1250 Israelis die each year from pollution-related cancer
Starmail - 8. Okt, 10:20
Mobilfunk Archiv (Englisch)
8
Okt
2007
5
Okt
2007
European Environmental Agency Director goes for the Danes
A EU press release about Denmarks criticism of the Bioinitiative report, that I have translated.
Links at the bottom
Best regards.
Agnes.
www.mast-victims.org
It is pure dishonesty, when the Danish National Health Agency concludes, that a report about the dangers of mobile phone radiation, written by International Scientists, is just a part chapter.
This is the thundertale of the director for the European Environmental Agency in a frontal attack on the Danish Agency.
The Danish National Health Agency totally misses the point, and knowingly ignores the ample provable indications that, exposure to electromagnetic radiation from f. inst MobileHandsets and Wireless Networks, can in the long run, be dangerous and health damaging.
The Danish National Health Agency thereby does not live up to their National obligation.
This is how the criticism sounds, and it does not come from an organisation for Electrosensitive people, but from the Director for the European Environmental Agency, Professor Jacqueline McGlade, herself.
She has put her heavy artillery in position against the Danish National Health Agencies estimate of a report published by the Bioinitiative Working Group. The group is made up of International Scientists, and they have concluded, on a background of examining 2000 scientific studies of Electromagnetic Radiation, that the existing guidelines for protecting the public against Radiation are insufficient.
The European Environmental Agency has added a chapter and have tried to get focus and awareness for the report.
The Agency points out, that history is loaded with examples of, that Government Agencies ignored the warning signs and did not act until the undeniable evidence was dumped on the desks of the civil services, and the devastating effects on the environment and the population already was a fact.
"We have to remember, that the precautionary principle is one of the basic principles for the EU´s Environmental policies. Proper, safe and proportional acts to prevent possible and potentially serious threats from Electromagnetic Radiation are now looked upon as proper and wise, seen from a future perspective" said Jacqueline McGlade when the report was published.
Same mission - different interpretations.
The Danish National Health Agency takes a completely different view of the 610 pages long report. The Agency caractirises it as a part chapter, unfit for use for anything. It does not live up to normal scientific standard, as it does not record sufficient discussions of possible faults.
"The report´s scientist-writers are well known in the public debate, where they consequently have stated, that they believe, that Electromagnetic fields cause a health problem, and that the Government Agencies have not decided on a sufficient public protection niveau. The Danish National Health Agency estimates, that the published report mirrors that believe, instead of going through the scientific data with the weight put on the weight of the scientific quality, as usually happens in larger reports, where existing knowledge is collected" writes the Danish National Health Agency.
It is this criticism that gets Jaqueline McGlade´s blood boiling. She states, that the Bioinitiative Scientists scrutiny is good.
"It is perverse and intellectually dishonest to pinpoint one report, when the Danish National Health Agency knows all about all the other reports and recommendations, that have come out of f.inst Germany and EU with the same conclusions and results. The Danish National Health Agency cuts off a single corner in the report, and totally misses the point, and the whole of the burden of proof with indications.
In a way the Danish National Health Agency does not deliver their National obligation" says the Director.
She concludes that it is wrong, when the Danish National Health Agency dismisses, that there are longtime health damages from being exposed to Electromagnetic Radiation. There do not exist any studies of, what happens, if someone is exposed to the Radiation f.inst by using a Mobile phone for more than 10 years.
On the contrary, indications for the health damage are coming to light, f.inst the higher risk of developing brain tumours, Jacqueline McGlade pinpoints.
Need to sound the alarm over warning signals.
The indications demand, that the Agency have to use the EU´s precautionary Principle, which states that the Government Agencies should try to minimise the exposure of Mobile Radiation and inform of safety precautions.
It might be, that people should use headsets, as these, according to the British studies reduce the Electromagnetic Radiation to the head by 25 procent.
"There is no reason, whatsoever, to risk serious health damage, when you can take precautions, that do not cost anything.
That would also signal the manufacturers of the equipment. The history with f.inst Asbestos and PVC clearly shows, that it is only when the public gets worried, that the Industry tries to design a safer equipment.If we are mistaken, the worst case scenario will be that the public has tried to minimise the Radiation. " Says Jacqueline McGlade
The Danish National Health Agency and the European Environmental Agency have a very similar roll:
To contribute with trustworthy, documented recommendations. How can there be so big a difference between your interpretations, and why should we trust the European Environmental Agency?
