Breakthrough? Asks ES-UK (charity 1103018) June ‘06
Potentially
yes. Why only potentially we hear you cry? Well because on issues of this level
of size and importance, with recognised implications, things only change
mightily slowly, against extreme resistance. There is a counter-force that
comes from resisting authorities and hundreds of millions of pounds of invested
capital used to creaking and groaning with exuberant growth. Like a muscle–bound
superman tearing off his garments as he expands, and not willing to be
thwarted, we mean the Telecoms industry principally. Everything then depends on
getting a fair examination of the unfolding science, a reasoning media and then
application of the lessons learned.
So
quite a few IFs and BUTs you could say, are in prospect.
Mixing
our visual metaphors, just for fun; we are the little terrier with our teeth
sunk firmly in the giant foot. The wind will start whistling out of his
self-inflation as our scientific grip bites ever harder; any slight collapse,
even a faltering in growth rate, is a significant event. A portent of limits.
Will it happen?
The
formation of this new discussion group is key, the EMF-DG (Public info copied
below) means there is at the least now
a forum, a place and time where our issue is ‘on the table’, taken seriously, by scientists, with a view to
developing ‘precautionary advice’. ‘Old
Bill’, which is how I feel like warmly describing Sir William Stewart, has
never wavered from his view that rapid expansion, of at least the microwave/mobiles
aspect of our fears, should follow the ‘precautionary
principle’.
‘Lamentably ignored’, as he said this has
been in the reckless gold rush of new applications, and with his MTHR report
cherry-picked as it also has been, nevertheless his estimation of the
possibilities of health effects is still there. No ‘clean sheet’ bill of health has ever been issued by the HPA on
mobile microwave technology and now with this, it is consideration of all exposures
to electromagnetic fields as potentially carrying health risks.
Read for yourself online if you can at: http://www.hpa.org.uk/radiation/understand/radiation_topics/emf/emfdg/index.htm
EMF DG (here are some extensively edited minutes for those unable
to get them printed off by a friend or family member)
Electromagnetic Fields Discussion Group (EMFDG)
Establishment and terms of
reference
The Radiation Protection Division (RPD) of the Health
Protection Agency (HPA) has established a discussion group on electromagnetic
fields (EMFs). The Electromagnetic Fields Discussion Group (EMFDG) is chaired
by Sir William Stewart, FRS, FRSE, the chairman of the HPA. The RPD has a
responsibility to give advice on protection standards for EMFs. It also needs
to ensure that when information is presented to the public, it should be
informative and address any concerns. It is intended that the Group should
contribute to how such advice is formulated and presented.
Chairman
Sir William Stewart (HPA)
Secretary
Dr John Stather (HPA)
Members
Mr Mike Bell (Chairman, EM Radiation Research Trust)
Dr Mike Clark (HPA)
Mr Andy Davidson (Tetrawatch)
Mr Michael Dolan (Mobile Operators Association)
Professor Denis Henshaw (University of Bristol)
Mr George Hooker (Department of Health)
Dr Myron Maslanyj (HPA)
Dr Jill Meara (HPA)
Mr Alan Meyer (Mast Action UK Services)
Professor Mike O’Carroll (Chairman, Revolt)
Mrs Eileen O’Connor (EM Radiation Research Trust)
Mr Alasdair Philips (Powerwatch)
Professor Alan Preece (University of Bristol)
Dr Zenon Sienkiewicz (HPA)
Mrs Anne Silk
Dr John Swanson (National Grid Transco)
Mr Chris Woollams (CANCERactive)
Notes of meetings held are available.
Meeting of 2 March 2006 (PDF, 94 KB, 8 pages)(here heavily
edited)
Welcome and Work of the EMF Discussion Group
The
Chairman welcomed Members to the first meeting of the Electromagnetic Fields Discussion
Group (EMFDG). He said the Members he had invited to participate in the work of
the Group had considerable expertise in relation to addressing possible health effects
from exposure to electromagnetic fields (EMFs).
They
could provide a valuable input to the development and communication of Health
Protection Agency (HPA) advice to the public in this area.
