Looking for new job opportunities

UPDATE February 11, 2014

I am still looking for opportunities in research, editorship or consulting work. My current appointments, as Adjunct Professor at the University of Helsinki and as the Chief Editor of ‘Radiation and Health’ for the Frontiers in Public Health, are both pro bono appointments for which I do not receive any salary. I do it for the love of science.

Therefore, I am still looking for new opportunities (with salary attached).


Melbourne, Australia; updated Jan. 21, 2013

This summer 2012, my institution in Finland has terminated my research projects on biological and health effects of cell phone radiation.


Some of my credentials:
(my full CV available upon request)

Experienced Science Communicator

  • BRHP science blog since 2009

Experienced Expert and Evaluator of Science

  • In 2009 testified in US Senate hearing on health and cell phones.
  • In 2011 member of the IARC Working Group that classified cell phone emitted radiation as a possible human carcinogen (group 2B).
  • Member of Steering Committee of the Swiss National Science Foundation programme (NFP 57).
  • Chaired Task Group on High-Throughput Screening Techniques in EMF research (EU COST BM0704 Action).

Experienced Lecturer

  • Currently Visiting Professor at the Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn/Melbourne, Australia.
  • Research Professor at STUK – Radiation and Nuclear Safety Authority, Helsinki
  • Adjunct Professor at the University of Helsinki
  • Visiting Scientist at the Georgetown University 1990/91, Washington, DC
  • Visiting Assistant Professor at Harvard Medical School 1997/99, Boston, MA, USA
  • Guangbiao Professor at Zhejiang University 2007-2010, Hangzhou, China


  • M.Sc. (1978) Jagiellonian University, Krakow, Poland
  • D.Sc. (1983) Jagiellonian University, Krakow, Poland;
  • Ph.D. (1990) Helsinki University, Finland,
  • Docent (1992) Helsinki University, Finland
  • Member of the Board of Directors of the Bioelectromagnetics Society (BEMS) (2006-2009 & 2010-2013).

Experienced Editor & Science Writer

  • Associate Editor, Bioelectromagnetics (2006-2010).
  • Editorial Boards Member of the Bioelectromagnetics and of the Open Proteomics Journal.
  • Guest Editor of Proteomics.
  • Editor of Radiation Proteomics book for Springer.

Experienced Conference Organizer

  • Co-Chaired Technical Program Committees for the BioEM 2009, Davos Switzerland and for 2010 BEMS meeting in Seoul, S. Korea.
  • In 2002 organized the first ever bioelectromagnetics session on “Genomics, Transcriptomics & Proteomics” (Rhodes, Greece)
  • Co-organized/Co-chaired WHO/Cost281/STUK workshops in Helsinki on stress response (April 2004) and on proteomics & transcriptomics (October 2005).

20 thoughts on “Looking for new job opportunities

  1. Hi S,

    The situation of your mother, that you described in the moment on my blog, appears to be very complex. It starts with the lightning strike, then is power line’s ELF-EMF and then finally is RF-EMF as microwaves emitted by the wireless communication devices.

    It might be very difficult, if ever possible, to find out what is responsible for the observed symptoms. Since I am not a medical doctor I cannot even attempt to make any sort of “diagnosis”. Each of the electric fields that you pointed out in your comment has differently regulated effects on living cells. So, I am uncertain whether EHS acquired in the presence of power line would continue in the presence of cell phone… I guess nobody knows because there are no studies…

    I tried to find out if any of my colleagues does a suitable study, but unfortunately research in this area is “frozen”. My own attempt to get funding for, among others EHS study, failed because my institution in Finland closed down my research. In fact, research on EHS is forbidden in my institute and I was “asking for a trouble” by attempting to submit grant to EU.

    I am sorry that, after all, I cannot be of more help. I am looking for new job where I could continue my research, including EHS. Chances are slim but I am trying. You may follow my blog to se what will happen. If I find new job then you will see it from my blog.

