Monday, October 10, 2016

International Scientist Appeal on Electromagnetic Fields & Wireless Technology

International EMF Scientist Appeal


Oct 10, 2016

Two hundred and twenty-three scientists from 41 nations have signed the International EMF Scientist AppealAll have published peer-reviewed research on electromagnetic fields (EMF) and biology or health. In addition, ten scientists who have published peer-reviewed research on related topics have signed this petition.


Mar 10, 2016

More than one hundred EMF advocacy and education nongovernmental organizations from 23 nations have signed a letter in support of the International EMF Scientist Appeal.  The letter was prepared by the IEMFA, the International Electromagnetic Fields Alliance

The letter calls upon all governments throughout the world to ... recognize that exposure to electromagnetic fields (EMF) is an emerging health and environmental crisis that requires a high priority response; review currently available EMF exposure information that demonstrates harm to humans and nature; revise current EMF exposure guidelines and propose how they can be lowered; and adopt precautionary measures to reduce EMF exposure.


Feb 8, 2016

Two hundred and twenty scientists from 41 nations have signed the International EMF Scientist AppealAll have published peer-reviewed research on electromagnetic fields (EMF) and biology or health. In addition, nine scientists who have published peer-reviewed research on related topics have signed this petition.

The nations with the most signatories are the United States (with 29), Italy (19), South Korea (15), Turkey (15), India (12), China (11), United Kingdom (11), Canada (9), Brazil (8), Iran (8), Australia (7), Spain (7), Germany (6), Sweden (6), Finland (5), Greece (5), and Russia (5).

The Appeal calls on the World Health Organization (WHO) and the United Nations (UN) including all of its member states and the UN Environment Programme (UNEP) to adopt more protective exposure guidelines for EMF and wireless technology in the face of increasing evidence of health risks.These exposures are a rapidly growing form of worldwide environmental pollution.

Links to more than 50 news stories published in over two dozen nations can be found on the Appeal web site under media coverage.


Dec 22, 2015


The European Journal of Oncology published the text of the International EMF Scientist Appeal in its December edition. The journal publishes contributions in the various areas of oncology including biology, epidemiology, pathology and clinical medicine.
International Appeal: Scientists call for protection from non-ionizing electromagnetic field exposure. European Journal of Oncology. 20(3/4): 180-182. 2015.
Abstract
We are scientists engaged in the study of biological and health effects of non-ionizing electromagnetic fields (EMF). Based upon peer-reviewed, published research, we have serious concerns regarding the ubiquitous and increasing exposure to EMF generated by electric and wireless devices. These include–but are not limited to–radiofrequency radiation (RFR) emitting devices, such as cellular and cordless phones and their base stations, Wi-Fi, broadcast antennas, smart meters, and baby monitors as well as electric devices and infra-structures used in the delivery of electricity that generate extremely-low frequency electromagnetic field (ELF EMF).
http://bit.ly/EMFappealEurJ
Oct 15, 2015

As of October 15, 2015, 215 scientists from 40 nations have signed the International EMF Scientist Appeal


Jul 20, 2015

As of July 18, 2015, 206 experts signed the Appeal.


Jun 25, 2015

WHO: It's time for a change

The World Health Organization promotes the radio frequency radiation guidelines adopted by the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP). Many countries have adopted these guidelines to serve as their regulatory standards for wireless radiation exposure from cell phones, Wi-Fi, and other wireless devices.

ICNIRP has 14 members on the commission. ICNIRP recently announced that is calling for nominations to serve on the Commission from 2016 to 2020. To be eligible for membership, one must be nominated by the Executive Council of the International Radiation Protection Association (IRPA) or an IRPA Associate Society.

IRPA, the international professional society for radiological protection, was created by health physicists with expertise in ionizing radiation. The Executive Council consists of 12 members including seven physicists, two engineers, a nuclear technologist, a biochemist, and an M.D. biologist. Their expertise and the primary focus of their association has been on protection from ionizing radiation. So it is reasonable to question why the eligibility criteria for ICNIRP membership requires that ICNIRP members be nominated by IRPA or its affiliates since ICNIRP’s domain is non-ionizing radiation protection.

Do the selection criteria for ICNIRP membership explain why ICNIRP has not adopted biologically-based guidelines to protect people from non-ionizing radiation?

ICNIRP should be composed of members who possess a comprehensive and deep understanding of the scientific literature regarding chronic, low intensity exposure to non-ionizing radiation and biology or health. In addition, these experts should be unbiased and should not have even the appearance of a conflict of interest.

Recently, 206 scientists signed the International EMF Scientist Appeal, a petition which claims that "the ICNIRP guidelines do not cover long-term exposure and low-intensity effects" and "they are insufficient to protect public health."  All of these scientists have published peer-reviewed research on non-ionizing radiation protection.
"The International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP) established in 1998 the “Guidelines For Limiting Exposure To Time-Varying Electric, Magnetic, and Electromagnetic Fields (up to 300 GHz)”[1]." These guidelines are accepted by the WHO and numerous countries around the world. The WHO is calling for all nations to adopt the ICNIRP guidelines to encourage international harmonization of standards. In 2009, the ICNIRP released a statement saying that it was reaffirming its 1998 guidelines, as in their opinion, the scientific literature published since that time “has provided no evidence of any adverse effects below the basic restrictions and does not necessitate an immediate revision of its guidance on limiting exposure to high frequency electromagnetic fields."http://emfscientist.org/index.php/emf-scientist-appeal
Perhaps, it is time for the WHO to replace ICNIRP with an expert committee that has greater expertise regarding non-ionizing radiation protection and use this committee to establish the WHO guidelines for wireless radiation. 