"Because we base our recommendations on a very broad base over the whole of Europe. This is why we have a European Environmental Agency. We have no intersts in any National Politcal or National Govermental means and we are by and large free to be express our views to the citizens. We are not bound by any countries policies.
We have, for a long time now, worked towards that the European Countries ought to put more weight on warning signals from Scientists and inform about the precautions. So it is a question of preoriticing" says
Jacqueline McGlade
Translated from Danish by: Agnes Ingvarsdottir.
http://www.mast-victims.org
http://www.mast-victims.org/index.php?content=news&action=view&type=newsitem&id=2323
Source: http://ing.dk/artikel/82068
http://omega.twoday.net/search?q=BioInitiative
http://omega.twoday.net/search?q=EEA
http://omega.twoday.net/search?q=Denmark
Links at the bottom
Best regards.
Agnes.
www.mast-victims.org
It is pure dishonesty, when the Danish National Health Agency concludes, that a report about the dangers of mobile phone radiation, written by International Scientists, is just a part chapter.
This is the thundertale of the director for the European Environmental Agency in a frontal attack on the Danish Agency.
The Danish National Health Agency totally misses the point, and knowingly ignores the ample provable indications that, exposure to electromagnetic radiation from f. inst MobileHandsets and Wireless Networks, can in the long run, be dangerous and health damaging.
The Danish National Health Agency thereby does not live up to their National obligation.
This is how the criticism sounds, and it does not come from an organisation for Electrosensitive people, but from the Director for the European Environmental Agency, Professor Jacqueline McGlade, herself.
She has put her heavy artillery in position against the Danish National Health Agencies estimate of a report published by the Bioinitiative Working Group. The group is made up of International Scientists, and they have concluded, on a background of examining 2000 scientific studies of Electromagnetic Radiation, that the existing guidelines for protecting the public against Radiation are insufficient.
The European Environmental Agency has added a chapter and have tried to get focus and awareness for the report.
The Agency points out, that history is loaded with examples of, that Government Agencies ignored the warning signs and did not act until the undeniable evidence was dumped on the desks of the civil services, and the devastating effects on the environment and the population already was a fact.
"We have to remember, that the precautionary principle is one of the basic principles for the EU´s Environmental policies. Proper, safe and proportional acts to prevent possible and potentially serious threats from Electromagnetic Radiation are now looked upon as proper and wise, seen from a future perspective" said Jacqueline McGlade when the report was published.
Same mission - different interpretations.
The Danish National Health Agency takes a completely different view of the 610 pages long report. The Agency caractirises it as a part chapter, unfit for use for anything. It does not live up to normal scientific standard, as it does not record sufficient discussions of possible faults.
"The report´s scientist-writers are well known in the public debate, where they consequently have stated, that they believe, that Electromagnetic fields cause a health problem, and that the Government Agencies have not decided on a sufficient public protection niveau. The Danish National Health Agency estimates, that the published report mirrors that believe, instead of going through the scientific data with the weight put on the weight of the scientific quality, as usually happens in larger reports, where existing knowledge is collected" writes the Danish National Health Agency.
It is this criticism that gets Jaqueline McGlade´s blood boiling. She states, that the Bioinitiative Scientists scrutiny is good.
"It is perverse and intellectually dishonest to pinpoint one report, when the Danish National Health Agency knows all about all the other reports and recommendations, that have come out of f.inst Germany and EU with the same conclusions and results. The Danish National Health Agency cuts off a single corner in the report, and totally misses the point, and the whole of the burden of proof with indications.
In a way the Danish National Health Agency does not deliver their National obligation" says the Director.
She concludes that it is wrong, when the Danish National Health Agency dismisses, that there are longtime health damages from being exposed to Electromagnetic Radiation. There do not exist any studies of, what happens, if someone is exposed to the Radiation f.inst by using a Mobile phone for more than 10 years.
On the contrary, indications for the health damage are coming to light, f.inst the higher risk of developing brain tumours, Jacqueline McGlade pinpoints.
Need to sound the alarm over warning signals.
The indications demand, that the Agency have to use the EU´s precautionary Principle, which states that the Government Agencies should try to minimise the exposure of Mobile Radiation and inform of safety precautions.
It might be, that people should use headsets, as these, according to the British studies reduce the Electromagnetic Radiation to the head by 25 procent.
"There is no reason, whatsoever, to risk serious health damage, when you can take precautions, that do not cost anything.