    Best of luck to you and your mother,

  2. Hi Dariusz, I’m just writing to remind you about how you said you would be getting back with us mid-January. Looking forward to hearing from you. Could you email us as soon as possible? That would be most appreciated.
    My mother has EHS very severely. Any tips or collaboration from someone who believes like yourself and has knowledge would be so helpful.
    Thank you,

  3. Thanks Kiti. Yes, I certainly would like to hear more. Please contact me via my STUK e-mail address… Best, Dariusz

  4. Thank you for your message. I will respond via e-mail in mid-January. Best, Dariusz

  5. Professor:

    Best wishes and good luck to you.

    While I frequently disagree with your positions, I have always respected your independence from both the skeptics and the doomsayers (ICEMS).

    I hope you find others like yourself and establish a research group immune to the pressure of activists. That would be immensely helpful in moving forward on this concern.



  6. Hi,
    I’m writing on behalf of my Mother, who suffers from EHS (electromagnetic hypersensitivity) to cellphones, celltowers, major powerlines, and wifi.
    (I am sorry about the length of this email but just need to detail the situation so you can better understand it.)

    She knew she was sensitive over 20 years ago when all of us kids were still young and we moved near high tension major powerlines. They were literally within feet of our house. She couldn’t sleep, was irritable, and had massive headaches, and all of us kids immune systems’ were compromised, with more frequent colds and me getting a grapefruit-sized tumor years later.

    There was not much information at the time, so she was in the dark about the source of the problem for a while. Then, she started to notice that whenever she left the house for long periods of time, she would feel better. A meter man from the power company came out and measured our house readings. He said that when the gauss meter reads 1, children are more susceptible to leukemia and cancers. However, in our house, the gauss meter read 4-12.

    We moved away, but not without difficulty, as the landlord didn’t want to release us from the lease, so we had to stay there for 6 months. We attempted to spend as much time as possible away from the house.

    It was at that time that my Mother was diagnosed with Epstein Barr, which she now has fibromyalgia. She recovered in a lot of ways through natural remedies.

    However, about 4 years ago, she gradually started getting even worse symptoms than she had 20 years ago because now you cannot escape the electromagnetic radiation. It follows you through cellphones, celltowers, wifi, etc. So it’s not as simple as moving away from a high tension power line any longer. And cellphones are so much more powerful now than ever before, so they really pack a punch.

    She gets burns on her skin, a cracking sensation in her head, and body numbness just being in the same car or auditorium with those who have their cellphones with them. (Since cellphones are virtual mini-computers now, they update even if they’re not on. So whereas she used to be okay as long as others turned their cellphones off in her company, now she cannot be around them at all without pain.) NOTE: She was also struck by lightning as a child; however, we are not sure if this would have any bearing on her condition since many have EHS who have not been struck by lightning.

    She cannot sleep to recover. She suffers intense, aching pain down to her bones that lasts for weeks. Once, her arm swelled up and had to be put into a splint and she was unable to drive for 2 months after being in a store for about 20 minutes where people had their cellphones on. She gets massive sweats she calls flash floods sometimes every 20 minutes where she feels like her core is on fire and she’s drenched in sweat all over. Right now, she is having a problem swallowing her saliva, and must keep a rag handy. Eating alleviates this temporarily.
    At another time, she suffered spinal pain; she describes it as feeling like it went down her spine in the shape of a V, a pain she describes feeling like an open lesion bleeding inside. Everything she does she has to practically run through due to how inescapable the sources of electromagnetic radiation are now. She mostly is confined to our apartment at this point.

    However, it is very hard, even in our apartment, as many neighbors now have satellite dish & wifi. Now she can only really linger on one side of the house, as the other side is attached to our nextdoor neighbor, who has wifi. We hope to find safer housing.

    She has already made many adjustments in the realm of health, dietary (gluten-free, sugar-free, no medications…), even trying several shielding mechanisms, none of which have as of yet worked. We’ve even attempted moving to where the NRAO is in WV, but as yet, housing has not panned out.