Jun 8, 2015

Joel M. Moskowitz, Ph.D. submitted the International EMF Scientist Appeal along with the Press Release and a description of the Appeal to the Federal Communications Commission in response to an FCC request for input regarding its radio frequency radiation regulations which were adopted in 1996 (Proceeding Number 13-84).

These three documents can be downloaded from FCC web site at http://bit.ly/FCCappeal.

A summary of key documents submitted to the FCC under Proceeding Number 13-84 is available at http://bit.ly/FCCkeydocs.


Jun 4, 2015

The "International EMF Scientist Appeal" has generated more than 48 news stories in 26 nations written in 21 different languages attesting to the global reach of this petition.


May 16, 2015

On Monday, May 11th, 190 scientists from 39 nations submitted an appeal to the United Nations, the UN member states, and the World Health Organization (WHO) requesting they adopt more protective exposure guidelines for electromagnetic fields (EMF) and wireless technology* in the face of increasing evidence of risk.These exposures are a rapidly growing form of environmental pollution worldwide. 

*(e.g., cell phones, cordless phones, Wi-Fi, wireless devices, cell towers, wireless utility meters).

The “International EMF Scientist Appeal” asks the Secretary General, UN affiliated bodies and all member nations to encourage precautionary measures, to limit EMF exposures, and to educate the public about health risks, particularly to children and pregnant women.

To date, the petition has been signed by 200 EMF scientists from 40 countries -- each has published peer-reviewed research on non-ionizing EMF and biology or health -- about 2,000 scientific papers in all. 

The EMFscientist.org web site launched last Monday has been visited by people in 119 countries attesting to the global reach of this emerging public health crisis. The site contains information about this "wake up call" from the scientific community including a 3-minute video announcing the Appeal by Dr. Martin Blank, a past president of the International Bioelectromagnetics Society who has had over 30 years of experience conducting EMF research at Columbia University.

The International EMF Alliance has begun to collect endorsements of the Appeal from non-governnmental (i.e., non-profit) organizations around the world.]


May 11, 2015


PRESS RELEASE


International Scientists Appeal to U.N. to Protect Humans and Wildlife from Electromagnetic Fields and Wireless Technology


WHO’s conflicting stance on risk needs strengthening, says 190 scientists


New York, NY, May 11, 2015. Today 190 scientists from 39 nations submitted an appeal to the United Nations, UN member states and the World Health Organization (WHO) requesting they adopt more protective exposure guidelines for electromagnetic fields (EMF) and wireless technology in the face of increasing evidence of risk. These exposures are a rapidly growing form of environmental pollution worldwide.

The “International EMF Scientist Appeal” asks the Secretary General and UN affiliated bodies to encourage precautionary measures, to limit EMF exposures, and to educate the public about health risks, particularly to children and pregnant women.

The Appeal highlights WHO’s conflicting positions about EMF risk. WHO’s International Agency for Research on Cancer classified Radiofrequency radiation as a Group 2B “Possible Carcinogen” in 2011, and Extremely Low Frequency fields in 2001.  Nonetheless, WHO continues to ignore its own agency’s recommendations and favors guidelines recommended by the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP). These guidelines, developed by a self-selected group of industry insiders, have long been criticized as non-protective.

The Appeal calls on the UN to strengthen its advisories on EMF risk for humans and to assess the potential impact on wildlife and other living organisms under the auspices of the UN Environmental Programme, in line with the science demonstrating risk, thereby resolving this inconsistency.

Martin Blank, PhD, of Columbia University, says, 
"International exposure guidelines for electromagnetic fields must be strengthened to reflect the reality of their impact on our bodies, especially on our DNA. The time to deal with the harmful biological and health effects is long overdue. We must reduce exposure by establishing more protective guidelines.”
Joel Moskowitz, PhD, of University of California, Berkeley, says, 

“ICNIRP guidelines set exposure standards for high-intensity, short-term, tissue-heating thresholds. These do not protect us from the low-intensity, chronic exposures common today. Scientists signing the Appeal request that the UN and member nations protect the global human population and wildlife from EMF exposures.”


International EMF Scientist Appeal, Description of the Appeal and Spokesperson Quotes:  EMFscientist.org

Video Statement (3 min.) by Spokesperson Martin Blank, PhD:  EMFscientist.org
     (An HD version of the video statement is available on request.)


Contacts:

Elizabeth Kelley, MA, Director             Joel Moskowitz, PhD               
EMFscientist.org                                  School of Public Health, UC Berkeley
info@EMFscientist.org                         jmm@berkeley.edu