Sometimes Asking Questions Provides You With Answers That May Be Uncomfortable

Maryanne Demasi, via Huffington Post

The claims that our program “should never have aired” should not sit well with the public. At best, it’s an over-reaction. At worst, it’s a form of censorship.

Sometimes in science asking questions provides you with answers that may be unsettling. Not because they are conclusive, but because they are inconclusive. It’s the duty of scientists and science reporters to encourage critical thinking on issues that are still up for debate.

Several other counties around the world have more stringent radio frequency safety thresholds than Australia. Italy, China, Switzerland and Russia have wireless safety limits, which are a hundred times more stringent than our own. In France, they restrict advertising of mobile phones to children. They have also banned Wi-Fi in nurseries and day care centres.

So I decided to investigate. Why are some countries making these changes and not Australia? To say that this is a fringe view is not sustainable.

Wireless technology is relatively new and the science in this area is not as settled as is often claimed. Especially in relation to children. That is why a study is currently underway, involving over 14 countries, which is assessing whether the use of mobile phones at an early age increases the rates of early onset brain tumours in 1000 young people. The results will be released this year……

As an investigative journalist, I am used to taking some heat from critics. It’s part of the job. Catalyst is no stranger to controversy. As investigators, we have studied emerging scientific debates at home and abroad, and brought them into Australian living rooms. What was perceived as controversial a few years ago, like discussions on dietary sugar or the over-prescription of cholesterol-lowering medications called statins, is now widely debated overseas by mainstream media outlets…..

The great thing about science is that new discoveries are constantly made and orthodoxies change. Sometimes so-called “fringe” views move into the mainstream, forcing governments to change policies to prevent public harm. This has happened many times. Think back to thalidomide, asbestos, tobacco. We are not suggesting this will necessarily happen in the case of wireless technology, but it’s also not scientific to claim the door has been slammed shut on this discussion….

See full article at: Huffington Post 

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

7 Responses to Sometimes Asking Questions Provides You With Answers That May Be Uncomfortable

  1. Hammer Mann says:

    Gwen,
    I wrote politely and forcefully to Dr Jenny Promos,
    some weeks ago. She is the head Doctor at the Department of Education & Training and Early Childhood & School Education Group at 2 Treasury Place East Melbourne Vic 3002. Her phone number is 03 9637 2000. I am still awaiting a proper and written reply from her. All I got was a dismissive Boiler Plate type of letter from her, effectively backing up the four I allege to be Pretend scientists at ARPANSA who I allege still live in the ignorant world of some fifty years ago in respect to the then little then known effects of Microwave Radiation Damage to humans and animals and insects and plants, such as tree’s leaves and delicate creepers.

    They these I allege to be pretend scientists at ARPANSA of Ken Karapidis and Keith Decent could not give me any proper or logical answers to my sensible and scientific questions regarding damage to children and adults from Microwave radiation. Neither could their bosses of Stephen Solomon or the chief scientist Dr Carl Larsson.
    I was very disappointed in their rather Laze-fey and seemingly uncaring attitude of the four of them towards what should be their Lawful and Common Law Duty for people’s health and welfare which is sadly lacking in any of ARPANSA’s actual Pretend to be scientists. They are I allege a total disgrace to their profession and all of them need to be sacked.
    They seem only interested in keeping their jobs to claim their monthly pay packets from the Victorian Government with whom I allege they collude to keep the frightening truth regarding Microwave Damage to humans and animals and all of LIFE from the public !

    • Anonymous says:

      Hammer Mann, you need to send affidavits or legal notices otherwise it does not matter at least with an affidavit they have to answer with an affidavit under penalty of perjury.
      Of course they can ignore your affidavit but then they will be in default eventually.

  2. dana says:

    Thank God for Maryanne Demasi. I was beginning to think that there weren’t any journalists out there who were smart enough to understand the science behind wireless devices. Clearly some people want to suppress the truth and the fact that some of it is getting out is making them have a fit. Rodney Croft, was actually quoted in the SMH as saying “‘we can be very confident that the emissions are indeed safe.’” I don’t think anybody has ever said that before. Can he possibly be any more ridiculous and unscientific? There are thousands of papers showing health effects. As a person who suffers daily from health effects of wireless devices has had to move house because of them, I find the behaviour of Rodney Croft absolutely disgusting The moronic SMH article tried to make out that people warning about the health effects wireless technology were “a fringe position that is not supported by science”, even though they are actually quite a large group. Well, at least now I know why, after writing a letter extensively explaining the research, they chose not to do a proper scientific report on this subject – they seem to be acting as prostitute for the mobile phone/wireless technology industry. The whingers that claim the Catalyst report was ‘biased” don’t seem to be able to come up with any specific arguments to say why it is biased because they know the facts presented in it are accurate. What they resent about this program is that the public has finally been told the truth.

    • Jacken says:

      Perhaps Rodney Croft has some special insight that enables him to categorically state that “possible carcinogens” are “safe”.

  3. Julie Richardson says:

    I agree entirely. I loved the program & think it’s high time this issue received the kind of public exposure this screening allowed. Thank you sincerely for having the courage to air it.

    • Hammer Mann says:

      Yes Julie,
      I say congratulations to brave Maryanne Demasi and Dr Devra Davis and others on the Wi-Fri Catalyst Programme on Tuesday 16th Feb 2016 and a big thumbs down to COWARDLY ARPANSA who keep on I allege wickedly defending the Totally Indefensible !

  4. mosh says:

    REASSURING LIES OR AN INCONVENIENT TRUST?, MOST PEOPLE WOULD PREFER THE FORMER!

Leave a comment

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 )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s