Raise awareness of environmental health issues in order to better protect our children and future generations.

EMF Studies

17 December 2016

Inaccurate Official Assessment of Radiofrequency Safety by the Advisory Group on Non-ionising Radiation

Extract from "Conclusions":  "Schools, hospitals, employers, organisations and individuals have legal responsibilities to safeguard the health, safety, well-being and development of children, employees and members of the public. But they are unable to fulfil their legal responsibilities when they have been provided with inaccurate information and the evidence of possible harm has been covered up... PHE (Public Health England) and AGNIR (Advisory Group on Non-ionising Radiation) had a responsibility to provide accurate information about the safety of RF fields. Unfortunately, the report suffered from an incorrect and misleading executive summary and overall conclusions, inaccurate statements, omissions and conflict of interest. Public health and the well-being of other species in the natural world cannot be protected when evidence of harm, no matter how inconvenient, is covered up.

Inaccurate official assessment of radiofrequency safety by the Advisory Group on Non-ionising Radiation
Reviews on Environmental Health. Volume 31, Issue 4, Pages 493–503
https://doi.org/10.1515/reveh-2016-0060, November 2016

Sarah J. Starkey1
1Independent Neuroscience and Environmental Health Research, 27 Old Gloucester Street, London WC1N 3AX, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland

Full text available.

Abstract:


The Advisory Group on Non-ionising Radiation (AGNIR) 2012 report forms the basis of official advice on the safety of radiofrequency (RF) electromagnetic fields in the United Kingdom and has been relied upon by health protection agencies around the world. This review describes incorrect and misleading statements from within the report, omissions and conflict of interest, which make it unsuitable for health risk assessment. The executive summary and overall conclusions did not accurately reflect the scientific evidence available. Independence is needed from the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP), the group that set the exposure guidelines being assessed. This conflict of interest critically needs to be addressed for the forthcoming World Health Organisation (WHO) Environmental Health Criteria Monograph on Radiofrequency Fields. Decision makers, organisations and individuals require accurate information about the safety of RF electromagnetic signals if they are to be able to fulfil their safeguarding responsibilities and protect those for whom they have legal responsibility.

Link to full text:
https://www.degruyter.com/view/j/reveh.2016.31.issue-4/reveh-2016-0060/reveh-2016-0060.xml?format=INT

No comments:

Post a Comment