Electromagnetic Hypersensitivity study, University of Wollongong

A team of scientists at the Illawarra Health and Medical Research Institute (IHMRI), based at the University of Wollongong, are conducting a study into whether or not wireless technology makes people sick.

Wollongong Uni EHS study flyerVolunteer participants will be tested in the ‘safety’ of their home using “portable exposure devices and will be using signals that are relevant to each person’s symptoms.’’ Too bad if the participant’s home has been rendered unsafe by the installation of smart meters on, or near, their homes.

What consideration, if any, has been taken by the researchers with respect to all other sources of Electromagnetic Radiation (EMR) intruding into the home: the main culprits include mobile phone towers, neighbourhood WiFi, NBN towers and even dirty electricity? Will the team have the authority to turn off all of these EMR sources while conducting their provocation tests? It is seriously doubtful that they can and so these will most probably become unaccounted confounding influences.

Anyone who is Electromagnetic Hypersensitive (EHS) and is considering becoming involved in this study would best be advised to first read SSMA Vice President Steve Weller’s response to Rodney Croft regarding this planned study before making any commitments.

Rule number one when conducting scientific tests: remove all variables.

Will the testers know all the local sources of EMR, let alone remove them for the duration of the test? Will all participants be exposed to identical local sources of EMR, other than the EMR being applied by the tester? How can you test a person’s response to controlled doses of EMR when there are other extraneous and uncontrolled man-made electromagnetic radiation coming at the test subject from all directions?

RF/EMR is a stressor that elicits a response from the body to deal with it. Some people are vulnerable to these frequencies and develop symptoms that can include insomnia, headaches, mood changes, cognitive impairment, heart problems, facial flushing, digestive problems and abdominal pain. Testing for reactions to EMR would do well to focus on physical reactions, particularly those which are autonomic, i.e. those reactions that the participant does not have direct and full control over, such as heart rate variability or nerve conductivity.

Meet the research team:

Meet the research team

Meet the research team

This study, overseen by several psychologists, appears to start with the premise that EHS is purely psychological in nature. That those who claim to be EHS have developed anxiety and concern over wireless technology leading to the development of both physiological and psychological problems. The fact that we are bioelectrical systems that can respond to minute levels of electrical interference does not appear to factor into the picture.


Of course who in their right mind would want to be used and abused in order to fill the pay packets of psychologists and so called ‘experts’ who have continually declared EHS to be a psychological health issue in the media and public forums? There are plenty of ‘experts’ out there who know which side their bread is buttered on. Employment for such researchers is a revolving door between industry and government. Go against either group and the odds are that you would likely see your career flushed down the toilet and faced with the unwelcome prospect of looking for a new job.

Unfortunately, in Australia, there is a shortage of research funding for truth seekers but plenty of funding for those who are willing to produce research that supports the interests of the telecommunication cartel. ‘The Procrustean Approach’ by Australia’s Don Maisch explores this problem in great depth.

Deception Apparent at All Levels of the Scientific Process

“From industry funding controlling the release of study results to manipulations of study design, to publicizing abstracts that do not disclose a study’s true findings, deceptions are increasingly common at all levels of the scientific process. Sometimes the media itself, which often receives a large amount of advertising dollars from the cell phone industry, is responsible for spreading inaccurate and misleading information.” You can read more here “How Science Can Deceive You about Your Cell Phone”

But not all is lost for those who are unfortunate enough to find themselves being EHS. There are ethical scientists as well as doctors who unfailingly adhere to their Hippocratic oath “to do no harm”, who are working hard to actively raise awareness that EHS is a bona fide physiological disorder which can be clearly associated with EMR. This was recently demonstrated at the 5th Paris Appeal Congress, 18th of May, 2015 where this Déclaration de Bruxelles EN-1 was the final outcome.