The
members had a range of views on the health effects of EMFs.
It
was important to keep the size of the group to a manageable number to enable a
constructive debate.
The
work of the Group is expected to cover the whole of the electromagnetic
spectrum up to, but not including optical frequencies.
Sir
William proposed that the terms of reference for the work of the Group should
be:
to provide a forum for
considering possible health concerns related to exposure to electromagnetic
fields (EMFs) and to provide an input to the development of HPA advice.
The
RPD has a primary responsibility to provide a scientific view of how various
radiations across the EMF spectrum can affect public health.(They advise the Dept of Health which advises GPs etc., ES-UK) RPD also has a responsibility to ensure that
when information is presented to the public, it should be informative and
address any concerns.
Members
agreed these terms of reference for the EMFDG.
RPD Report on Electrical Sensitivity (By Dr
Neil Irvine, last year)
The
document considered the definition of electrical sensitivity (ES) in terms of
the subjective attribution of symptoms to exposure to EMFs at levels below
those shown to cause adverse health effects and on which exposure standards had
been established.
Discussion
1
It was agreed that it was a step forward that this important report
acknowledged that the condition of
hypersensitivity exists (but causal
links to EMFs are not, ES-UK) and that it affects some people in the population.
The numbers of people affected in the UK are, however, largely unknown but it was thought by some members to be
more than a few per million and could be a few per hundred.
Some members felt it important that the condition
is recognised and that means of prevention are further developed.
Various
approaches to treatment have been tested and others are possible. The extent to which ES could be attributed
to the presence of powerlines, radiofrequencies or other sources of EMFs was
not clear, but hypersensitivity is known to be a serious problem for some people
and these need help.
2
There was some concern that ES was being
treated simply as a psychological disorder but some members expressed the
view that the physical nature of the symptoms meant that it was more than that.
Symptoms that appear to be caused by the condition included skin rashes,
itching and head pains. EMFs may well not be the only possible factor in the
development of ES; diet as well as other environmental factors and
psychological triggering could also be involved.
In
addition, people may have some underlying clinical symptoms, which could be exacerbated
by the presence of EMFs or other agents, such as fluorescent lights or
chemicals in the home. This needed to be examined further.
3
There was comment that the RPD document was limited in the extent of its coverage
of the condition and that very few people have actually been checked for
symptoms and sensitivity. It was clear, however, that there are people who do physically
suffer, although the exact cause is not clear. Ethical aspects of nonvoluntary exposure
to stressors (in the widest interpretation of the term) needs to be considered.
(such as hurting ES people in the tests at
Essex and Kings College, ES-UK)
4
It was noted that the report had not been able to access non-English language literature.
Some members considered that this may cause bias in the coverage of the subject
but was inevitable given the constraints of the project. (German and Swedish material largely ignored, ES-UK)
5
An Expert Group had been set up in Sweden to review the issue of ES. It had acknowledged
that there was a syndrome that did need to be dealt with and methods of
treatment developed. This was, therefore, considered to be a condition that
could be defined, although at present it was not possible to fully identify the
cause.
6
It was noted that at the Press Conference when the RPD report was launched, many
of the media representatives had the view that concern about ES was being very
much overstated. The journalists at the press conference were surprisingly
unsympathetic and cynical about the need to advise people how to reduce
domestic exposures. It was noted that speculation in the media on the content
of the report before it was published may have impacted on the response itself.
(or because the industry is lobbying the
media, remember ‘Psychotic crap’ etc. ES-UK)
7
The hypersensitivity studies funded within the MTHR programme have had difficulties
in recruiting sufficient numbers of volunteers. Some potential volunteers would
not take part because of the experimental design involving increases in
exposure that they considered would increase their symptoms. (Because it makes them ill in fact, ES-UK)
Other
designs without this requirement may be possible. Those wishing to volunteer
should make contact through Nigel Cridland at RPD, Chilton, who is the
scientific co-ordinator of MTHR.
