…post was updated and revised in response to comment from Eric van Rongen…
In a very interesting news post, Louis Slesin of the Microwave News, reminded that the secretive dealings are part of the RF-arena [emphasis added DL]:
“…Government and industry representatives from Australia, Canada, France, Japan, Korea, New Zealand and the U.S. participated, as did an assortment of academics. The public was not invited…”
…and, of course, ICES, ICNIRP and EMF Project were there as well. It seems typical for the industry, regulators, governments, ICES, ICNIRP and EMF Project to mingle, in the absence of general public and later, to provide very scarce information, if any at all.
Those responsible for developing safety guidelines and for government/academia funded research, seem to prefer to do things in secrecy, behind the scenes, not to be “bothered” by a plethora of activists. They prefer to present their work when it is fully ready and “deal is done“.
I have frequently written about the problems with the transparency of ICNIRP, problems with the conflict of interests within ICNIRP problems with selection of members that lead to uniformity of opinions within ICNIRP on EMF and health = no problem whatsoever, even if research, like on mm-waves, have not been done.
Similar secrecy problems has EMF Project, associated with the WHO.
As pointed out by Louis Slesin, one of the presentations at the recent GLORE 2020 meeting was from Emilie van Deventer of the EMF Project.
The last time I have met Emilie van Deventer was at the 2017 BioEM conference in Hangzhou, China. There we had two discussions, just us face-to-face. One of the issues that I tried, apparently unsuccessfully, to explain was the counter-productivity of the secretiveness of dealings by EMF Project. My opinion was that if EMF Project, in post-Repacholi-era, would like to build trust with general public, it should be more open and should regularly write what it is doing, including matters that are not yet ready and still are in preparation.
In discussion Emilie van Deventer clearly agreed with my points but, my attempt at increasing openness of EMF Project clearly failed. Since our meeting in Hangzhou conference in 2017, Emilie van Deventer, either on her own or with someone’s advice, has stopped to respond to my messages and inquiries.
Information that I have been inquiring, with Emilie van Deventer, was who are the experts performing systematic reviews and who made selection or who approved certain applicants and on what basis. Unfortunately, this information is shrouded in secrecy even though it is well known that selection of experts has huge impact on the outcome of the systematic reviews. The outcome, that will not only impact telecoms and governments but will also impact the general public.
The presentation of Emilie van Deventer at the GALORE 2020 meeting was very general and did not provide any meaningful details. It is still not known who and how and by whom was approved as expert for systematic reviews. Nothing meaningful was revealed.
However, while the systematic reviews will be published only in 2022, EMF Project has already, in secrecy, scientifically revised own opinion on EMF and health, including 5G.
According to the newest (February 2020) opinion of the EMF Project on the health risks of EMF, including 5G [emphasis added DL]:
“…To date, and after much research performed, no adverse health effect has been causally linked with exposure to wireless technologies. Health-related conclusions are drawn from studies performed across the entire radio spectrum but, so far, only a few studies have been carried out at the frequencies to be used by 5G.
Tissue heating is the main mechanism of interaction between radiofrequency fields and the human body. Radiofrequency exposure levels from current technologies result in negligible temperature rise in the human body.
As the frequency increases, there is less penetration into the body tissues and absorption of the energy becomes more confined to the surface of the body (skin and eye). Provided that the overall exposure remains below international guidelines, no consequences for public health are anticipated…”
So, the question is, who has performed review of science for the EMF Project to enable posting of the above information on EMF and health well ahead of the results from the systematic reviews? Or, did EMF Project used the 2020 recommendations of ICNIRP?
Hereby, I am asking directly Head of EMF Project, Dr. Emilie van Deventer, to respond where from this opinion on 5G and health originates?
As far as it is known, the last WHO/IARC evaluation of carcinogenicity of RF exposures was performed in 2011 and it classified this radiation as possibly carcinogenic for humans. The next review by IARC is expected in a couple of years time.
BRHP - Between a Rock and a Hard Place 
Dariusz and Eric,
I’m Electromagnetic Hypersensitive (EHS). My neurologist and GP affirm this diagnosis. I do not need any further research to tell me that EMF and there non-thermal effects are harmful to human health. The number of people suffering from glioblastoma, EHS, testicular cancer etc will continue to increase over time and will expose the industry cover ups. Those who publish their names on conflicted research in support of the industry will long be remembered as participants in the great fraud that has harmed human health. We the sufferers will not be silenced.
Microwave effect on diffusion: a possible mechanism for non-thermal effect ( Changes the viscosity of the water) https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24856870/
??? Google translator gives this:
“Nowadays it is really possible to make blind people sight – but you cannot do that yourself – unfortunately you have to go to a specialist who can help you. In this case, the horse will not only have to eat itself, but also have to go to the food bowl itself.”
What is this about?
Het is tegenwoordig echt mogelijk om blinden ziende te maken – maar dat kun je niet zelf – helaas moet je dan wel naar een specialist die je kan helpen. In dit geval zal het paard niet alleen zelf moeten eten maar ook nog zelf naar de voerbak moeten gaan.
Eric
The real question is, how many more people are going to get sick and suffer as you ignore the real issue, bury your heads in the sand whilst looking for a way out of the mess you and others have created, with yet another delay until 2022 for the results of “More Research”. isn’t there enough already, the Insurance industry thinks so, and they so rarely get it wrong.
Dr Alexander Lerchl, He, like you, claimed there was no effect below current ICNIRP levels, that was , until his own research confirmed the opposite. and he had to admit he was wrong. we’ll see if he maintains that stance through this GLORE 2020. You must know you have no credibility with mainstream science and the Electrosensitives of this world, who have lost Job’s Homes and families, me included, not to mention all the families who have lost loved ones and bread winners, to brain tumours. ICNIRP members past and present a lot to answer for, I await that day, it’s fast approaching.
Thanks for pointing it out my error- corrected…
Dariusz,
First, it is GLORE 2020, not GALORE 2020. Second, ICNIRP indeed ‘diligently published all comments”, and we didn’t keep anything secret. If you click on the tab Comments and responses you will see every full comment and the response of ICNIRP. Please look carefully before you make accusations.
Eric van Rongen, ICNIRP vice-chair