2015-12-29 Dr. Martin Pall charges that Royal Panel failed to perform its scientific duty when reviewing Safety Code 6

  • Charlie Teo, a famous neurosurgeon,  and Devra Davis ask for the public to have the right to know about the dangers of using wireless devices.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yEfFkF1OHsY

  • More clothing to  protect against RF.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-3377831/The-REAL-tin-foil-hat-12-hipster-headwear-claim-able-protect-people-electromagnetic-smog.html

 

  • Martin Pall has done research on the biological effects of microwave radiation and argues that the recent review of Safety Code 6 was faulty.    Health Canada loaded the panel with industry affiliates and allowed only selected studies to be reviewed – ignoring more than 150 published over the 5 years prior, many of which showed mechanisms that lead to biological damage.

“Scientific evidence contradicts findings and assumptions of Canadian Safety Panel 6”

“The 2014 Canadian Report by a panel of experts only recognizes thermal effects regarding safety standards for non-ionizing radiation exposures. Its position is therefore contradicted by each of the observations above. The Report is assessed here in several ways including through Karl Popper’s assessment of strength of evidence. Popper argues that the strongest type of evidence is evidence that falsifies a theory; second strongest is a test of “risky prediction”; the weakest confirms a prediction that the theory could be correct but in no way rules out alternative theories. All of the evidence supporting the Report’s conclusion that only thermal effects need be considered are of the weakest type, confirming prediction but not ruling out alternatives. In contrast, there are thousands of studies apparently falsifying their position….

 

The Report states that “The Panel considered an ‘established adverse health effect’ as an adverse effect that is observed consistently in several studies with strong methodology. With this definition in mind, the Panel reviewed the evidence for a wide variety of negative health impacts from exposure to RF energy, including cancer, cognitive and neurologic effects, male and female reproductive effects, developmental effects, cardiac function and heart rate variability, electromagnetic hypersensitivity, and adverse health effects in susceptible regions of the eye.” Despite this claim to have reviewed a broad array of biological impacts, in fact the Report does not provide a comprehensive review. Rather it engages, as documented below, in what can be referred to as “cherry-picking” – selecting studies consistent with its assumptions. Moreover, it often ignores studies that are not consistent with its assumption that there are no biological effects excepting those that, in their view, may be tied to heating.”  Pg. 104

 

Furthermore, the Report ignores the fact that WHO considers microwave radiation to be a Class 2B carcinogen, and the Report also ignores the fact that four prominent reviews on this topic (48–51) all come to the conclusion that microwave exposures can cause cancer. It is apparent therefore that the Panel of Experts on Safety Code 6 has allowed its assumptions to greatly influence its assessment here, rather than providing an objective assessment of the literature.” Pg. 105

 

“…in this situation where perhaps thousands of such modifications may be needed because of thousands of apparent falsifying studies, the difference in practice from outright falsification by each study may be trivial. It is clear, in any case that the Expert Panel has completely avoided doing its scientific duty here, failing to assess each of the thousands of apparent falsifying studies, and opting instead, as seen above, to make specious arguments. That is tragic, in my view, failing to protect the health of many Canadians, and indeed others around the world.”  Pg. 107

 

“However the “logic” presented in the Report provides industry with a strategy to indefinitely prevent any true scientific standards from being used to assess safety.    Industry need only fund research that ends up making “inconsistent” conclusions, thus allowing all independently funded studies to be thrown out because of these “inconsistencies” and thus indefinitely preventing adoption of safety standards based on genuine, independent science.      It is my hope and expectation that this was not the goal of the Expert Panel, but it is nevertheless an apparent consequence of their Report, if it is viewed as being scientific.”  Pg. 110

 

If you are interested in seeing who the panel members were, they are listed at https://rsc-src.ca/en/expert-panels/rsc-reports/review-safety-code-6-2013-health-canadas-safety-limits-for-exposure-to The initial Chair, who had participated on earlier panels,  was Dr. Daniel Krewski who resigned after conflicts of interest were discovered.

 

The entire report can be found at http://www.citizensforsafetechnology.org/uploads/scribd/PALL%20Rev%20Environ%20Health-2015.pdf  and is well worth reading.    I hope you will consider sending to Dr. Perry Kendall, the BC provincial health officer who refuses to acknowledge any harm is caused by exposure to RF.    If he did, he could not possibly allow $$meters to be put on our homes or wifi in our schools. He uses Safety Code 6 to justify his position, which is to do nothing.  Safety Code 6 is obsolete and flawed, based upon positions supported by the industry. I would like to make it our New Year Resolution to either force Kendall to do his job which is to prevent the public from being harmed or resign.

*********************************

Letters:

Re the update about the US Navy’s plans for RF wargames on the Olympic Peninsula:

From: X
Sent: December 29, 2015 3:53 PM
To: Elizabeth May <Elizabeth.may@parl.gc.ca>; Murray Rankin <Murray.Rankin@parl.gc.ca>; Randall.Garrison@parl.gc.ca
Cc: Dennis and Sharon Noble <dsnoble@shaw.ca>

Subject: 2015-12-28 Update on RF war games over Olympic Peninsula

Congratulations on your re-election in October as our Victoria area MPs. Hopefully you will have managed a little relaxation over the holidays.

As a constituent of Elizabeth May; I live close to UVIC- my husband and I are some of many British Columbians who have refused to have ‘smart’ meters placed on our home. We retain our analog meter and you may have heard from other constituents that BC Hydro is penalizing us for retention of these analog meters. Our BC government and Opposition have largely been silent on the issue and certainly our media has been so as well.

However I am forwarding to you the following as  it is a federal issue.  Please see item number 4 below. (in update 12/28) You may well be aware of concerns in the Greater Victoria area about the noise, RF radiation and shaking resulting from US military activity on the Olympic Peninsula.

May I please request that the issue be raised in the House when you return to Ottawa.

Many thanks for your assistance in this matter. I believe that you are already aware of this matter but perhaps with a new government, we as citizens may be afforded a courtesy of a response. It is a most serious issue and one that many of our US neighbours are attempting to address.

All the best.

X

**********************

Newsletter prepared by Sharon Noble

“The world is a dangerous place, not because of those who do evil, but because of those who look on and do nothing.”   Albert Einstein