That would also signal the manufacturers of the equipment. The history with f.inst Asbestos and PVC clearly shows, that it is only when the public gets worried, that the Industry tries to design a safer equipment.If we are mistaken, the worst case scenario will be that the public has tried to minimise the Radiation. " Says Jacqueline McGlade
The Danish National Health Agency and the European Environmental Agency have a very similar roll:
To contribute with trustworthy, documented recommendations. How can there be so big a difference between your interpretations, and why should we trust the European Environmental Agency?
"Because we base our recommendations on a very broad base over the whole of Europe. This is why we have a European Environmental Agency. We have no intersts in any National Politcal or National Govermental means and we are by and large free to be express our views to the citizens. We are not bound by any countries policies.
We have, for a long time now, worked towards that the European Countries ought to put more weight on warning signals from Scientists and inform about the precautions. So it is a question of preoriticing" says
Jacqueline McGlade
Translated from Danish by: Agnes Ingvarsdottir.
http://www.mast-victims.org
http://www.mast-victims.org/index.php?content=news&action=view&type=newsitem&id=2323
Source: http://ing.dk/artikel/82068
http://omega.twoday.net/search?q=BioInitiative
http://omega.twoday.net/search?q=EEA
http://omega.twoday.net/search?q=Denmark
Starmail - 5. Okt, 07:41
4
Okt
2007
3
Okt
2007
Repacholi Admits Interference from the Industry at the World Health Organisation EMF Project
http://groups.google.com/group/mobilfunk_newsletter/t/a55e73947abe99b4
--------
Repacholi CV
What of his Chairmanships of self selecting bodies which have assiduously excluded expert bioscientists who challenge their industry aligned views?
Arthur
IRPA/INIRC: Member of the International Radiation Protection Association's (IRPA) International Non-Ionizing Radiation Committee since 1978. Chairman of Committee 1988—1992.
ICNIRP: Inaugural Chairman of the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection May 1992 to April 1996. ICNIRP - an "independent" scientific body chartered to review the scientific literature and provide advice on protection from exposure to all non-ionizing radiations and fields. (ICNIRP was formed from the membership of IRPA/INIRC )
http://www.iddd.de/umtsno/odpsejm/electricwords/RepacholiResume.htm
http://www.normatividadantenas.gov.co/documentos/Documentos_tecnicos/ICNIRP_GUIDELINES.pdf
of ICNIRP, based in Germany and constituted as a 'private club'.
The late Dr Neil Cherry said - 'Is ICNIRP really an independent body of scientists? In 2000 in Europe I talked with scientists who described ICNIRP as a self-appointed NGO. This description seemed to make sense as they only appoint people who agree with them.
They claim that they are independent of the WHO and are recognised by it. "Who in the WHO recognises them?" is my question. The answer is "Dr Michael Repacholi". He claims to be independent of ICNIRP, but actually helped to form it, chaired it for many years and is currently Chairman Emeritus.
I believe that this is a construct to give each other status and credibility. When independent scientists look at the ICNIRP and WHO scientific assessments these assessments are obviously and demonstrably selective, biased and methodologically wrong by inappropriately dismissing epidemiological evidence. This has been demonstrated in my ICNIRP review report and in my presentations in Europe'.
(See also 'No secrets between ICNIRP and WHO Emf Group - half the membership is common!')
From Mast Sanity/Mast Network
http://www.mastsanity.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=168&Itemid=1
http://omega.twoday.net/search?q=Repacholi
http://omega.twoday.net/search?q=World+Health+Organisation
http://omega.twoday.net/search?q=ICNIRP
http://omega.twoday.net/search?q=emf+project
http://omega.twoday.net/search?q=Neil+Cherry
--------
Repacholi CV
What of his Chairmanships of self selecting bodies which have assiduously excluded expert bioscientists who challenge their industry aligned views?
Arthur
IRPA/INIRC: Member of the International Radiation Protection Association's (IRPA) International Non-Ionizing Radiation Committee since 1978. Chairman of Committee 1988—1992.
ICNIRP: Inaugural Chairman of the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection May 1992 to April 1996. ICNIRP - an "independent" scientific body chartered to review the scientific literature and provide advice on protection from exposure to all non-ionizing radiations and fields. (ICNIRP was formed from the membership of IRPA/INIRC )
http://www.iddd.de/umtsno/odpsejm/electricwords/RepacholiResume.htm
http://www.normatividadantenas.gov.co/documentos/Documentos_tecnicos/ICNIRP_GUIDELINES.pdf
of ICNIRP, based in Germany and constituted as a 'private club'.
