umtsno.de

Schlafstörungen, Unruhezustände, Lernstörungen bei Kindern, beschleunigtes Krebswachstum, Blutbild- und Erbgutveränderungen, ist das für den Abbau der UMTS-Sender nicht ausreichend?

Es stimmt einfach nicht, daß es "keinen wissenschaftlichen Nachweis für gesundheitliche Gefahren" gibt. Es gibt unzählige seriöse Studien aus dem In- und Ausland, die die Schädlichkeit des gepulsten Mobilfunks beweisen.

more

"..In this respect, any statement by industry or official sources that claims (or suggests) that:

(a) There is no evidence of ill-health effects from masts; or
(b) The overwhelming evidence is that masts do not cause ill-health effects;
is completely and blatantly untrue."

exDr Grahame Blackwell

see Taddyfone

Prof. Guido Zimmer, Arzt u. Biochemiker, Berater der Wolfgang-Goethe-Universität (Frankfurt am Main)

"Was unser aller Gesundheit belastet und bedroht, kann unmöglich dem Gemeinwohl dienen"

Bisherige Studien zu Schädigungen durch Mobilfunk-Sender (Basisstationen)
Stand April 2006

The Moss report

Hardell, Richter et al - at The Moss report

27 Sep 2005, By Dr. Ralph Moss: Do radiofrequency energy fields cause cancer?, Part 1+2+3

SUBVERTING THE SCIENCE OF EPIDEMIOLOGY

from Iris, 17 Dec 2006

part 1 | part 2

PART I

Epidemiology is the branch of medicine that studies the causes, distribution and prevention of diseases within various populations. It is to epidemiologists that the medical profession, lawmakers and the shapers of public policy turn when they need clarification of the underlying factors that trigger or predispose to disease.

Epidemiology has been responsible for some of the most crucial and life-saving advances in public health. However, the very importance of epidemiology makes it a prime target for the industrial giants whose products or manufacturing techniques are under suspicion as possibly contributing to diseases such as cancer. If they are to escape the imposition of restrictive controls or outright bans on their products, it is in their interest to minimize the impact of any potentially damaging epidemiological evidence.

This phenomenon was discussed in a paper titled ex"Secret ties to industry and conflicting interests in cancer research," published last month in the American Journal of Industrial Medicine. The authors of the paper documented several instances of leading epidemiologists secretly acting as paid consultants to industry over extended periods during which those industries were under intense scrutiny as potential contributors to the incidence of cancer.

For example, the paper cites the case of Sir Richard Doll, one of the most famous epidemiologists and cancer researchers in the world, who died last year. One could hardly imagine a more eminent career. In 1950, Doll was one of the first to point out the clear link between cigarette smoking and the alarming rise in lung cancer. "The risk of developing the disease increases in proportion to the amount smoked," he wrote.

"It may be 50 times as great among those who smoke 25 or more cigarettes a day as among non-smokers." This was a revolutionary thesis at the time. But, like his US colleague and contemporary, Ernst Wynder, Doll not only directed his efforts toward making the medical profession aware of the lethal effects of smoking, he also made use of the media to explain the connection to the public. Through his groundbreaking work on tobacco and lung cancer Doll became a foundational figure in modern epidemiology and public health.

Before and after World War II, Doll was an influential member of the Socialist Medical Society, and made a name for himself as someone who was not afraid to indict industry for its contribution to the growing incidence of cancer. In 1954 he warned that, besides smoking, exposure to nickel, asbestos, gas production tars, and radioactivity were other major causes of cancer.

In the following year, he published a landmark report warning about high cancer rates in asbestos workers. In 1967, he further warned that an "immense" number of substances were known to cause cancer, and that prevention was a better strategy than cure. Until the late sixties, he was still considered a political radical. However, as the years passed, Doll mysteriously and sometimes drastically changed these views.

According to Samuel S. Epstein, MD, Professor Emeritus of Environmental and Occupational Medicine at the School of Public Health, University of Illinois, Chicago, the one-time maverick eventually emerged as a major defender of corporate industry interests. Using the immense prestige of his position, Doll was able to trivialize and dismiss numerous industrial causes of cancer, while focusing public and political attention on smoking as the prime offender.

Doll also published several influential papers that called into question other possible environmental causes of cancer. One of these was "The causes of cancer: quantitative estimates of avoidable risks of cancer in the United States today," published in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute in 1981, which he co-authored with his close colleague, Professor Richard Peto. Another paper, "Effects of exposure to vinyl chloride: an assessment of the evidence," was written by Doll alone. These and other publications massively downplayed the risks of environmental carcinogens in the food, air, water and workplace.

Doll's star continued to rise throughout his long life. Although he never received a Nobel Prize, he was inducted into the Royal Society in 1966, was appointed Regius Professor of Medicine at Oxford University in 1969, and received a knighthood in 1971. Oxford named a building after him while he was still living. When he died in July 2005, at the age of 92, he was lauded as a founder of British cancer science.

But Doll's reputation has now begun to fray, if not unravel entirely. The publication of the paper "Secret ties to industry and conflicting interests in cancer research" in the American Journal Industrial Medicine reveals that there was a hidden side to Doll's public career. Over a period of many years, Doll was secretly retained as a paid consultant by several giant international chemical companies at the same time that he was acting as an ostensibly impartial scientific expert to investigate and report on suspected links between these companies' products and the development of cancer. For example, the industrial giant Monsanto paid Doll $1,500 per day as a consultant over a period of years during the 1980s.