This entry was posted in ARPANSA, electromagnetic hypersensitivity (EHS), health, Research, wireless and tagged , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

16 Responses to Electromagnetic Hypersensitivity study, University of Wollongong

  1. Anonymous says:

    I emailed Sarah, she still has not replied.I asked her to confirm what she actually said.
    If Sarah has first hand knowledge and factual evidence then she needs to produce it.She needs to be very careful of what she says as if she is giving out misleading or false information, then this could be seen as negligent.
    Its also a crime to make false statements.

  2. Tanya says:

    The article at http://www.theguardian.com/society/2013/mar/29/electrosensitivity-is-technology-killing-us is 2 and a half years old. In it, James Rubin, who is one of the team members of this currently proposed ‘health study’ states, “But we’ve spent millions on the research and the time comes when you have to say, in the future the money would be better spent on looking for effective treatments, rather than chasing a cause.”

    So why is he, two years later, still accepting research funding to “chase a cause”? Because it pays his bills and sways the balance of research findings in the direction of no relationship between EHS and EMR. Get a conscience James! And go get a real job!

    And why should EHS people be expected to knock themelves out with pills, use expensive shielding and exclude themselves from society just so people like James Rubin can live in the pocket of industry? Since when was it best to cover up the problem with treatments, rather than eliminate the cause? Get a brain, James!

    • Anonymous says:

      They have already found the cause. Now they need to put money into finding how this radiation is making people sick.This would require individual analysis as everyone has different symptoms. The balance of research findings is just his opinion and i am not interested in his opinions.
      Perhaps its time to now spend money on effective treatments for those sprouting propaganda.I am not sure if you can treat cowards with medication.

  3. CA says:

    Microwave News (online) is a good source of information about the science of microwave exposures, and politics behind the scenes that influence science. Some authors have tested whether people can sense of an EM field, and if study participants fail to sense the EM field, have concluded that there is no such thing as electro-hypersensitivity (EHS). This is akin to asking a person who has an allergic response to a small amount of a substance consumed (peanut oil on a peanut-free candy?), to recall whether they tasted the peanuts before reacting. If we think more in terms of EHS as an allergic response (following the lead of Joel Moskowitz, PhD), we may come to a better understanding of the impacts of this new exposure on human health.

  4. Gwen says:

    I found this comment on the Guardian news regarding approval for coal mines etc. I thought it gives an insight into how we got the electrical devices in our meter boxes.

    “Having worked in major project approvals through consultancies for many years (until ethically I could take no more), this is the process for practically every project:
    – Proponent consults with key figures in planning departments to ensure they have all the initial ‘tools’ (e.g. legal, planning) to ensure a smooth approvals process
    – Proponent commissions a compliant consultancy to use existing and some new data to develop risk assessments and initial/ rough drafts of EIS (yes, well before a project is announced). The consultancy is left in no confusion as to how any data will be collected and analysed. The report is pre-determined
    – Project is then announced to public; in many cases, the draft EIS is basically done.
    – The proponent becomes embedded in the consultancy, physically changing the various reports that come in from different sections of the consultancy business. Most of this is passive aggressive: “great work, really interesting, but do we really want to use the phrase ‘irreparable damage’ – how about we use the phrase ‘unlikely outcome’, or better still we could remove this section all together”
    – The final report from the consultant looks nothing like the initial draft assessments, but is praised by the proponent as a ‘rigorous assessment’ carried out by ‘independent consultants’. The truth, in most cases, was lost before it even reached the page.
    – The draft EIS is submitted to a compliant and often involved planning department who palm it off to individuals that rarely know the finer details of the project and don’t bother to check.
    – Pressure is then exerted through the media and hearings.
    -Approval follows; if it doesn’t, or if the courts overturn it, simply change the regulations to ensure it is approved next time
    You see, the general public does not realise that the true ‘breach of trust’ (I won’t use the ‘c’ word commonly found in acronyms like ICAC) occurs between the proponent, the planning department and the consultant. Sure, corruption (whoops, used the term) manifests at a political level, but the underlying problem sits with the cosiness of proponents, government agencies and consultants. It is here that the truth is manipulated.”

