Showing posts with label precautionary. Show all posts
Showing posts with label precautionary. Show all posts

Thursday, March 13, 2025

The Precautionary Principle

The precautionary principle and protection of children’s health\

World Health Organization, August 14, 2012


The precautionary principle and protection of children’s health

Overview

Precaution is about how do we make better, more preventive decisions under complexity and uncertainty – a compass not a hammer.

Excerpts

“Unrecognized risks are still risks; uncertain risks are still risks; and denied risks are still risks.” -- John Cairns, Jr.

“All scientific work is incomplete – whether it be observational or experimental. All scientific work is liable to be upset or modified by advancing knowledge. That does not confer upon us a freedom to ignore the knowledge we already have, or to postpone the action that it appears to demand at a given time.” -- Sir Bradford Hill (1965)

Widespread Statement on the Precautionary Principle

“When an activity raises threats of harm to the environment or human health, precautionary measures should be taken even if some cause and effect relationships are not fully established scientifically.”

Key components of the principle include:

- taking action to prevent harm in the face of scientific uncertainty,
- placing burdens on proponents of an activity,
- seeking out safer alternatives to potentially harmful activities, including stopping the activity; and
- democratic participation in decision-making regarding science and technology.

Problem –– Limitations in the science used to study causes of disease

  • Lack of interdisciplinary approaches to find patterns in the evidence
  • Difficulties in following populations
  • Cumulative and interactive exposures/effects
  • Low-dose impacts/windows of vulnerabilty/susceptible populations
  • Lack of explicitness about uncertainties – what is known, not known, can be known, suspected
  • Traditional scientific approaches often lead to “no problem”

Precaution and science

  • Precaution is not anti-science or just risk management. Best available science should inform policy.
  • It demands more rigorous and transparent science to characterize risks, identify opportunities for prevention and make clear gaps in understanding.
  • The role of science is to inform policy – we don’t need perfect information, but enough to decide when we know enough to act and what to do.
  • Call for more science.

Conclusions

  • Precautionary policies recognize the limits of science and policy under uncertainty and complexity.
  • Precaution should be considered a continuous approach to guide better, more health protective decisions under uncertainty.
  • The most robust decisions involve a diverse range of tools, options, stakeholders, and an ability to build on knowledge – the whole of the evidence. But precaution not a guarantor against mistakes.
  • The best environmental policies will be informed by the best available science, but will also be guided by a principle of erring on the side of caution.
  • Go beyond the border of diagnosis to solutions. Need to increase resources for research and development of safer alternatives to problem materials and activities.
  • Ultimate goal is to prevent disease and degradation and restore health.


To download the entire slide presentation: https://cdn.who.int/media/docs/default-source/childrens-environmental-health/precaution.pdf

© World Health Organization

Sunday, October 1, 2023

Presentations

Joel Moskowitz, UC Center for Occupational & Environmental Health webinar / video & slides, Nov 3, 2021

Joel Moskowitz, Occupational and Environmental Medicine Grand Rounds, University of California, San Francisco (Sep 24, 2020)
Video (52 minutes), slides and supplemental slides: https://www.saferemr.com/2020/09/UCSF-RFR-health-risks-grand-rounds.html

"Cell Phones, Cell Towers, and Wireless Safety"
Joel Moskowitz, Keynote presentation, University Health Services, University of California, Berkeley (Feb 27, 2019)
Video (72 minutes), slides, and safety tips: https://www.saferemr.com/2019/03/cellphones-cell-towers-wireless.html

Cellphones and Public Health Policy 
Joel Moskowitz, Collaborative on Health and the Environment Webinar, May 9, 2018

Video (30 minutes): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zE-ff6oSY0k

"Wireless Technology & Public Health: Health & Environmental Hazards in a Wireless World"
Joel Moskowitz, Collaborative on Health and the Environment, Teleconference (Feb 16, 2016)  http://healthandenvironment.org/wg_calls/18206
Slides: http://healthandenvironment.org/uploads/docs/MoskowitzslidesFeb162016.pdf
Audio:  http://che.webfactional.com/audio/chepartnercallwirelesstechfeb162016.mp3
Q&A:    http://healthandenvironment.org/articles/partnership_blog/18207

"Wireless Phone Radiation Risks and Public Health Policy"
Joel Moskowitz, UCLA Fielding School of Public Health presentation (Oct 22, 2015)
Slides: http://bit.ly/wirelessradiationUCLA102215


