The truth about mobile phone and wireless radiation

The truth about mobile phone and wireless radiation: what we know, what we need to find out, and what you can do now

Presented by Dr Devra Davis, Visiting Professor of Medicine at the Hebrew University Hadassah Medical School, and Visiting Professor of Medicine at Ondokuz Mayis University, Turkey.

Video Lecture Link

The Lecture

What are the health effects of mobile phones and wireless radiation? While Australia has led the world in safety standards, including compulsory seat-belt legislation, plain packaging on cigarettes, and product and food disclosure legislation, it falls behind in addressing the significant issues associated with mobile phone use. In this Dean’s Lecture, epidemiologist and electromagnetic radiation expert, Dr Devra Davis, will outline the evolution of the mobile phone and smartphone, and provide a background to the current 19 year old radiation safety standards (SAR), policy developments and international legislation. New global studies on the health consequences of mobile/wireless radiation will be presented, including children’s exposure and risks.

The Speaker

Dr Devra Davis is an internationally recognised expert on electromagnetic radiation from mobile phones and other wireless transmitting devices. She is currently the Visiting Professor of Medicine at the Hebrew University Hadassah Medical School, and Visiting Professor of Medicine at Ondokuz Mayis University, Turkey. Dr Davis was Founding Director of the Center for Environmental Oncology at The University of Pittsburgh Cancer Institute —­ the first institute of its kind in the world, to examine the environmental factors that contribute to the majority of cases of cancer.

In 2007, Dr Devra Davis founded non­profit Environmental Health Trust to provide basic research and education about environmental health hazards. Dr Davis served as the President Clinton appointee to the Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board in the U.S.A. from 1994–­1999, an independent executive branch agency that investigates, prevents and mitigates chemical accidents.

As the former Senior Advisor to the Assistant Secretary for Health in the Department of Health and Human Services, she has counseled leading officials in the United States, United Nations, European Environment Agency, Pan American Health Organization, World Health Organization, and World Bank.

Dr Davis holds a B.S. in physiological psychology and an M.A. in sociology from the University of Pittsburgh, 1967. She completed a PhD in science studies at the University of Chicago as a Danforth Foundation Graduate Fellow, 1972 and a M.P.H. in epidemiology at the Johns Hopkins University as a Senior National Cancer Institute Post-­Doctoral Fellow, 1982. She has authored more than 200 publications and has been published in Lancet and Journal of the American Medical Association as well as the Scientific American and the New York Times.

This lecture is presented by the Melbourne School of Engineering, in partnership with the Faculty of Medicine, Dentistry and Health Sciences, the Faculty of Science and the Melbourne Networked Society Institute, at the University of Melbourne.

Original Post Linked here

This entry was posted in Smart Meter and tagged , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

7 Responses to The truth about mobile phone and wireless radiation

  1. Anonymous says:

    Paul R what you have said is correct and i agree. Its annoying when so much evidence does exist. They do have to do more research but,they already have enough research to show that microwave radiation is bad for your health.They just have to add to it or refine it ,like they do with any other research.

    • Anonymous says:

      Anecdotal evidence isn’t the same as evidence needed for scientific studies fyi.

      • Anonymous says:

        Anon, why don’t you explain the differences between anecdotal evidence and evidence needed for scientific studies?
        Does ARPANSA use anecdotal evidence? Anecdotal means based on personal observation, case study reports. The real experts don’t use anecdotal evidence they use real scientific evidence FYI.

  2. Anonymous says:

    Yes Paul, we have to totally ignore the fact that so many hundreds/thousands of people have come forward in Victoria and reported headaches, tinnitus, nausea, insomnia after and during the Victorian roll out and we need to do more studies. Yes obviously we need to do more studies. Don’t worry about any real people having real problems in the actual real life roll out environment but let’s get someone like say Chris Zombolas from EMC Technologies to do a couple more tests in his lab. After all they’ve produced some nice reports for us in the past haven’t they.

  3. Paul R says:

    It’s hard to see this woman as a supporter of the “cause” because she has a very diplomatic/bureaucratic approach to how she says things. I am sick and tired of people saying that “we need to do more research on the subject”. We HAVE the evidence. According to Barrie Trower there are at least 6,000 scientific research papers dating back from the 1930s which clearly say that microwave radiation is detrimental to biological health.

    So, why do people keep taking such a bureaucratic approach to “fixing” the problem? It’s like saying” Oh, I broke my leg. I have to make sure that we do all the paperwork first before even considering going to the hospital even though I am in massive amounts of pain.”

    I admit that she is trying but she is taking such a lukewarm approach to the actual ‘taking action’ part of fixing the problem. Most people think that I have a simplistic (read: immature) approach to some things but, honestly, I think that most people just lack common sense because they over-complicate things that could be simple.

    • Dana says:

      Absolutely agree with you, Paul. Research can take 10 years or more. If we wait and do nothing half of us could be dead by then and children will be born with deformities due to DNA damage in their parents.
      Dr Erica Mallery-Blythe says that there are tens of thousands of research papers on the health effects of RF with 70% of them finding significant effects. There is no way there can be that much smoke and not be fire. Because of the way statistical tests are constructed, if there were truly no health effects due to RF, the percentage of studies finding health effects due to chance alone would be 5%, not 70% (for 95% confidence standards). Also, consider that some drugs are withdrawn from the market because of one negative study.
      I am pleased, however, that the word MICROWAVES is finally getting out there. I think people will be quite shocked to realise that they have been microwaving their heads. We need to repeat this fact as often as we can as this fact alone could win the debate.

      Unfortunately the public also seems to have almost no concept of passive exposure to RF. Warnings usually seem to go something like ”don’t put the phone up to your head” or ”don’t put a tablet in your lap”‘. People with electrosensitivity know how woefully inadequate these warning are. What about the almost constant passive exposure to cell towers, smart meters and other people’s mobile phone which are much stronger than they used to be? I never used to be able to feel the emissions from the old mobile phone unless someone was making a call but I can feel the new ones from at least 2 houses away if they are not in flight mode. We really need To push for a better concept of passive exposure to RF. It is ridiculous that there is legislation to protect against passive smoke exposure but no legislation which protects against RF exposure when RF exposure is so much more pervasive and inescapable – you can go to the ends of the earth and barely find a place where there is no RF, certainly nowhere you can get a job – talk about discrimination against people with electrosensitivity.
      Has anybody seen the recent interview with Devra Davis in the SMH? They basically act like she is a lone voice in the wilderness warning people about phones. I think that the tone of this article is borderline disrespectful to Dervra Davis as it tries to do a bit of a character assassination job and doesn’t focus on the facts. One of our biggest difficulties is going to be to crack through the psychological barrier to getting these ignorant reporters to understand the evidence because some of them are lazy and don’t want to face that their own excessive use of mobile has been dangerous.
      I also like Barrie Trower because he doesn’t sugar-coat the truth. I hope he will come out to Australia soon.

    • Seeing Reason and Rationale says:

      Paul, there may be reasons why she takes the approach she does. There must be. I suspect the answer is to look into her history. The opposition is more ruthless in the U.S. than here as we heard in her presentation, and I suspect that this woman has been totally trashed and ridiculed by the vested interest bureaucracy along her activist journey. Perhaps she just needs to roll the way she does in order to still remain an active voice. I don’t know but you, me and others are that angry that we need to be careful not to destroy those persons who may be on our side but who don’t publicly display the same degree of anger that we carry within us in some forthright way that we think they must. Just my thought. I may be wrong but we need to be careful and we need to be united. Having said that I understand why some people are upset and don’t approve.

Leave a comment

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your 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