It
may also be possible to carry out behavioural studies and to visit people in
their homes to conduct studies there, rather than use the laboratory.
There
appeared to be some analogies between ES and stress, both of which are factors
in ill health and affect well-being. Some people are affected by environmental
factors that they do not understand and it is often not possible to alleviate
the symptoms by counselling. Various approaches have been used to alleviate the
symptoms of ES. It should be possible to learn from anyone who had ES and
recovered what might be appropriate to treat other people with similar
conditions.
The Chairman said that it was important that the RPD report had been published and that
it acknowledged the condition of hypersensitivity existed, although it is not
yet clear what are the various factors that trigger its development. There is
an urgent need to fully understand the mechanisms involved. (For them ES cannot happen unless they know
how, absurd, ES-UK) Required for the future are carefully designed and
controlled studies to examine features of ES and how they might be caused and
treated. Whilst this was not necessarily a role for RPD it may be one for the
HPA that has a much broader remit than radiation protection and should be
concerned with the well-being of members of the public. (Here they are
desperate to avoid radiation as the cause, ES-UK)
If
there are ways to control the condition of hypersensitivity, HPA should be able
to consider how best to collate information on treatments that have been
reported as being helpful.
DECT Phones Questions were raised
about the signals from DECT phones that are widely used in the home
Ultrasound and Infrasound
Concerns
have been raised about exposures to ultrasound and infrasound and how these are
addressed. End of EMF-DG report summary.
Never forget however, say ES-UK as we reported from US
Professor Michaels in our last Newsletter:
“DOUBT Is
Their Product, says Michaels,
scientific uncertainty is being deliberately created, manufactured, he
claims, by profitable corporations to protect their activities from interfering
public interest health regulation.”
What
comes out of these discussions depends largely on what goes in.
And also on the politics;
For
instance as said on the Mast-Victims home page by:
Professor G J Hyland
(see http://www.mast-victims.org/index.php?content=forward)
Associate Fellow, Department of Physics, University of Warwick*, UK. Executive
Member, International Institute of Biophysics*
Neuss-Holzheim, Germany.
“Sadly,
people cannot rely on the protection of their governments in this field of
environmental pollution, since governments freely admit to a vested interest in
continuing to promote the growth of mobile telephony. In the UK, for example,
the Government netted £22.5 Billion from the auction of the 3G licences, whilst
the annual revenue from mobile telephony is currently around £15 Billion;
clearly, it is in governments' interests
not to find any problems with this bounteous technology.
Accordingly,
we have, in the UK, the obscene
spectacle of the government body responsible for protecting the public from
adverse effects of electromagnetic exposure the HPA-RD (the old National
Radiological Protection Board, NRPB) being engaged by the mobile phone industry
to speak at meetings in support of the safety of their products: the industry
knows that it will not be disappointed.
Neither
can the public expect an unbiased hearing either in Public Inquiries or in the
Civil Courts. For the whole procedure is
biased in favour of the Industry, since a judgement against the phone companies
would have potentially serious consequences not only for the continued,
effectively unregulated expansion of mobile telecommunications, but also, more
importantly, on government revenue - a situation that will not be allowed
to happen, as has repeatedly been demonstrated.
Given
their experience with official cover-ups in the case of BSE/CJD - with initial
assurances of no risk and subsequent revelations of cover-ups - the public is now understandably wary of
safety assurances from 'official' scientific sources in the case of exposure to
electromagnetic fields. Quite justifiably, the public remains sceptical of
attempts by governments and the mobile phone industry to reassure them that all
is well, particularly given the unethical way in which they often operate
symbiotically so as to promote their own vested interests, often under the
brokerage of the very statutory (advisory) bodies (such as the HPA/NRPB in the
UK) whose function it supposedly is to
ensure that the health and well-being of the public is not compromised
by electromagnetic exposure. This scepticism is enhanced when those with
views contrary to the 'official' perceived wisdom are treated as mavericks who,
at worst, should be silenced, or, at best, studiously ignored.
