April 1, 2019
Via Joel Moskowitz
I have been circulating abstracts of newly-published scientific papers on wireless radiation and electromagnetic fields (EMF) about once a month since August, 2016. Several hundred EMF scientists around the world receive these updates. The complete collection including the papers below contains more than 600 abstracts.
To see the latest studies or to download the 435-page document (pdf) go to the following web page:
Recent Papers
Note: The following paper is relevant in light of the recent "attacks" on U.S. and Canadian embassy personnel in Cuba and on U.S. consulate personnel in Guangzhou, China. My hypothesis is that in all three incidents (Havana, Guangzhou, and Moscow) the affected individuals experienced neurological symptoms due to electrosensitivity (aka microwave sickness) from repeated exposures to microwave radiation deployed for surveillance purposes by a foreign nation.
The "Moscow signal" epidemiological study, 40 years on
Martinez JA. The "Moscow signal" epidemiological study, 40 years on. Reviews on Environmental Research. 34(1):13-24. Mar 2019. d oi: 10.1515/reveh-2018-0061.
Abstract
Between 1953 and 1979, the USSR irradiated the United States embassy in Moscow with microwaves. This episode, a classic Cold War affair, has acquired enormous importance in the discussions on the effect of non-ionizing radiation on people's health. In 2011, the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) classified radiofrequency electromagnetic fields as being a possible human carcinogen (Group 2B), but the results of recent laboratory and epidemiological studies have led some researchers to conclude that radiofrequency electromagnetic fields should be reclassified as a human carcinogen instead of merely a possible human carcinogen. In 1978, the "Moscow signal" case was officially closed after the publication of the epidemiological study of (Lilienfeld AM, Tonascia J, Tonascia S, Libauer CA, Cauthen GM. Foreign Service health status study. Evaluation of health status of foreign service and other employees from selected Eastern European posts. Report on Foreign Service Health Status Study, U.S. Department of State 6025-619073, 1978), showing no apparent evidence of increased mortality rates and limited evidence regarding general health status. However, several loose ends still remain with respect to this epidemiological study, as well as the affair as a whole. In this paper, we summarize the available evidence concerning this case, paying special attention to the epidemiological study of Lilienfeld et al. After reviewing the available literature (including declassified documents), and after some additional statistical analyses, we provide new insights which do not complete the puzzle, but which may help to better understand it.
Conclusions
This event was just one of many that took place during the Cold War, and must therefore be assessed in the context of manipulation, political interests and classified information typical of the time. With the data in hand, with what we have been able to gather and what we have shown in this article, we can approach the truth, possibly even guess it, but not reveal it in its total dimension. And we will probably never be able to do so.
Those who, in the published results we have mentioned, use this event to deny the harmful effects of microwave radiation do not have enough evidence to support their position. There are too many loose ends, unanalyzed information, methodological flaws, and debatable interpretations.
However, on the opposite side of the debate, those who take this case as incontestable evidence of the harmful effects of microwaves on humans at low intensities, must also admit that there is a lack of statistical consistency in the results. There is still too much imprecision.
A global vision of the whole event, including the nuances and details that we have explained in this article, show the latter to be closer to the truth than the former, even more so when we consider non-carcinogenic effects linked to what is now associated with electrohypersensitivity. However, it must be recognized that the methodology used by Lilienfeld et al. (1) also casts doubt on this claim, as the health status symptom questionnaires were filled in after the case was made public (nocebo effect). In addition, the results of our simulations are also partially dependent of the quality of data of Lilienfeld et al. (1), which were not complete, having a different degree of potential bias regarding mortality, cancer incidence and health status. Further research on the personnel of the Havana embassy who were recently subjected to a similar attack, could indirectly help to better understand what happened in Moscow more than 40 years ago.
Power densities measured at the Moscow embassy were higher than the average levels typically found nowadays in homes, schools and urban areas, and were of the same order of magnitude as the more extreme case of living just a few meters from a base station (see (19)). This means that exposure at the embassy could have been high in terms of today’s typical levels of exposure.
Nevertheless, the exposure was several orders of magnitude lower than those suggested by the ICNRIP guidelines, adopted by many countries as legal limits. As Hardell et al. (19) indicated, the BioInitiative Report (49) with updated references defined the scientific benchmark for possible health risks as 0.000003–0.000006 mW/cm2. Consequently, the exposure at the Moscow embassy was from 3 to 4 orders of magnitude higher than this safety benchmark, but 3 orders of magnitude lower than the legal limits of many countries.
In any case, and as Frentzle-Beyme (50) stated, “The level of proof required to justify action for health protection should be less than that required to constitute causality as a scientific principle”. The “Moscow signal” remains a “signal”; let us not reject it, but listen to it instead.