The late Dr Neil Cherry said - 'Is ICNIRP really an independent body of scientists? In 2000 in Europe I talked with scientists who described ICNIRP as a self-appointed NGO. This description seemed to make sense as they only appoint people who agree with them.
They claim that they are independent of the WHO and are recognised by it. "Who in the WHO recognises them?" is my question. The answer is "Dr Michael Repacholi". He claims to be independent of ICNIRP, but actually helped to form it, chaired it for many years and is currently Chairman Emeritus.
I believe that this is a construct to give each other status and credibility. When independent scientists look at the ICNIRP and WHO scientific assessments these assessments are obviously and demonstrably selective, biased and methodologically wrong by inappropriately dismissing epidemiological evidence. This has been demonstrated in my ICNIRP review report and in my presentations in Europe'.
(See also 'No secrets between ICNIRP and WHO Emf Group - half the membership is common!')
From Mast Sanity/Mast Network
http://www.mastsanity.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=168&Itemid=1
http://omega.twoday.net/search?q=Repacholi
http://omega.twoday.net/search?q=World+Health+Organisation
http://omega.twoday.net/search?q=ICNIRP
http://omega.twoday.net/search?q=emf+project
http://omega.twoday.net/search?q=Neil+Cherry
Starmail - 3. Okt, 14:05
1
Okt
2007
The possibility that EMF causes serious health problems
http://groups.google.com/group/mobilfunk_newsletter/t/16a62088861b297
http://omega.twoday.net/search?q=health+problems
http://omega.twoday.net/search?q=health+problems
Starmail - 1. Okt, 09:52
Radiation risks: real or imagined?
9:00AM Monday October 01, 2007
By Anthony Doesburg
With millions of new devices - cellphones, cordless phones and Wi-Fi networks - that emit electromagnetic fields becoming indispensable in homes and workplaces, should we be worried about the hidden health effects?
Yes, according to the BioInitiative Working Group, a collection of researchers from around the world who have written a report based on thousands of studies that look for links between EMF emissions and diseases like leukaemia and brain cancer.
Read More...
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/section/story.cfm?c_id=5&objectid=10466348
http://omega.twoday.net/search?q=radiation+risk
http://omega.twoday.net/search?q=leukaemia
http://omega.twoday.net/search?q=brain+cancer
http://omega.twoday.net/search?q=BioInitiative
http://omega.twoday.net/search?q=EEA
http://omega.twoday.net/search?q=Firstenberg
By Anthony Doesburg
With millions of new devices - cellphones, cordless phones and Wi-Fi networks - that emit electromagnetic fields becoming indispensable in homes and workplaces, should we be worried about the hidden health effects?
Yes, according to the BioInitiative Working Group, a collection of researchers from around the world who have written a report based on thousands of studies that look for links between EMF emissions and diseases like leukaemia and brain cancer.
Read More...
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/section/story.cfm?c_id=5&objectid=10466348
http://omega.twoday.net/search?q=radiation+risk
http://omega.twoday.net/search?q=leukaemia
http://omega.twoday.net/search?q=brain+cancer
http://omega.twoday.net/search?q=BioInitiative
http://omega.twoday.net/search?q=EEA
http://omega.twoday.net/search?q=Firstenberg
Starmail - 1. Okt, 09:30
30
Sep
2007
Why are allergies on the rise and how can medicine combat them?
http://news.independent.co.uk/health/article3001607.ece
From Mast Sanity/Mast Network
http://omega.twoday.net/search?q=allergies
From Mast Sanity/Mast Network
http://omega.twoday.net/search?q=allergies
Starmail - 30. Sep, 16:21
29
Sep
2007
Minister to address health survey concerns
Health Minister Mary Harney is to meet with campaigners this week to address serious concerns regarding a disproportionate level of deaths in a Southside suburb. A health survey conducted by residents in Clondalkin recently revealed a high number of deaths and illnesses in an area dominated by a mobile phone mast. The survey carried out by Mast Action Clondalkin (MAC) claims a number of local people have either suffered from or are suffering from cancer and other illnesses.
Read More...
http://www.dublinpeople.com/cms/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=3080&Itemid=49
From Mast Sanity/Mast Network
http://omega.twoday.net/search?q=cancer
Read More...
http://www.dublinpeople.com/cms/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=3080&Itemid=49
From Mast Sanity/Mast Network
http://omega.twoday.net/search?q=cancer
Starmail - 29. Sep, 22:53
