Debunking Martin L. Pall’s “bad science 2021”; part 3/3

Ken Foster and Quirino Balzano have just published a letter in which they respond to unfounded claims on 5G, made by Martin L. Pall.

On May 26th, 2021, Martin L. Pall has published review article: ‘Millimeter (MM) wave and microwave frequency radiation produce deeply penetrating effects: the biology and the physics

This is part 3/3 of the critical comments on Pall’s review.

The letter by Foster & Balzano begins with this sentence [emphasis added]:

  • A full analysis of the many factual errors, dubious claims and non sequiturs in this paper would be a big job. We comment on a few specific errors, and defer the longer discussion needed to address his biophysical theories.

At the end of discussion, Foster and Balzano write about the use of TV gossip by Pall as reliable “scientific” reference (I have written about Pall using this gossip story in his lecture). It is how Pall operates. He does scaremongering, he misrepresents science and he uses gossip, and anti-5G activists “buy” it and are duped by Pall – a really shameful conduct for a scientist:

  • Pall’s final cite (75) is to a television news report about three suicides in workers in an ambulance service in East Anglia UK (Nov. 2019). “It is possible,” Pall surmises, that “EHS may play a role in the approximate two-week time period between the beginning of service of the 5G ambulance and the first suicide”. A recent search of Lexis/Nexis and found many media accounts of the suicides, both when they occurred in Nov. 2019 and when a report of the incidents was completed in May 2020 (the report itself is apparently not publicly available). These accounts focused on workplace harassment, and none mentioned concerns about “5G”. In a statement to one of us (KRF), the ambulance service states that it did not investigate 5G in connection with the suicides, and has no plans to do so in the future. (According to news reports at the time, the ambulance service was participating in trials at a test site of 5G communications systems but there is no indication that the three workers were involved.)

5 thoughts on “Debunking Martin L. Pall’s “bad science 2021”; part 3/3

  1. Pingback: Martin Pall’s claims on EMF, VGCC and Alzheimer’s lack scientific evidence of proof or even likelihood | BRHP – Between a Rock and a Hard Place

  2. Pingback: If claims by Dimitris J. Panagopoulos are confirmed, Martin L. Pall committed scientific misconduct and his articles published since 2017 should be urgently retracted by the journals | BRHP – Between a Rock and a Hard Place

  3. This was not an effort to discredit Prof. Pall (not Paul). He did the discrediting all by himself.
    Sir, what is the reality you are invoking? Every physical or chemical agent is medicine or poison, depending on the dose (Paracelsus).
    The mechanisms (and so the doses) advanced by Prof Pall are simply unscientific and should be vigorously disputed. Nothing personal against Prof. Pall.

  4. It is highly worrisome to hear that anti-5G activists don’t care what nonsense is fed to them by Pall and many alike “scientists”.
    It is also worrisome that any mention of wireless communication coming to civilian use from military technology is equalled as made to kill population. It is ridiculous. Let me remind yoy that e.g. duct tape, tampons for women, paper tissues are… military technology-derived civilian applications. Let’s not be paranoid.

  5. Hi,

    A determined effort to discredit Martin L. Paul is disingenuous and wrongly focussed as it is missing the reality. Whether Martin L. Paul’s arguments hold up or not is irrelevant. Waste of time and effort so forget about it.

    5G is military technology period. Proof that it harms humans and maybe a good bit of life on this planet is beyond doubt and the military have done the science, thoroughly too, to prove just how harmful it can be. It has the capacity to kill at some level and Claims that it will not must be treated as simply that – a Claim without evidence, not conclusive evidence. The evidence is without doubt that millimetre wave radiation CAN kill and certainly can harm – its all a matter of degree.

    So the argument on whether it is harmful and how is irrelevant – it is done, finished and over. Live with this reality. No one but no one stands in front of a Millimetre Wave aerial in the military for very good reason.

    Do the science, the true science.

    Regards Peter


Leave a Reply

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

You are commenting using your 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 )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.