MOBILE PHONE GIANTS PANIC AFTER DAMNING GOVERNMENT REPORT ON HEALTH RISKS
I know this sounds pathetic, but I am always terribly nervous about putting things out. Still I have to bite the bullet. This is my contribution, for discussion, alteration or dismissal!
Jenny
MOBILE PHONE GIANTS PANIC AFTER DAMNING GOVERNMENT REPORT ON HEALTH RISKS.
Sir William Stewart, the Government’s Chief Scientific Advisor and head of the NRPB, recommends that children under 8 should be banned from using mobiles, and that 9 to 14 year olds should only use them in emergencies. He is concerned that since his original Report in 2000, scientific research from around the world shows evidence of potential risk from radiation from mobile phones and masts well below current ICNIRP guidelines. This must not be ignored. He recommends new planning laws to protect the health and safety of the public, and adds that masts should not be placed near schools.
Judging by the article in theTelegraph (Jan 16th) in response to Sir William Stewart’s devastating report on health risks from mobile phones and masts, the Telecom companies seem to have lost the plot!
Unable to argue the real science, the best they can do is call on the services of shrinks and the likes of sociologist Adam Burgess, to subtly imply that Sir William Stewart is psychologically ill equipped for his job. It is hard to ignore the contempt in Burgess' voice. Though he doesn't say so outright, the feeling one gets is that the British public are mentally unhinged if they take seriously, the precautionary approach that Sir William advises. “It’s all inconsequential,” the ubiquitous Dr Burgess states. But perhaps, as he does his many interviews, he is really killing two birds with one stone, spinning some outrageous propaganda for the telecom companies, whilst at the same time grabbing his 15 minutes of fame in order to hype his rather silly book. And why not – we all have to earn a living – though some of us would balk at his ‘throw caution to the wind’ attitude with regard to the health and safety of children.
In a phone-in with Dr Burgess, I said that advocating such an approach was appallingly irresponsible. All he could do was laugh. When it comes down to the real argument, people like this simply aren’t up to the job. However, why should we be pointing out their failings? The national organisation Mast Sanity is now gaining an unstoppable momentum, so it is very much to our advantage to have people like Dr Burgess batting for the other side.
Robert Matthews’ article in the Telegraph was a transparent and appalling piece of telecom propaganda, with not a shred of scientific evidence to prop up its arguments. To quote Roger Coghill (a ‘real’ scientist and expert in this field).
“I cannot believe that any responsible journalist would expose themselves to the ridicule of the scientific community with the kind of patent ignorance displayed in the Telegraph article. There has been persistent evidence of health hazard from studies way back to three or so decades ago. The Chinese nation (some 1.3 billion) takes those studies seriously by regulating far lower limits than ICNIRP. I presume this article was simply some industry plant, since it is far beneath any serious scientific attention. Roger Coghill MA (Cantab) C Biol MI Biol MA (Environ Mgt).”
Roger Coghill’s assumption that Matthews’ article was ‘simply some industry plant’, was no idle comment. It is surely too much of a coincidence that the Executive Director of the Daily Telegraph is non other than John Allwood, the former CEO of Orange. In the light of that knowledge, readers must judge for themselves the credibility and motives of the article.
The Industry’s desperate attempt to silence or discredit everyone who dares to suggest there are risks, reveals the enormity of the problem. If the technology isn’t safe, billions will have to be spent making it safe. No self respecting global giant would be prepared to sacrifice profits just to protect public safety. So, when a bomb shell like the Stewart Report hits the media headlines, damage limitation (the art of spin and lies) goes into overdrive.
However, it is truly shocking that anyone should advocate such dangerous nonsense as ignoring the precautionary principle with regard to children. In my opinion, it borders on the criminal to send out a message which could have such serious consequences. Of course we all hope that the worst case scenario doesn’t happen. But we can’t guarantee that it won’t, anymore than we can guarantee that it will. Right now the evidence of harm to health is mounting alarmingly. The least we can do for the sake of the next generation, is guard against the possibility – and those who say this is the action of fools and fanatics, have obviously not learned the lessons of history. Or perhaps it has nothing to do with ignorance – and everything to do with greed, self interest and an utter lack of morality.
