PRESS RELEASE: May 11, 2015 International Scientists Appeal to U.N. to Protect Humans and Wildlife from Electromagnetic Fields and Wireless Technology

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: EMFscientist.org

Video Statement (3 min.) by Spokesperson Martin Blank, PhD: EMFscientist.org

Contacts:

Elizabeth Kelley, MA, Director Joel Moskowitz, PhD

EMFscientist.org School of Public Health, UC Berkeley

info@EMFscientist.org jmm@berkeley.edu

1-510-643-7314

http://www.emfscientist.org/images/docs/EMF_Scientist_Press_Release.pdf

Advertisements

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

International EMF Scientists Appeal

martin-blankNew York, NY, May 11, 2015
International EMF Scientists Appeal to U.N. to Protect Humans and Wildlife from Electromagnetic Fields and Wireless Technology

Over 190 scientists from 38 nations have 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 scientists who have signed the Appeal have published more than 2000 peer-reviewed research papers on the effects of electromagnetic fields.

Martin Blank, PhD, of Columbia University, says, “International exposure guidelines for EMFs 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.”

The WHO’s International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) classified RF radiation as a Group 2B “Possible Carcinogen” in 2011, and ELF (power-frequency) fields as Group 2B back in 2001. A number of IARC advisors now believe that further evidence means that they should now be classed as Group 2A “probable human carcinogens”. However, WHO continues to ignore its own agency’s recommendations and, instead, favours guidelines recommended by the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP).

ICNIRP is a private NGO with a self-selected group of experts who do not recognise non-thermal effects of RF exposure. By their own admission their guidelines do not protect against low-level exposure effects which they still claim do not exist.

The new Appeal calls on the UN to properly assess the potential impact on wildlife and other living organisms under the UN Environmental Programme.

Further information

emfscientistThe new International EMF Scientist Appeal and video

Full details and the introductory video can be found on the EMFscientist website

exp-graph