"Wireless Phone Radiation Risks and Public Health Policy"
Joel Moskowitz, Mountain View Center for Performing Arts (Oct 10, 2015)
Slides: http://bit.ly/MtnView10102015
Video:  http://bit.ly/talk101015jmm (46:29)

"Cell Phones and Your Health" (BEUHS653)
Joel Moskowitz, UC Berkeley faculty and staff presentation (Sep 10, 2015)
Sponsored by University Health Services/Health Matters and CITRIS
Slides: http://bit.ly/ucbjmm091015

"Cell Phone and Wireless Radiation Safety Policy Options"
Joel Moskowitz, "Final Remarks: Domestic Policy Implications," Commonwealth Club of California (Jun 22, 2015) 
Slides: http://bit.ly/PolicyOptionsJMM
Video:  https://vimeo.com/133169375 (10:26)

Video & slides for the Commonwealth Club forum: "Cell Phones and Wireless Technologies: Should Safety Guidelines Be Strengthened to Protect Adults, Children and Vulnerable Populations – and Should Parents, Teachers and Schools Restrict Technology Overuse among Children?" (Jun 22, 2015): http://bit.ly/CC062215

"Wireless Phone Radiation Risks and Public Health"
Joel Moskowitz, UC Berkeley lecture, Health and Social Behavior (PH200) (Apr 8, 2015)
Slides: http://bit.ly/jmm04082015

"Mobile Phone Use and Cancer Risk: Research on a Group 2B Carcinogen"
Joel Moskowitz, Webinar for CDC Work Group on Cancer Prevention (Oct 29, 2014)
Slides:    http://bit.ly/CDCWebinar102914
Audio:     http://bit.ly/101l2lR or http://bit.ly/1tDZbg2

"Mobile Phone Radiation and Health: Recent Research and Policy Developments"
Joel Moskowitz, Haas School of Business, University of California, Berkeley (Jun 19, 2014)
Slides:     http://bit.ly/1lFp9vc

"Brain Tumor Risk from Wireless Phone Use: Recent Research and Policy Implications"
Joel Moskowitz, Commonwealth Club of California (Part II: Dec 9, 2013) 
Slides:    http://bit.ly/1k9PeRQ
Video:     http://bit.ly/1kxkpto or http://bit.ly/1hx3t5j

"Expert Roundtable: Skeptical about Cell Phones and Health?"
Forum at Commonwealth Club of California (Dec 9, 2013)
Other presentations will be available soon. 
Agenda : http://bit.ly/1aqek9K


"Cell Phones & Brain Tumors What Does the Science Show?"
Joel Moskowitz, Commonwealth Club of California (Part I: Nov 18, 2010)
Slides:                       http://bit.ly/W5tNCN
Video (15 minutes): http://vimeo.com/17266112

Thursday, December 1, 2022

International Scientist Appeal on Electromagnetic Fields & Wireless Technology

International EMF Scientist Appeal


As of November 22, 2022, more than 250 EMF scientists from 44 nations have signed the International EMF Scientist Appeal. These scientists have published over 2.000 peer-reviewed papers and letters on the biological or health effects of non-ionizing electromagnetic fields, part of the electromagnetic field (EMF) spectrum that includes extremely low frequency fields (ELF) emitted by electrical devices; and radiofrequency radiation (RFR), used for wireless communications. 

According to the Appeal:

"Numerous recent scientific publications have shown that EMF affects living organisms at levels well below most international and national guidelines. Effects include increased cancer risk, cellular stress, increase in harmful free radicals, genetic damages, structural and functional changes of the reproductive system, learning and memory deficits, neurological disorders, and negative impacts on general well-being in humans. Damage goes well beyond the human race, as there is growing evidence of harmful effects to both plant and animal life."

"The Appeal urgently calls upon the United Nations, the WHO, UNEP and the UN Member States to: Address the global public health concerns related to exposure to cell phones, power lines, electrical appliances, wireless devices, wireless utility meters and wireless infrastructure in residential homes, schools, communities and businesses.
 
The scientific findings identified by the signators and others justify this appeal. The World Health Organization (WHO) is encouraged to exert strong leadership in fostering the development of more protective EMF guidelines, to call for precautionary measures, and to educate the public about health risks, particularly risks posed to children and to normal fetal development. By not taking action, the WHO is failing to fulfil its role as the preeminent international public health agency."

