The Royal Society Expert Panel has not answered the questions posed by Canadians.
At this time we call upon Health Canada to distance themselves from this industry review of Canada’s wireless safety codes, and publicly lay out the next steps in the review process they have committed to.
USE THE EMAIL PC ON THE RIGHT TO SEND MINISTER AMBROSE YOUR ENCOURAGMENT TO DO SO!
"...Many potentially harmful effects of EMF exposure, such as the stress response and DNA strand breaks, occur at non-thermal levels. The current standards do not adequately protect the health and welfare of the public, and especially its most vulnerable members, children."
"...Over the past 5 years, I have noticed an increasing number of patients who present with EHS (Electromagnetic Hypersensitivity). The precautionary principle needs to be enforced without further delay."
"...The central issue is that Safety Code 6 is based entirely on the assumption that there are no adverse health effects of radiofrequency radiation other than at intensities that result in tissue heating. This assumption is not correct and is not justified. ... . ... we have strong evidence that humans are being harmed by excessive radiofrequency exposures, and also that children are more vulnerable than adults."
"... The proliferation of wireless devices overlooks a critical health issue—non-ionizing microwave radiation, at levels that do not induce measurable changes in temperature, can change and damage the brain and sperm. ... The implications for future health care costs if these [brain cancer] projections are correct are staggering. In the USA the treatment for a single case of brain cancer can cost between $100,000 for radiation therapy alone and up to $1 million depending on drug costs."
"... Our research group has during the last months published further evidence on the human carcinogenic effects of exposure to radiofrequency electromagnetic fields. These articles need to be included in your review."
"...The evidence is sufficient to warrant new public exposure standards benchmarked to low intensity (non-thermal) exposure levels now known to be biologically disruptive [includes plausible link with autism], and for public health advocacy of strong, interim precautionary practices."
"...Electrosensitivity is recognized as a disability in Sweden. People with EHS have varying degrees of disability. The evidence for non-thermal adverse effects on human health is overwhelming and the Precautionary Principle should be immediately reflected in guidelines for public and occupational EMF exposures. Children are at particular risk and preventative measures ensuring minimal EMF exposure should be of the highest priority."
"... Safety Code 6 essentially unchanged since 1979...there is a need to develop a regulatory framework that includes all aspects related to the spectrum encompassed under the current Safety code 6, one which is up-to-date and consistent with the emerging introduction of new telephony, devices, and their supporting infrastructures. ..."
"... Early life exposure to cell phone radiation was associated with behavioral disturbances in two studies of children, ... and more recently with asthma (indicative of immune disturbance)... Furthermore, through epigenetic mechanisms, effects can pass from parent to offspring. Canada is among least protective nations. The RSC Panel had a rare opportunity to bring Canada from the worst in the world, to the forefront of standards for exposure to radiofrequency energy... Indeed, considerable scientific evidence currently exists to justify curtailing and modifying our increasing reliance upon wireless communications, at every opportunity."
"I am very concerned about the increasing evidence internationally that EMR is creating increasing health problems in our population ... This issue is under active consideration by the Health and Public Policy Committee of the Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada, the Health Policy and Public Health Committees of the Canadian Medical Association and the Council of Family Physicians of Canada, the Canadian Paediatric Society and the Canadian Cardiovascular Society. There is an abundance of evidence from around the world that EMR can be harmful to health. It is imperative that [Safety] Code 6 be adjusted to protect Canadians, particularly our children."
"... We do not know the long-term effects of low-level microwave radiation. The safety of this technology on human health has not been properly tested and I would advise that you follow the precautionary principle [which] implies that we have a social responsibility to protect the public from exposure to harm, when scientific investigations have found a plausible risk. That “plausible risk” exists for microwave radiation at very low levels..."
"... the 10 higher-quality studies found a harmful association between cell phone use and tumor risk. ... [they] had no funding from the cellular industry whereas the lower quality studies had at least partial industry funding... ... Currently...Canada and the U.S., completely ignore biologic reactivity... Swisscom AG, a major telecommunications provider in Switzerland ... [acknowledged in their] patent application the cancer risk from exposure to wireless radiation eight years before the WHO's International Agency for Research on Cancer declared that radiofrequency energy, including cell phone and Wi-Fi radiation, is a "possible carcinogen" to humans, like DDT and lead..."
The Canadian Teachers Federation (CTF) is a national alliance of provincial and territorial teacher organizations that represent nearly 200,000 elementary and secondary school teachers across Canada.
RSC response by Geoffrey Flynn, Chair, Committee on Expert Panels to this exposé was to express regrets that Dr. Krewski resigned, not that he did not follow proper disclosure procedures and to try to cast doubt on the reporter’s credibility. C4ST’s understanding of the process is that there is no evaluation or judgment on disclosed conflicts.
The original July 8, 2013 date was deferred due to “ a large outpouring of interest in this event, making it challenging to organize in the current circumstances.”
RSC Protocols for public consultation were released.
Despite assurances “that your invitation will remain valid for the meeting”, several dozen Canadians were unable to speak to the panel who wished to do so. 3 of the 8 panel members were not in attendance at the public consultation. Due to technical difficulties, many of the presentations were not broadcast. At least one panel member offered to re-present her information, but her offer was not accepted
Electrosensitive individuals either were not able to present in the room since the Wi-Fi was not turned off. The ones that could presented under considerable duress.
The week of Oct. 28th, 2013, two conflicted panel members Dr. Foster and Dr. Moulder publish a review paper that demonstrates their pre-formed opinions continue, leading to continued questions about their objectivity.
Moulder is one of the panel members who has direct financial ties to industry. Under oath, he has admitted to receiving payments totaling “several hundred thousand dollars” testifying on behalf of industry in claims of damages from individuals.
That same week Foster also conducts a seminar explaining how WiFi and Smart meters can only have thermal effects on the human body.
The week of Jan. 13th, our nominee was accepted with a notice that:
On Jan. 31, 2014 a draft of the Expert Panel report would be sent to reviewers
On Feb. 14, 2014 the reviewers’ reports are due (we estimate the document to be approx. 200 pages)