    Cities seems to have better building codes which make apartments in the city better as opposed to the houses in the country with less stringent building standards; however, in the city, Mom practically must stay inside, as opposed to in the country she almost must stay outside. And as we mentioned, with so much wifi now, apartment living is almost impractical, since wifi penetrates walls.
    (It shows just how far wifi signal travels if you take, for example, the case of coffee shops with wifi hotspots, where you can sit outside the coffee shop and receive signal for your laptop or phone. Well, it travels just as far when you’re living attached in an apartment nextdoor to someone who has wifi.)
    So it’s a perplexing problem.
    Our funds are very limited and my mother is on disability. She’d be willing to participate in a study to experiment with something, or to be instructed how to make something herself, or find out about any funding available. She’d be a very good test candidate due to the severity of her symptoms.

    Thank you for listening, any suggestions or collaboration she’d be open to.



  7. Pingback: Mobile phone radiation and health – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

  8. Thank you for your supportive comments. I will continue to speak openly about the science in RF area. Best, Dariusz

  9. Welcome to the ranks of the academically persecuted, esp. in this field.

    Perhaps by making common cause with (but not only) fellow researchers and academics in your general field who have suffered persecution or undue restriction; and making good use of what is afforded by internet facilities; together mutual support, frank discussion (even pseudonymously if needed), perhaps collaboration can develop, leading to alternative methods of research support. The only motivation need be for the love of your science.

    Such open exchange among scholars as you have initiated, at the blog and the sadly defunct column, is very much in the public interest. It is high time for de-cloistering of academe. In its cloistering, suppressive behaviour such as you have suffered is made easier. (Even if your suppression has had something to do with your opening up in this way in the recent past.)

    However much I differ from your public policy positions, you are to be highly commended for your efforts at bringing science to the public square. Bring along colleagues who share dedication to your scientific pursuit, and dare to contribute in this way in the great public interest.

  10. By silencing dissenting voices, corporations and institutions can monopolize “truth” and “scientific consensus” as what they present. This is exactly what we have got from the tobacco industry in the last century. It was only last month – November 2012 – that the tobacco companies received a legal judgment to admit that they have been lying and the judge forced them to pay for a campaign to inform the public their decades of deception. And how many mainstream media has reported this important decision?

    “By the end of the 1920s, scientists already knew that tobacco smoke contained a small encyclopedia’s worth of risky chemical compounds: carbon monoxide and hydrogen cyanide, hydrogen sulfide and formaldehyde, ammonia and pyridine (a component in industrial solvents)… The documents show that the industry was well aware of the presence of a radioactive substance in tobacco as early as 1959. Furthermore, the industry was not only cognizant of the potential “cancerous growth” in the lungs of regular smokers but also did quantitative radiobiological calculations to estimate the long-term (25 years) lung radiation absorption dose (rad) of ionizing alpha particles emitted from the cigarette smoke… internal documents revealed something else. Not only did cigarette makers know about polonium-210 contamination of their product for decades – they knew how to fix it and chose not to… These radioactive residues can be removed by acid-washing the plants. But the documents obtained by the California researchers showed that manufacturers refused to do that for fears that the acid would alter the nicotine and decrease the chemical kick that helps make the products popular. The UCLA analysts went on to calculate the resulting radiation health risk from regular smoking, based in part on the industry’s own analysis. They set the cost of such alpha radiation in the lungs at 120-138 cancer deaths per 1,000 regular smokers. ”

    I hope with all my heart that honest scientists like you will find ways to continue honest research. And please don’t stop advocating the Precautionary Principle. With the proliferation of cellphone and wireless technology, the entire human race is at risk. Thank you for standing up for health and safety for all of us, and our children! Best wishes to you for the New Year!

  11. David,

    First of all I am very sorry about Leslie’s passing. I wish you all the strength necessary.