--

July 22, 2019

U.N. Environment Programme Urged to Protect Nature and Humankind from Electromagnetic Fields (EMF)

4G/5G antenna densification is escalating health risks - a global crisis

New York, NY, July 22, 2019. The Advisors to the International EMF Scientist Appeal, representing 248 scientists from 42 nations, have resubmitted The Appeal to the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) Executive Director, Inger Andersen, requesting the UNEP reassess the potential biological impacts of next generation 4G and 5G telecommunication technologies to plants, animals and humans.

There is particular urgency at this time as new antennas will be densely located throughout residential neighborhoods using much higher frequencies, with greater biologically disruptive pulsations, more dangerous signaling characteristics, plus transmitting equipment on, and inside, homes and buildings. The Advisors to The Appeal recommend UNEP seriously weigh heavily the findings of the independent, non-industry associated EMF science.

See video of spokesperson for The Appeal, the late Martin Blank, Ph.D. of Columbia University, and read the recent letter to the UNEP and The Appeal.

The Appeal highlights the World Health Organization’s (WHO) conflicting positions about EMF risk. The 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, the WHO continues to ignore its own agency’s recommendations and favors guidelines recommended by the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP), a private German NGO with industry ties long criticized for promoting guidelines not protective of humans, and falsely assuming authority. In addition, it should be noted that no nation has established EMF exposure guidelines aiming to protect animals and plants.

The Appeal calls on the United Nations to resolve the inconsistencies among its sub-organizations and to seriously address the rapidly escalating health and environmental crisis caused by man-made EMF pollution. Leadership is needed now, especially in light of urgent warnings from international scientists about 4G/5G antenna densification, the Internet of Things (IoT), and plans for significant radiation from space emitted by tens of thousands of satellites now being launched.

The Advisors to the International EMF Scientist Appeal - Annie Sasco, MD, Dr.PH., Henry Lai, Ph.D., Joel Moskowitz, Ph.D., Ronald Melnick, Ph.D. and Magda Havas, Ph.D., call on the UNEP to be a strong voice for the total environment of the planet, and an effective catalyst within the United Nations with regards to the biological and health effects of electromagnetic pollution.

In the letter to UNEP, Dr. Havas, Professor Emeritus, Trent University's School of the Environment, Canada, details serious effects on plants, insects and wildlife from electromagnetic fields that are well documented in the scientific literature.

Ronald Melnick, Ph.D., Advisor to The Appeal and former scientist at the U.S. National Toxicology Program (NTP) within the National Institutes of Health (NIH), who managed the design and development of the NTP's recently published $30 million animal study showing a clear link between radio frequency radiation (RFR) and cancer, states: “Results from the NTP study show that the previously held assumption that radiofrequency radiation cannot cause cancer or other adverse health effects is clearly wrong.”

Policymakers the world over should take note.

See International EMF Scientist Appeal and Letter to UNEP (June 25, 2019)


Contacts:

Elizabeth Kelley, M.A., Director
EMFscientist.org
info@EMFscientist.org

Joel M. Moskowitz, Ph.D.
School of Public Health, UC Berkeley
jmm@berkeley.edu


July 1, 2019 (updated September 1, 2019)

More than two hundred forty scientists from 42 nations have signed the 
International EMF Scientist Appeal. All have published peer-reviewed research on electromagnetic fields (EMF) and biology or health -- totaling more than 2,000 papers and letters on EMF in professional journals. In addition, ten scientists who have published peer-reviewed research on related topics have signed this petition.

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.

Quotes from 21 Experts Regarding Electromagnetic Fields


July 10, 2018

Two hundred forty-two (242) scientists from 41 nations including 38 from the U.S. have signed the International EMF Scientist Appeal. All 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.


September 20, 2017

Two hundred thirty-five (235) scientists from 41 nations including 33 from the U.S. have signed the International EMF Scientist Appeal. All have published peer-reviewed research on electromagnetic fields (EMF) and biology or health. 



Mar 10, 2016

Over 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).


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://www.mattioli1885journals.com/index.php/Europeanjournalofoncology/article/view/4971

Oct 15, 2015

Two hundred fifteen scientists from 40 nations have signed the International EMF Scientist 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
                                                                             

Wednesday, March 9, 2022

Recent News Stories

Selected news stories I contributed to ....

