The Critical Importance of Molecular Biomarkers and Imaging in the Study of Electrohypersensitivity. A Scientific Consensus International Report

Prof. Dominique Belpomme

NOTE (by Jean Hudon, Québec, http://www.cqlpe.ca/): This paper — published on July 7 by an international group of 30 co-authors led by Dominique Belpomme and Philippe Irigaray — does NOT call for medicalization of electrohypersensitivity, (i.e. giving medication to treat the symptoms while ignoring the high environmental levels of EMF mechanisms that are causing the functional disability).

This paper simply states that this physical condition that patients are complaining of needs to be taken seriously by medical professionals and researched like any other medical or biological condition; and that it cannot be just "excused" as psychological or psychosomatic, based on faulty (and industry-funded) provocation studies.

Link to full text: https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms22147321

The Critical Importance of Molecular Biomarkers and Imaging in the Study of Electrohypersensitivity. A Scientific Consensus International Report

by Dominique Belpomme, George L. Carlo, Philippe Irigaray, David O. Carpenter, Lennart Hardell, Michael Kundi, Igo Belyaev, Magda Havas, Franz Adlkofer, Gunnar Heuser, Anthony B. Miller, Daniela Caccamo, Chiara De Luca, Lebrecht von Klitzing, Martin L. Pall, Priyanka Bandara, Yael Stein, Cindy Sage, Morando Soffritti, Devra Davis, Joel M. Moscowitz, S.M.J. Mortazavi, Martha R. Herbert, Hanns Moshammer, Gerard Ledoigt, Robert Turner, Anthony Tweedale, Pilar Muñoz-Calero, Iris Udasin, Tarmo Keppel, Ernesto Burgio and André Vander Vorst

Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2021, 22(14), 7321;  Published: 7 July 2021

Abstract

Clinical research aiming at objectively identifying and characterizing diseases via clinical observations and biological and radiological findings is a critical initial research step when establishing objective diagnostic criteria and treatments. Failure to first define such diagnostic criteria may lead research on pathogenesis and etiology to serious confounding biases and erroneous medical interpretations. This is particularly the case for electrohypersensitivity (EHS) and more particularly for the so-called “provocation tests”, which do not investigate the causal origin of EHS but rather the EHS-associated particular environmental intolerance state with hypersensitivity to man-made electromagnetic fields (EMF). However, because those tests depend on multiple EMF-associated physical and biological parameters and have been conducted in patients without having first defined EHS objectively and/or endpoints adequately, they cannot presently be considered to be valid pathogenesis research methodologies. Consequently, the negative results obtained by these tests do not preclude a role of EMF exposure as a symptomatic trigger in EHS patients. Moreover, there is no proof that EHS symptoms or EHS itself are caused by psychosomatic or nocebo effects. This international consensus report pleads for the acknowledgement of EHS as a distinct neuropathological disorder and for its inclusion in the WHO International Classification of Diseases. 

View Full-Text