    Cancelling my research is in part money saving exercise and on part caused by my independent opinions and my resistance to submit to censorship of valid scientific opinion by some of my bosses.

    I do agree with your opinions about options for continuations of research. The major problem is that it is likely that we do not control for all important exposure parameters. The only way to find them out is research. However, too many decissio-makers, industry representatives and scientists are obstructive. It is difficult to “swim magainst this huge tide”. Especially that those who wish to obstruct have bureaucratic powers and can prevent legitimate scientific efforts.

    Best wishes,

  12. Thanks. It is not OK when the dissenting scientific opinions are silenced instead of allowing open scientific debate…

  13. Dear Dariusz,
    I hope you find a way to continue your excellent and important research. I think that terminating it by your institution is detrimental to progress towards safe use of radio and Radar which must be based on understanding the biological effects of the radiation.
    All the best,

  14. Professor Leszczynski, I’m also very sorry to hear about the termination of funding on your research on the biological and health effects of cellphone radiation. It is very sad to see the continuous efforts by institutions to silence scientists who call for Precaution on cellphone and EM radiation by either withholding research funding, or removing them from their jobs altogether. When such voices are all stifled, corporations can advertise the “consensus in science showing no harm” even more loudly.

  15. Click link http://www.hese-project.org/uk_forum/

    Gesendet: Montag, 17. Dezember 2012 um 03:12 Uhr Von: "BRHP – Between a Rock and a Hard Place" <comment-reply@wordpress.com> An: emf-mf@hese-project.org Betreff: [New post] Looking for new opportunities…

    dariuszleszczynski posted: "This summer, my institution in Finland has terminated my research projects on biological and health effects of cell phone radiation. I AM ACTIVELY LOOKING FOR NEW OPPORTUNITIES in RESEARCH, as JOURNAL or BOOKS EDITOR/PUBLISHER, as CONSULTANT or on LECTUR"

  16. Dariusz,
    I’m so sorry to hear that STUK have terminated your research programmes and funding in Helsinki. Is that politically motivated, or a money-saving exercise, or something masquerading as a lack of research excellence (i.e. no papers in Cell, Science or Nature)? Or even a combination of all three? I can’t say that things are much better here for me; although I am still in my university post (but I’m considering taking early retirement in late 2013 or 2014), my wife’s cancer spread to her liver last May and she died in early November. I am still finishing off the data analysis for a BEM Brief Communication that finds zero promotion of alpha-synuclein aggregation in a C. elegans Parkinson’s model, but of course that was done using our “perfectly tuned” TEM cells – rather than the rough and ready one we used initially. The trouble is, even if I could get funding to pursue such work, I’m not sure how we could follow that up. Which characteristics of the “non-tuned” field induce a heat-shock response (with minimal heating) that is not seen with a “perfectly tuned” field? Given that the exposure system is in effect a sealed (octahedral) metal box, it would be difficult enough to characterise the differences between tuned and unturned fields, let alone mimicking each such difference on its own and adding it on to the tuned field (singly, or possibly in multiple combinations?) until a heat-shock response reappears….. In an ideal world, of course, that might be worth doing – but I suspect it would be a very boring and possibly unproductive project for all concerned. It is equally plausible that the initial findings and their later disappearance in fact arose from a difference in controls – from an early reliance on shielded controls in the same incubator (because we only had the one prototype TEM cell, made of aluminium!) to the later improved experimental design involving two matched TEM cells made of copper (one exposed, one sham). Or was there even some inexplicable contribution from the metal used in constructing the TEM cell – Al versus Cu? This seems to me to typify the problems that beset this field. When you change anything in your experimental design – even an apparent improvement (as in this case) – effects often evaporate. Trouble is, it’s actually almost impossible to pin down which factors might be responsible, or whether the initial findings were just an artefact….
    May I wish you the very best in your job hunt. Are you still continuing with your visiting professorship in China (and Australia?)?
    Best regards,

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s