  5. We are the majority says:

    The nature of this study is clear, the results will be distorted. Does anyone honestly expect a Report on radiation to be in any way scientifically authentic when its overseen by ‘psychologists’ – people who have absolutely no scientific expertise, least of all in EMR or radiation studies? The Study’s bureaucrats might as well have put bricklayers or landscape gardeners in charge, who I’m sure would also appreciate the lucrative dough this gig will generate. Give us a break.

  6. cindy says:

    Croft is funded by Telstra and other telcos. We already know the result then. How about something less disingenuous?

  7. Robert Scott says:

    Can you imagine the amount of money tied up in cell phones, Smart Meters , Wi Fi & alike . This study if it proves the premice that RF radiation has an effect on some people do you think it will see the light of day ? I worked with fire control radar whilst I was in the RAAF and while I was not directly exposed to high power x band radiation it was around me every working day. I may not be susceptible to RF radiation as 30 years on it doesn’t seem to have effected me…………Rob

  8. Rob Guy says:

    A standard biometric test demonstrates that ambient electrical noise, when synchronised to the alpha and beta brain waves, causes profound effects on human perception. Testing sets up a feedback loop using an electroencephalograph to drive an electrical pulse generator. Effects are noticeable down to low levels. Consumer-level equipment can be purchased via the internet. Search for EEG headsets.
    A minority of pulse groups embedded in emissions from smart meters occur at a repetition rate close to that of alpha/beta waves so the proposed research should include biometric lab tests to confirm, or otherwise, any physical effects on voluntary test subjects.

  9. Paul says:

    A study of this nature lead by psychologists? Wow!! Rodney Croft is a psychologist (not a scientist) and we all know how that has panned out. This is not to say that genuine and dedicated psychologists exist who are clearly intelligent and would take into account all factors when conducting a proper study, which this clearly is not!

    As stated above, the only way to conduct a true scientific study is to remove the test subjects from all sources of EMR (mobiles, mobile towers, microwave ovens, wifi and any other sources not covered here), otherwise how can the results be believed? Maybe someone can suggest a place on this planet that is devoid of all EMR.

    This ‘study’ by by the once reputable Illawarra Health and Medical Research Institute (IHMRI), based at the University of Wollongong, is laughable. What else can anyone say?

  10. Peter says:

    And now we have to contend with this:
    Turning the “Smart Meter” grid into a supercomputer –
    If you thought that “Smart Meters” were pulsing far too often, just wait until they are also used to transmit computational data as well. The radiation will end up being off the charts.

    • Paul R says:

      Noticed a few interesting points here.

      “analyzing an individual’s genome to come up with a personalized cancer treatment regime,”
      – Wow! Not only does this network harm you by potentially giving you cancer but it also helps you to find a cure for the exact thing that it is perpetuating! Who would have thought that people could create computers that were dumb?

      “intelligent devices”
      – Ha, ha, that’s probably one of the best jokes I’ve heard all day.

      Are these people brain damaged? Perhaps someone should suggest to Eric Frazier that he should stick his head in a functioning microwave oven and see about how he feels about his ‘brilliant’ idea afterwards.

      But on the bright side, all these stupid ideas just brings us closer to Humanity’s end. Well, it’s better than a lifelong path of suffering.

  11. Rik says:

    If they want to do a test just come and stay at my house for a week. If they aren’t sick after a few days they dont have EHS. If they do they would want to leave within the first 24 hours.

    I have 3x the smart meters here so they wont put me in the study if i applied. Ive had wireless internet since it started with wifi B so its been many years. Same as mobile phones, my first was an analog but i never suffered EHS until smart meters were installed here. They are 100x more than any wireless internet or mobile phone.

  12. Sophie Meneguzzi says:

    Please ban smart metres in Australia.

Leave a Reply to Gwen Cancel 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 )

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