News Center: Papers and Articles Archive
-
“Another conclusion of this study is that the current ICNIRP (1998) and IEEE (2005, 2010) guidelines urgently need to be revised, as the duty cycle of 1,000 currently tolerated can produce unacceptable temperature increases that may result in permanent tissue damage.” From IT’IS in Zurich.
-
This expert group on EMF/NIR, which advises the Swiss Federal Office for the Environment, states that these two animal cancer studies are “the most comprehensive” to date. Despite their methodological differences, they both showed “relatively consistent results in schwannomas and gliomas, as well as a dose-dependent trend to an increase in the carcinogenicity of these tumors.” Based on these findings, BERENIS favors a precautionary approach for RF/EMF exposures.
-
“A suggestive increased risk associated with long-term and frequent uses were observed for thyroid microcarcinomas, but not larger tumors (>10mm).”
-
Frank de Vocht confirms that GBM is rising in the U.K. but argues that it’s “unlikely” that RF from cell phones is responsible.
-
Ron Melnick, formerly with NTP, spells out 15 “extensive and misleading” statements made by ICNIRP on the NTP and Ramazzini cell phone–animal studies. Also today, Ramazzini’s Fiorella Belpoggi posted her comments. See also Melnick’s commentary on the NTP study posted (Sept 20) by Environmental Research.
-
Challenges NYTimes report (below). “No microwave weapon that affects the brain is known to exist.”
-
“Strikes with microwaves, some experts now argue, more plausibly explain reports of painful sounds, ills and traumas than do other possible culprits — sonic attacks, viral infections and contagious anxiety.” (Front page, print edition, September 2.)
-
Jim Lin,12-yr former member of ICNIRP (& editor-in-chief of Bioelectomagnetics), writes: “Perhaps the time has come to judiciously reassess, revise & update [the ICNIRP] guidelines” so that they protect against long-term RF exposures. As of now they only address acute effects.
-
“In conclusion, despite the improved quantitative exposure assessment used in this study, the results do not support a positive association between occupational exposure to high-frequency EMF and either glioma or meningioma risk. However, given our limited statistical power, due to the small number of exposed participants, and despite our results’ lack of significance our findings foster the need for further research focusing on RF magnetic fields and tumor promotion, as well as possible interactions with other frequencies and with chemicals.” (see press release.)
-
“We found preliminary evidence suggesting that RF-EMF may affect brain functions such as figural memory in regions that are most exposed during mobile phone use.”
-
An “urgent” call for action from D. Belpomme, L. Hardell, I. Belyaev, E. Burgio & D. Carpenter.
-
“Together our results show that acute exposure to ELF EMFs, at intensities ranging from those at ground level to those near transmission lines, can have profound effects on honey bees.” Open access.
-
This study shows “a positive correlation betwen duration of exposure and DNA damage.”
-
SImulations show that, “A shift of 10% of the incident power density to frequencies above 6 GHz would lead to an increase in absorbed power between 3–370%. This could lead to changes in insect behaviour, physiology and morphology over time due to an increase in body temperatures from dielectric heating. The studied insects that are smaller than 1 cm show a peak in absorption at frequencies” above 6 GHz, which will to used by 5G. (Open access)
-
“We report a rhythm of BBB permeability driven by a clock within the BBB.”
-
“Exposure levels tended to increase with increasing urbanity. In most microenvironments downlink from mobile phone base stations is the most relevant contributor.” One exception: Australia where broadcast radiation was #1.
-
From the Research Institute of Occupational Health in Moscow.
-
Supplementing chemotherapy with 200 kHz E-fields increased progression-free survival (by 2.7 months to 6.7 months) and overall survival (by 4.9 months to 20.9 months) in patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma. Both are statistically significant improvements.
-
“Considering (a) the conflicting results of RF epidemiology studies and (b) the lack of generally accepted biophysical or molecular mechanisms through which RF could induce or promote neoplasia, data from animal bioassays will play a central role in ‘weight-of-the-evidence’ assessments of the possible health effects of RF exposure.” Abstract only. By IITRI’s David McCormick, who ran the exposures for the NTP–cell phone cancer study.
-
Effects seen for exposures to ELF magnetic fields as low as 0.15μT [1.5mG]. Note caveat: These results “cannot be regarded as proof of involvement in cancer, including childhood leukemia.” From the Weizmann Institute in Israel. Open access.