Official
assurances of safety in the case of exposure to the microwave radiation used in
mobile telecommunications is based on the fact that the levels of emission in
publicly accessible areas in the vicinity of Base-stations are thousands of
times lower than the limits stipulated in the safety guidelines published by the
International Commission for Non-Ionising Radiation Protection (ICNIRP). The nonsense of being content with such
compliance is that these guidelines protect against what is here not
actually a hazard - namely getting overheated; the intensity of the radiation
is simply far too low for this to occur. At the same time, however, these
guidelines neglect the most discriminating feature of all, namely the 'aliveness'
of those exposed1. When (and only when) alive, the
body supports a number of electrical bio-rhythms characterised by different
frequencies; perhaps the most familiar are those associated with the activity
of the brain and the heart. These rhythms are intimately connected with
biological functionality, some being involved in maintaining the delicate
balance of biochemicals essential to health, whilst others play a role in the
transmission of biological information essential to maintaining well-being.” End.
We
can add our case studies from you to Neil Irvine’s literature survey, actual
real-life reports of your suffering, but little more. And they may be dismissed as ‘anecdotal’,
so consequently ‘unscientific’! But
please do send in your own brief summary accounts of being affected by EMFs,
GPs and family reaction and so on, if you have not done so already. Sheer
numbers help, we are up in the hundreds now, questionnaire details later.
Other news.
Ha! Ha! From our website News Update page.
Do we have here the CURSE OF
ES-UK?
No sooner do we publicly and
finally reveal the extent of abuse others dare to use, such as the admirable
American Professor Andrew Marino, and feature on our website (and just below)
his accusations of scientific fraud and lying from head of EMF research at WHO,
Dr Michael Repacholi, than HE PUBLICLY ANNOUNCES HIS RESIGNATION! Yes, Reppie
is gone!
Emilie Van Deventer who we met
at the Prague electrosensitivity conference is his successor, we hope she is
more scientifically neutral and proves politically tough and adroit. Good Luck
Emilie, we liked you, and wish you well.
Repacholi and WHO, the
criticism from Andrew Marino.
For the most incisive, no-holds
barred, scientific and personal dismantling of the man and ‘quasi-science’ behind the World Health Organisation's posture on
health risks from EMFs, Dr Michael Repacholi, visit this website; Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center http://www.ortho.lsuhsc.edu/Faculty/Marino/Comments/RepacholiTestimony.html#52306
Written by: Andrew A.
Marino, Ph.D., J.D. head of the Louisiana State University Health Sciences
Center Phone: 318-675-6177 / Fax: 318-675-6186 E-mail: amarino@lsuhsc.edu We copy below for those unable to access.
This shocking indictment explains
why it is so difficult for us to get any movement through scientific debate at
the international level, and thus recognition, of our EHS illness. We have
avoided words like 'liar' as not productive, and unscientific, but faced with
these conclusions drawn by reputable and professional scientists all over the
world (many signing a petition) we have to take notice. He details a
devastating scientific case for his claims based on Repacholi’s recorded
utterances and arguments.
It IS straightforward
corruption for Marino.
Paid scientists and functionaries are deliberately concealing the truth,
distorting the value and relevance of studies, drawing wrong conclusions, Dr
Marino says scathingly, and this agrees with what many of you have often
expressed:
"At the bottom of the
barrel is the EMF scientist who functions as a brainwasher to deceive the
public, innocent young and old alike, into giving themselves cancer and other
diseases. There is no purer example of such a man than Michael Repacholi. He is
at the end of a historical line of change that must be recognized before
science can once again resume its task of finding the best truth possible.
Repacholi acts as if he were
invested as regards the natural world with powers like those exercised by
priests over souls. Amazingly, people believe the daydream that he has the
ability to identify true and certain knowledge regarding EMFs. He has
perpetuated this myth, with almost no critical questioning.
Not only is there the myth of
Repacholi's wisdom according to which he can see through the mist into the
truth of things, but also the myth that absolute truth about exactly what EMFs
do and how they do it can be discerned if only we looked in the correct
fashion. He has succeeded in hiding any sense of the complexity of nature, so the ordinary person does not
understand that the best EMF science could ever hope to do was to produce imperfect
and uncertain understanding, and to achieve knowledge about EMFs that was
only somewhat better than a guess.”