Barbara Koeppel. Federal Court Instructs FCC to Review Electromagnetic Radiation StandardsThe Washington Spectator, Mar 9, 2022.

Fredrik Kaltsveit. Concerned about the 5Gnetwork. Minerva (in Norwegian). Mar 7, 2022.

Joel Moskowitz. 5G, Public Health, and Inconvenient TruthsLa Maison Du 21e Siècle (Canada, in French). Feb 8, 2022.

Barbara Koeppel. Wireless Hazards. The Washington Spectator, Dec 28, 2020.

Joel Moskowitz. Regulators Steamroll Health Concerns as the Global Economy Embraces 5GThe Washington Spectator. 46(9):6, September 2020.

Christopher Ketcham. Is 5G Going to Kill Us All? The New Republic, May 8, 2020.

Joel Moskowitz. Cell phones and 5G. The Lisa Wexler Show. WICC (Connecticut), Jan 30, 2020.

Joel Moskowitz. Can wireless earbuds damage your brain? Morning Show / Radio New Zealand, Jan 26, 2020.

Alexandra Stassinopoulos, Supreme Court upholds Berkeley’s ‘Right to Know’ ordinanceThe Daily Californian, Dec 13, 2019.

Joel Moskowitz. We Have No Reason to Believe 5G is Safe. Scientific American, Oct 17, 2019.

Simon Hill. Is cell phone radiation actually dangerous? We asked some experts. Digital Trends, Sep 25, 2019.

Joe Mahr. Lawsuit filed against Apple, Samsung after Chicago Tribune tests cellphones for radiofrequency radiationChicago Tribune, Aug 29, 2019.

Sam Roe. We tested popular cellphones for radiofrequency radiation. Now the FCC is investigating. Chicago Tribune, Aug 21, 2019.
  
Joel Moskowitz. 5G Health RisksBBC Radio 5, May 30, 2019 (9 minute news segment).

Markham Heid. Are AirPods and Other Bluetooth Headphones Safe? Medium, Mar 7, 2019.
  
Hiawatha Bray. Could your cellphone’s electromagnetic field make you sick? Boston Globe, Jan 17, 2019.
Lynne Peeples. Should cell phone providers warn customers of health risks? Berkeley says yesMcClatchy Washington Bureau, July 11, 2018.

Mark Hertsgaard and Mark Dowie, THE NATION, March 29, 2018.

Are you carrying your cellphone too close to your body?
Nara Schoenberg, Chicago Tribune, Jan 26, 2017.

Katia Savchuk, California Magazine, Oct 18, 2016.

Markham Heid, TIME Magazine, Sep 28, 2016.

Ryan Knutson, Wall Street Journal, July 6, 2016.

U.S. Cellphone Study Fans Cancer Worries
Ryan Knutson, Wall Street Journal, May 28, 2016.
Joel Moskowitz & Larry Junck, Wall Street Journal, May 22, 2016.

At C.D.C., a Debate Behind Recommendations on Cellphone Risk 
Danny Hakim, New York Times, Jan 1, 2016.

Does Cell-Phone Radiation Cause Cancer?
David Schipper, Consumer Reports, September 24, 2015.


Simon Hill, Digital Trends, April 21, 2015.

Hablan los expertos. ¿Es la radiación del teléfono móvil realmente peligrosa? (Spanish translation)

This West Virginia town has gone radio silent: Greetings from the quiet zone
Steve Featherstone, Popular Science, Mar 16, 2015.

Wireless Radiation: What Scientists Know and You Don’t with Dr. Joel Moskowitz
Patti and Doug Wood, WBAI-FM, Mar 10, 2015.

Mobile Phone Update
Kathryn Borg, Times of Malta, Feb 15, 2015.


Wearable Technology Poses Newfound Health Risks
Karin Wasteson, GlamMonitor, Feb 7, 2015.

Are wireless phones linked with brain cancer risk?
Ronnie Cohen, Reuters Health, Nov 11, 2014.

Experts: Why wearable tech could pose health risks. 
Brooke Crothers, Fox News, Oct 20, 2014.
Descubre los Niveles de Radiación de los iPhone 6 y iPhone 6 Plus de Apple
Patricia Alvarado, iPadizate (Spain), Oct 7, 2014.

Cellphone Boom Spurs Antenna-Safety Worries: Many Sites Violate Rules Aimed at Protecting Workers From Excessive Radio-Frequency Radiation
Ianthe Jeanne Dugan and Ryan Knutson, Wall Street Journal, Oct. 2, 2014.