Those who, in the published results we have mentioned, use this event to deny the harmful effects of microwave radiation do not have enough evidence to support their position. There are too many loose ends, unanalyzed information, methodological flaws, and debatable interpretations.
However, on the opposite side of the debate, those who take this case as incontestable evidence of the harmful effects of microwaves on humans at low intensities, must also admit that there is a lack of statistical consistency in the results. There is still too much imprecision.
A global vision of the whole event, including the nuances and details that we have explained in this article, show the latter to be closer to the truth than the former, even more so when we consider non-carcinogenic effects linked to what is now associated with electrohypersensitivity. However, it must be recognized that the methodology used by Lilienfeld et al. (1) also casts doubt on this claim, as the health status symptom questionnaires were filled in after the case was made public (nocebo effect). In addition, the results of our simulations are also partially dependent of the quality of data of Lilienfeld et al. (1), which were not complete, having a different degree of potential bias regarding mortality, cancer incidence and health status. Further research on the personnel of the Havana embassy who were recently subjected to a similar attack, could indirectly help to better understand what happened in Moscow more than 40 years ago.
Power densities measured at the Moscow embassy were higher than the average levels typically found nowadays in homes, schools and urban areas, and were of the same order of magnitude as the more extreme case of living just a few meters from a base station (see (19)). This means that exposure at the embassy could have been high in terms of today’s typical levels of exposure.
Nevertheless, the exposure was several orders of magnitude lower than those suggested by the ICNRIP guidelines, adopted by many countries as legal limits. As Hardell et al. (19) indicated, the BioInitiative Report (49) with updated references defined the scientific benchmark for possible health risks as 0.000003–0.000006 mW/cm2. Consequently, the exposure at the Moscow embassy was from 3 to 4 orders of magnitude higher than this safety benchmark, but 3 orders of magnitude lower than the legal limits of many countries.
In any case, and as Frentzle-Beyme (50) stated, “The level of proof required to justify action for health protection should be less than that required to constitute causality as a scientific principle”. The “Moscow signal” remains a “signal”; let us not reject it, but listen to it instead.
--
The "Moscow signal" epidemiological study, 40 years on
Radio Frequency Electromagnetic Field Exposure Assessment for Future 5G networks
Radio Frequency Electromagnetic Fields Exposure Assessment in Indoor Environments: A Review
Assessment of RF EMF exposure from personal measurements considering the body shadowing effect in Korean children and parents
Emissions from smart meters and other residential radiofrequency sources
Not in My Neighborhood: A User Equipment Perspective of Cellular Planning Under Restrictive EMF Limits
Becoming electro-hypersensitive: A replication study
A critical review on wireless charging for electric vehiclesBecoming electro-hypersensitive: A replication study
Effects of a brain tumor in a human head on SAR and temperature rise due to RF sources at 4G and 5G frequencies
Comparing DNA Damage Induced by Mobile Telephony and Other Types of Man-Made Electromagnetic Fields
Radiofrequency electromagnetic field exposure and risk perception: A pilot experimental study
Effects of Exposure to 5.8 GHz EMF on Micronucleus Formation, DNA strand breaks & Heat Shock Protein Expressions in Human Eye Cells
The carcinogenic potential of non-ionizing radiations: The cases of S-50 Hz MF and 1.8 GHz GSM radiofrequency radiation
Monitoring mice health, investigation of behavior, hematological parameters under the effect of an electromagnetic field
Oxidative stress-mediated alterations on sperm parameters in male Wistar rats exposed to 3G mobile phone radiation
Exposure to non-ionizing electromagnetic radiation of public risk prevention instruments threatens the quality of spermatozoids
Effect of 1800-2100 MHz Electromagnetic Radiation on Learning-Memory and Hippocampal Morphology in Swiss Albino Mice
Cell Phone Radiation Effect on Bone-to-Implant Osseointegration: A Preliminary Histologic Evaluation in Rabbits
Effect of Mobile Tower Radiation on Microbial Diversity in Soil and Antibiotic Resistance
Effects of ELF EMF on B16F10 cancer cells
Low frequency pulsed EMF promotes differentiation of oligodendrocyte precursor cells through upregulation of miR-219-5p in vitro
Effects of pulsed EMF on learning and memory abilities of STZ-induced dementia rats
Involvement of calcium in 50-Hz magnetic field-induced activation of sphingosine kinase 1 signaling pathway
Computational simulations of the penetration of 0.30 THz radiation into the human ear
Computational simulations of the penetration of 0.30 THz radiation into the human ear
--
Joel M. Moskowitz, Ph.D., Director
Center for Family and Community Health
School of Public Health
University of California, Berkeley
Electromagnetic Radiation Safety
Center for Family and Community Health
School of Public Health
University of California, Berkeley
Electromagnetic Radiation Safety
Website: https://www.saferemr.com
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/SaferEMRTwitter: @berkeleyprc
No comments:
Post a Comment