Jennifer Godschall Johnson – Mast Sanity
Fields of Influence - Mobile phones "the largest human biologic experiment"
http://omega.twoday.net/stories/473121/
Jenny
MOBILE PHONE GIANTS PANIC AFTER DAMNING GOVERNMENT REPORT ON HEALTH RISKS.
Sir William Stewart, the Government’s Chief Scientific Advisor and head of the NRPB, recommends that children under 8 should be banned from using mobiles, and that 9 to 14 year olds should only use them in emergencies. He is concerned that since his original Report in 2000, scientific research from around the world shows evidence of potential risk from radiation from mobile phones and masts well below current ICNIRP guidelines. This must not be ignored. He recommends new planning laws to protect the health and safety of the public, and adds that masts should not be placed near schools.
Judging by the article in theTelegraph (Jan 16th) in response to Sir William Stewart’s devastating report on health risks from mobile phones and masts, the Telecom companies seem to have lost the plot!
Unable to argue the real science, the best they can do is call on the services of shrinks and the likes of sociologist Adam Burgess, to subtly imply that Sir William Stewart is psychologically ill equipped for his job. It is hard to ignore the contempt in Burgess' voice. Though he doesn't say so outright, the feeling one gets is that the British public are mentally unhinged if they take seriously, the precautionary approach that Sir William advises. “It’s all inconsequential,” the ubiquitous Dr Burgess states. But perhaps, as he does his many interviews, he is really killing two birds with one stone, spinning some outrageous propaganda for the telecom companies, whilst at the same time grabbing his 15 minutes of fame in order to hype his rather silly book. And why not – we all have to earn a living – though some of us would balk at his ‘throw caution to the wind’ attitude with regard to the health and safety of children.
In a phone-in with Dr Burgess, I said that advocating such an approach was appallingly irresponsible. All he could do was laugh. When it comes down to the real argument, people like this simply aren’t up to the job. However, why should we be pointing out their failings? The national organisation Mast Sanity is now gaining an unstoppable momentum, so it is very much to our advantage to have people like Dr Burgess batting for the other side.
Robert Matthews’ article in the Telegraph was a transparent and appalling piece of telecom propaganda, with not a shred of scientific evidence to prop up its arguments. To quote Roger Coghill (a ‘real’ scientist and expert in this field).
“I cannot believe that any responsible journalist would expose themselves to the ridicule of the scientific community with the kind of patent ignorance displayed in the Telegraph article. There has been persistent evidence of health hazard from studies way back to three or so decades ago. The Chinese nation (some 1.3 billion) takes those studies seriously by regulating far lower limits than ICNIRP. I presume this article was simply some industry plant, since it is far beneath any serious scientific attention. Roger Coghill MA (Cantab) C Biol MI Biol MA (Environ Mgt).”
Roger Coghill’s assumption that Matthews’ article was ‘simply some industry plant’, was no idle comment. It is surely too much of a coincidence that the Executive Director of the Daily Telegraph is non other than John Allwood, the former CEO of Orange. In the light of that knowledge, readers must judge for themselves the credibility and motives of the article.
The Industry’s desperate attempt to silence or discredit everyone who dares to suggest there are risks, reveals the enormity of the problem. If the technology isn’t safe, billions will have to be spent making it safe. No self respecting global giant would be prepared to sacrifice profits just to protect public safety. So, when a bomb shell like the Stewart Report hits the media headlines, damage limitation (the art of spin and lies) goes into overdrive.
However, it is truly shocking that anyone should advocate such dangerous nonsense as ignoring the precautionary principle with regard to children. In my opinion, it borders on the criminal to send out a message which could have such serious consequences. Of course we all hope that the worst case scenario doesn’t happen. But we can’t guarantee that it won’t, anymore than we can guarantee that it will. Right now the evidence of harm to health is mounting alarmingly. The least we can do for the sake of the next generation, is guard against the possibility – and those who say this is the action of fools and fanatics, have obviously not learned the lessons of history. Or perhaps it has nothing to do with ignorance – and everything to do with greed, self interest and an utter lack of morality.
Jennifer Godschall Johnson – Mast Sanity
Fields of Influence - Mobile phones "the largest human biologic experiment"
http://omega.twoday.net/stories/473121/
Starmail - 19. Jan, 10:04