Precaution or Paranoia? Berkeley May Require Cancer Warning Stickers for Cell Phones 
Sabin Russell, California Magazine, Aug 19, 2014


日用手機30分 腦癌機率爆增3倍 

Wang Zi Yin, Chinese Health Network (Taipei), August 13, 2014

            

Thursday, July 15, 2021

Radio Interviews

"Cell phones and cancer"
Pat Thurston Show, KGO Radio, July 15, 2021 (36 minutes)
Host: Pat Thurston
Guest: Joel Moskowitz


"5G Health Risks"
Up All Night, BBC Radio 5, May 30, 2019 (9 minutes)
Host: Rhod Sharp
Guest: Joel Moskowitz
Stream or download: https://archive.org/details/5G-health-risks-BBC-Radio-5


"Are cellphones dangerous to your health?"
Kim Komando, Sep 9, 2017 
Guest: Joel Moskowitz
Download podcast: http://podcast.komando.com/episode/2388/download.mp3
https://www.komando.com/downloads/418156/are-cellphones-dangerous-to-your-health


"Berkeley Approves Radiation Warning for Cell Phones"
KQED Forum, May 18, 2015
Host: Michael Krasny
Guests: Allan Balmain, UCSF School of Medicine
             Joel Moskowitz, UC Berkeley
http://www.kqed.org/a/forum/R201505180930


"Wireless Radiation: What Scientists Know and You Don’t with Dr. Joel Moskowitz"
Green Street Radio, WBAI-FM (New York City), 8:00-9:00 PM EDT, Mar 10, 2015 (37 minutes)
Hosts: Doug and Patti Wood
Guest: Joel Moskowitz, UC Berkeley
Transcript: http://bit.ly/1FCC1i6
http://www.greenstreetradio.com/wireless-radiation-what-scientists-know-and-you-dont-with-dr-joel-moskowitz/


"Cell Phones: Tobacco of the 21st Century" 
Health Action, WBAI-FM (New York City), Feb 4, 2015 (no longer available)


"Your Call: What do you want to know about cell phone radiation?"
Host: Rose Aguilar, Your Call, KALW - FM, Sep 16, 2014  (49 minutes)
Guests: Joel Moskowitz, UC Berkeley; Kevin Kunze, "Mobilize" Director
http://bit.ly/Yourcallcellphone


"Mobilize: A Film on Cell Phone Radiation”
Host:  Brian Edwards-Tiekert, Upfront, KPFA - FM, Sep 11, 2014 (25 minutes; starts at 33:50)
Guest: Joel Moskowitz, UC Berkeley


"Dr. Joel Moskowitz Joins the Show"  (52 minutes)
Boil the Frog Slowly Radio and Patient Safety Radio, Aug 1, 2014
http://bit.ly/boilfrogslowly


"Wireless Revolution: Research/Policy Implications" 
Host: Layna Berman, Your Own Health and Fitness, KPFA - FM, Apr 22, 2014 (1:00-2:00 PM). 
Re-Aired on KPFA - FM on Jun 2, 2015 (1:00 - 2:00 PM)
Guest: Joel M. Moskowitz, UC Berkeley

http://bit.ly/QwhjbB



"Today on Your Call: What are 'best practices' for using digital devices?"
Host: Ali Budner, Your Call, KALW - FM, Mar 13, 2014  (53 minutes)
Guests:  Joel Moskowitz, UC Berkeley
                Levi Felix, founder The Digital Detox and director of Camp Grounded


"Cell Phones and Health"
KPFA-FM, Jan 31, 2014 (1:00-1:30 PM)
Moderator: Laura Garzon Chica
Guests:  Josh Hart, Director, StopSmartMeters
               Joel Moskowitz, UC Berkeley
               Kevin Kunze, Director, "Mobilize"
http://www.kpfa.org/archive/id/99666


"What Do You Need to Know about Cellphone Radiation?"
An interview on KAHI radio news (Nov 22, 2013) (11 minutes).

Transcript:      http://bit.ly/1heyOFv
Download at:  http://bit.ly/J2XAf9 



"Everything you and your 'Friends and Neighbors' need to know about cellphone radiation and how to protect yourselves"
A 2-part program aired on Calvary Radio Network in Dec, 2013 (50 minutes).

Download at:     http://bit.ly/18xbulT