Eileen O’Connor’s post about the credibility problem of SCENIHR was just published by EMFacts Consultancy. It is titled “Industry bias exposed in SCENIHR’s scientific assessment” and here is a quote from this post
“…Scientific Committee on Emerging and Newly Identified Health Risks (SCENIHR) member Dr Kjell Hansson Mild has exposed control of science within the SCENIHR group. SCENIHR excluded many studies from the latest scientific review, including five studies by the Hardell Group, published in 2013. Dr. Mild was a co-author with Dr. Hardell. At the same time SCENIHR excluded Dr. Hardell’s and Dr. Mild’s key scientific papers, they promoted Dr. Mild’s participation in SCENIHR as giving balance and transparency to this process. These studies from the Hardell Group are the longest studies on mobile phones and brain cancer. Of even greater significance is Hardell’s conclusion that the proof of mobile phones causing an increase in gliomas — the deadliest of brain tumours, and acoustic neuromas tumours on the auditory nerve.
The SCENIHR Report fails to do a thorough review of hundreds of papers on non-ionizing electromagnetic fields (EMF) and biological health effects, and excludes literally hundreds of papers containing new information in the field concerning adverse EMR impacts…”.
It is an interesting read on how science, industry, politics and health policy intermingles in yet another exercise of “cherry picking”…
It would be also interesting to get to know what are the EU ‘criteria’ used in selection of scientists to SCENIHR. I complained about SCENIHR in my earlier post on BRHP as well as Eileen O’Connor in her earlier BRHP guest blog.
Read in full the EMFacts Consultancy post here.
BRHP - Between a Rock and a Hard Place 
Pingback: Call for an overhaul of SCENIHR membership | BRHP – Between a Rock and a Hard Place