End.
So…, our ES show rolls a little
more optimistically along the faltering road to EHS recognition, and eventually
EMF limits, good advice, research, and treatments, fingers firmly crossed for
the future, or does it? Breakthrough…….?
Well it seems unlikely if you accept the clear limitations of what scientific inquiry on EMF bioeffects can
be expected to achieve according to Marino, we must live with doubt, a very
uncomfortable prognosis for EHS sufferers. Great for those keen on keeping it
unresolved at a minimum.
NEW: ‘The
Powerwatch Handbook’ to answer your EHS questions, from 01353-778814 published
by Piaktus Books Ltd ISBN 0 7499 2686 4 is by Alasdair & Jean Philips of
Powerwatch. To order a copy (p&p free) telephone 0870 161 0870. More
information: www.detect-protect.com
For our
compilation of case studies/personal stories:
Electro Sensitive
Questionnaire July 2006
The following outline questions may assist you when
compiling your ES health history:
Name & location & occupation: (for the avoidance of duplication. When we compile these details
into the document we will code these details, such as F43lon, for female aged
43 and living in London)?
How long have you known you are ES? How did you find this out?
Now that you know about ES how long have you been experiencing ES
symptoms?
ENVIRONMENT
Have you moved house recently and if so, were you becoming ES at
an earlier address and if so what were the triggers? Does anyone else in
your household suffer from similar symptoms?
Do your colleagues at work have similar symptoms? What is your
occupation?
HEALTH
What is your current state of health and how stable is this?
Please list your symptoms, how often do these occur and what are
your worst symptoms?
How helpful has your own doctor been and have you been referred by
your GP for tests for your ES symptoms?
Please list any treatments either conventional or complimentary
that you have tried and which have or has helped you.
LIFESTYLE
How has your life changed since becoming ES, e.g. changes to your
career and earning potential, lifestyle, diet, friends, family, travel?
What are you now regularly unable to do?
What have you done to adapt your life e. g bought corded home
phone, stopped using a mobile/computer/wifi internet connection/ microwave
oven, other?
Have you shielded your home and or workplace? If so what shielding
materials did you use.
Have you learnt anything about being ES that you could share with
other sufferers?
Please mention any useful sources of information on ES, web sites,
hand outs, books which we could recommend to other ES.
Would you be prepared to
have your case notes included anonymously into a document, which will be used
to raise awareness about electro sensitivity? Please write any additional
comments on a separate sheet.
Please sign and date
this form: MANY THANKS for your time and we look forward to having more ES news
for you soon, sarahdacre@aol.com End.
Power to heal, power to harm
Says
this Editorial from the Independent on Sunday 07.05.06
We
are irredeemably in debt to electricity. It powers our economies and liberates
us from drudgery. Such once-laborious tasks as cooking, washing clothes or
cleaning the floor are largely accomplished by the flick of a switch. It has
vastly increased our knowledge, enabling us to read easily after dark and opening
the world's libraries at the push of a computer key. Every day, it saves
countless lives, especially by powering hospital equipment, and entertains us
in our millions, not least through television. No Roman emperor had slaves
enough to do the work that electricity achieves for us each day.
And
yet, as we reveal today, the slaves can revolt; the benefits also have a
downside. Increasing evidence links the invisible "smog" given off by
electrical wiring and appliances - and by mobile phones and their masts - to a
bewildering array of diseases. There seems little doubt that it increases the
chances of children getting leukaemia. There is good evidence that it causes
other cancers in adults, as well as miscarriages. It may even lead to
depression and suicide. Some people seem to become allergic to it, losing much
of what it bestows on the rest of us.
