BioEM2021 Workshop on EHS – slides of the presentations

Below, with the permission of the authors, are slides of all presentations.

Videos of the workshop presentations is available here.

 

Introduction Slides Dariusz Leszczynski

Slides Maël Dieudonné

Slides Martin Röösli

Slides Dariusz Leszczynski

7 thoughts on “BioEM2021 Workshop on EHS – slides of the presentations

  1. Hi! You ask: What new research should be done to get more insight into EHS?

    I answer: To investigate how proteins function in brain synapses when the brain is exposed to pulsed radiation at different frequencies? An electrosensitive person stopped reacting to radiation when she developed Alzheimer’s disease.

    I read in Research and Progress that: The CPEB protein has a shape that allows multiple copies to bunch together much like a stack of empty egg cartons. These stacks – called oligomers – increase in number as the synapses strengthen. The rods resemble prions, infectious proteins that clump together and cause serious diseases of the nervous system, such as mad cow disease, Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease and possibly Alzheimer’s, Huntington’s and Parkinson’s disease.

    Eric Kandel imagines that the diseases arise when the brain loses control over the normal formation of oligomers. So the risk of dangerous protein clumping may be a price we have to pay for good long-term memory.

    https://fof.se/tidning/2014/6/artikel/farligt-protein-starker-minnet

  2. Dariusz, yes.
    I was surprised when I saw Maël Dieudonné invited to this talk as this was a huge mistake. Inviting him was a poor assessment about Maël Dieudonné, to be honest.

    Maël Dieudonné is the new rival of James Rubin, with a slightly different narrative, but with the same result; Incompetent pseudoscience in conjunction with industry-friendly personnel is what you get.

    What Maël Dieudonné has done, just like James Rubin, is making a career of protecting the wireless industry at the expense of the population.
    Thus Maël is now made for life, as he is now an “expert in wireless damage to humans” (at least in the eyes of producers, governments and consumers).

    Maël Dieudonné even wants it so badly, that he throws James Rubin under the bus.

    And no, Maël Dieudonné did not in any way part from his narrative in his presentation slides for the BioEM2021 Workshop; The message he delivered is exactly the same nonsense as he usually delivers, and as such, he is consistent with his grotesque narrative as seen in his published pseudoscience (how did this get past peer review?).

    Inviting a person like Maël Dieudonné for the BioEM2021 Workshop event was a pretty big mistake. Unfortunately.

    Some day it would be constructive to use real intellectual scientists that are not mobile addicts or have ties to industry or government in any way, to do a proper scientific study fee of biases, assumptions, straw-men, diversion maneuvers, pseudoscience and plain nonsense, which would include malformed and corrupt entities like ICNIRP, FCC, and even the European Commission.
    Without all the biases we typically see when studies on wireless tech are done.
    If we care about people.
    If we care about the planet, the other animals and the environment.
    Maybe some day…

  3. That is interesting and puzzling… was I mistaken when I thought that Maël was more open-minded on EHS?

  4. Hello,

    You should know that the French EHS interviewed by Mael were very unhappy with the way he used their testimonies.
    They felt betrayed and were opposed to the misuse of their testimony.

    During his thesis, most of his jury was already committed to the psychosomatic cause of EHS, notably Gerald Bronner, a French sociologist for whom any minority theory is the beginning of a conspiracy theory.
    The latter is now at the center of a controversy on the constitution of an anti-fake news commission attached to the French government.https://www.lemonde.fr/idees/article/2021/09/30/irene-frachon-la-composition-de-la-commission-bronner-sur-le-complotisme-laisse-perplexe_6096624_3232.html

    Translated with http://www.DeepL.com/Translator

  5. Yes, you are correct, Maël’s presentation differs significantly from the opinions in his abstract and from his peer-reviewed articles. I was also wondering while he presented…

  6. Maël Dieudonné believes that EHS individuals should abandon reducing EMF exposure as a coping strategy.

    Tell it to people who maintain family life, housing and jobs using EMF reduction in silence.

    Despite the fact that Dieudonné’s characteristics will surely match certain EHS individuals, Dieudonné overall delivers a prejudiced and biased character assassination on the entire patient group and on a very dubious view of science.

    Yes, Dieudonné is right that weak doses of EMF can not cause the symptoms described, but from the world of allergens we know that harmless agents such as nuts can initiate life-threatening chain reactions from the body itself.

    Dieudonné’s claim of what is impossible is an argument of ignorance.

    His description of the history of the EHS phenomenon in France certainly does not match Nordic countries, where for many years before the introduction of 3G base stations there was a group of patients who primarily felt they had problems with ELF sources.

    These patients have not been “switched” to RF-EMF hypersensitivity. ELF remains a primary problem for the patient group, but RF-EMF makes a growing contribution.

    In the Nordic countries, there has been no significant history of radical cell tower activism as in France, where Dieudonné claims that activism came before the EHS spread.

    Only in recent years has the EHS patient group in the Nordic countries gained significant allies in groups of conspiracy theorists, who have also recruited many EHS individuals to their political agenda. It is a tragedy that conspiracy theorists and not society take EHS individuals seriously. With these friends, EHS people do not need enemies.

    I postulate that in the Nordic countries we see a growth of people who claim on social media that they can “feel the radiation”, but unlike traditional EHS patients, they do not feel an urgent need for EMF reduction. They broadcast their political demonstrations with a perfect 4G signal.

    In his original synopsis, Dieudonné expressed that it may be premature to dismiss EHS as a real disease. It is not reflected in his final presentation. And why not? I wonder.

    /David Wedege, Denmark

  7. Thank you, Q.

    On Sat, Oct 2, 2021 at 5:03 AM BRHP – Between a Rock and a Hard Place wrote:

    > dariuszleszczynski posted: “Below, with the permission of the authors, are > slides of all presentations. Video of the whole workshop will be presented > next week, for what I got enthusiastic permissions from all workshop > presenters. Introduction Slides Dariusz Leszczynski Sli” >

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 )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google 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.