williams (in terms of commentary on WHO, international industry protection, understanding of dosimetry, and new ways of understanding how genetic damage takes place). Do read it if you have time, it's in wonderful large print!
8 June 2006 - In The Netherlands, after the results of the Swiss study were published, resistance against UMTS/3G continues.
The environmentologists of all health services (GGDs) in The Netherlands disagree with the installation procedures for masts for mobile communication.
Nobody should be confronted without a mast in his environment without his given permission, says Fred Woudenberg, head of the department of environmental medicine of the GGD Amsterdam and president of the section of environmentologists of all 36 GGDs in The Netherlands. The worries of people about the masts and possible effects on health should be a main factor in the decision making, says Woudenberg.
He says the results of the Swiss study, though serious scientific research, have no meaning as for the possible health risks of permanent exposure.
Woudenberg does not speak as a person, but as the spokesman of all the environmentologists working with GGDs, says his colleague Matthijs Veldt.
Until now municipalities do not value the worries about health risks. When a provider asks permission to build a mast, the only criterium is if the masts fits into the spatial plans.
From Mast Network
Swiss study 3G or UMTS
There are more "replications" from the TNO study on the way: another whitewashing study paid by the Danish research council (taxpayers). The results are given on beforehand. This is the usual procedure in the socalled replication studies.´They are never replications, but always a totally different study. This is to make sure that the outcome is "no effects".
Highfrequent 2, TNO-Report and the ETH Study
UMTS-Antennen stören Wohlbefinden nicht? Schweizer Replikation widerlegt TNO-Studie?