None
of this alters the equation greatly; electricity still saves many, many more
lives than it destroys. Yet it makes sense to reduce the damage. First, ministers
must recognise the problem: there are welcome signs that this is starting to
happen after decades of denial. Next, they need to take action. For a start
they should ban the building of new homes near overhead power lines, and vice
versa. They should drive down the levels of radiation emitted by mobile phones,
beginning by forcing manufacturers to display them prominently. And they should
introduce measures to limit the smog given off by electrical appliances,
especially those used close to people’s heads such as electric shavers and hair
dryers. People should also be made aware of the danger and encouraged to take
commonsense measures such as moving clock radios from bedheads, and denying
small children mobile phones. As with
every other form of pollution, it needs regulation, and it is high time this
began.” End.
The above is
now the editorial position of this serious national newspaper; it represents
what we feel to be a responsible and achievable balancing of interests. It
stands in stark contrast to the mockery and ridicule we faced in the beginning
at ES-UK on this ES issue, the disbelief, or rather belief in an outdated
scientific dogma that ‘non-ionising
radiation cannot hurt you’. This still persists with some commentators and
far too many medical personnel and GPs, according to most ES sufferers, who know what makes them ill. Most of all it exists with psychiatrists we
are told over and over, who know nothing about this topic and EMF bioeffects but
nevertheless grandly consider these physical responses are ‘all in the mind’.
For those
unable to access these websites, which unavoidably is where a lot of the
‘action’ goes on nowadays, send us a SAE to below address and we will print out
relevant material and post it to you, while we have resources. Or phone if you
like.
Thanks for
the many donations, and many over the minimum, your appreciation in this very
real way keeps this show on the road. We now have new experienced help with
grant applications, so maybe some will bear fruit again.
Stop press
last minute additions:
By email from
a scientific advisor with ES
Energy Saving Light Bulbs & Health risk
Dear Rod, This evening (11/7/06) Via the B.B.C. 10pm news I sat & watched yet another ill conceived piece of advice; re alleged energy saving. I refer to the newly introduced low consumption light bulbs. I did some thorough tests, using: - (1) an oscilloscope; (2) an infrared detector & last but not least 3)my own physical responses. The oscilloscope test revealed that these bulbs emit a sine wave at37KHz, in turn the 37KHz then modulates a strong carrier wave of infra red at aprox 550nm wavelength, this in turn, unlike the light from an ordinary light bulb easily & deeply penetrates the epidermal layer of the skin & hence causes a reaction in 'ES' subjects such as myself. In my own case this manifests as a head tightening sensation with mild disorientation & a very unpleasant feeling in the 'Solar plexus' area. Please warn other ES people about this. I did send a warning out some weeks or months ago, but foreseeing the possibility by the manufacturers &/or our 'all knowing big brother type govenment', I took the precaution of carefully measuring it this time. Best Wishes from J.R. Edmund Wilson, an American intellectual was quoted in our Sunday paper referring to: “the deadly psychological insight into the infinite capacity of human nature for remaining oblivious or indifferent to the pains we inflict on others when we have a chance to get something out of them for ourselves”. Seems apt.
ElectroSensitivity-UK (registered charity 1103018) helping the vulnerable minority with ‘radiation sickness’, and reacting with health problems to electromagnetic fields, microwaves, RF etc. all 'electrosmog'.
Rod Read M.Phil. (Cantab),
Dip Psych Couns., Cert.Ed. Director
Please support us
with a donation, (£10 min.) our only income, to ES-UK as below.
We welcome help
from scientists, doctors and health experts in understanding causes and links,
diagnosis and treatments. Also all media inquiries, personal accounts of ES in
your life, info on what helps and e-mail addresses where possible.
ES-UK Office, Bury
Lane, Sutton, Ely, Cambs, CB6 2BB. Tel: 01353-778151 or at www.electrosensitivity.org.uk Also by e-mail at electrosensitivity@hotmail.com
Trustees: Professor of Human Radiation Effects Dr Denis Henshaw, Dr David Dowson MD., ChB, Jean Philips BA. Scientific advice from: www.powerwatch.org.uk, Keith Jamieson Dip.AAS. Bsc(Hons) RIBA. Inst.Ph., Environmental Consultant and others. Visit www.tetrawatch.net