At that time, Monsanto was at the center of an intense debate concerning the carcinogenicity of its product, Agent Orange, the notorious defoliant that was widely used during the Vietnam war. Doll testified to an Australian Royal Commission investigating the claims of servicemen who were exposed to Agent Orange that there was no evidence to suggest that this product was carcinogenic. Yet in his publications and statements he consistently failed to disclose that he was a paid consultant for Monsanto.

With the full weight of Doll's iconic reputation behind the denial of any connection between Agent Orange and cancer, the Royal Commission concluded that the defoliant did not in fact represent a health hazard. Monsanto was thus able to escape responsibility for causing untold numbers of cancers both among servicemen and the indigenous Vietnamese population. Without Doll's help, it is doubtful if this egregious cover-up could have taken place.

Similarly, Doll was hired as a paid consultant throughout the 1990s by other major industrial companies including Dow Chemical, and Turner and Newall, manufacturers of the carcinogen asbestos. During this period he similarly gave testimony and depositions as an expert witness on behalf of chemical industry giants in a number of cases, including one brought by the families of deceased workers who claimed that their loved ones' brain cancers had been triggered by exposure to vinyl chloride.

Once again, Doll failed to disclose his paid consultancy status, and neglected to declare any conflict of interest, while testifying to the effect that there was no evidence whatever that vinyl chloride contributed to brain cancer. Again, his towering reputation won the day, even though a decade earlier, in 1979, vinyl chloride had already been recognized and classified as a Grade I human carcinogen.

The secret of Doll's financial entanglement with industry was finally brought to light by lawyers who cross-examined him on the evidence he had given on behalf of Dow and others, and drew attention to his failure to disclose these connections. In response to lawyers' questions about his lack of acknowledgement of financial interest, Doll disingenuously replied that he did not know that he should disclose these sources of income.

According to his present-day defenders, the money in question was passed along to Green College, a medical college that Doll helped found at Oxford. But this is a weak defense, since accepting honoraria of this size certainly makes one beholden to the giver, regardless of how altruistically such money is spent. Another argument raised in Doll's defense was that he did this consulting work before formal disclosure of commercial interests had become mandatory.

But the principle that one should disclose one's financial and other biases was certainly widely accepted in the world of science long before it became a formal requirement of publishing in peer-reviewed scientific journals. According to his friend and close associate Richard Peto, Doll felt that it was necessary to co-operate with companies in order to gain access to data that could prove their products to be dangerous.

Yet this explanation of Doll's behavior flies in the face of the evidence. True, Doll started out as a critic of industry, a position that took him to the pinnacles of the medical establishment. Once there, however, he became increasingly cozy with those he had formerly criticized and wound up as their defender.

Far from speaking out on the hazards of industrial pollution, as Prof. Peto claims, Doll's persuasive words and unassailable professional reputation were used to downplay the dangers of chemical companies' products and manufacturing processes. To be concluded, with references, next week.

SUBVERTING THE SCIENCE OF EPIDEMIOLOGY PART I A paper published last month in the American Journal of Industrial Medicine reveals several instances of leading epidemiologists secretly acting as paid consultants to industry while those same industries were under intense scrutiny as potential contributors to the rising incidence of cancer.

HERE AT THE MOSS REPORTS NEW SCIENTIST ARTICLE
I am happy to report that I have published a new Opinion piece in the New Scientist. This is titled "Our Futile War on Cancer" (16 December 2006, issue 2582). It appears in both the print editions of the magazine and online at:

http://newscientist.com/


Moss Report, Subverting the science of epidemiology, part II

In a paper titled "Secret ties to industry and conflicting interests in cancer research," published last month in the American Journal of Industrial Medicine, several examples of leading epidemiologists secretly acting as paid consultants to industry are described. Last week we discussed the case of Sir Richard Doll, the eminent British epidemiologist who, along with his US colleague and contemporary Ernst Wynder, is credited with having initially established the link between smoking and lung cancer.

The paper documents the fact that for decades Doll was secretly retained as a paid consultant by several giant international chemical companies at the same time that he was acting as an ostensibly impartial scientific expert to investigate and report on suspected links between these companies' products and the development of cancer.
To read last week's newsletter please click or go to:

http://cancerdecisions.com/

The paper's leading author is Professor Lennart Hardell, MD, PhD, of the Department of Oncology, University Hospital, Ãñrebro, Sweden. Professor Hardell has published widely on issues of carcinogenesis and occupational and environmental medicine. This year alone, he has authored or co-authored thirteen papers that have been published in prominent international medical journals.

As Hardell and colleagues point out, Doll's case was not an isolated incident. The paper documents other equally egregious examples of conflict of interest, including the case of Dr. Ragnar Rylander, a professor of environmental health at Göteborg (Gothenburg) University in Sweden, who for 30 years acted as a paid consultant to Philip Morris, the American tobacco giant.

During this time he acted in effect as a kind of double agent, secretly discussing his academic tobacco-related research with Philip Morris executives and lawyers. Despite the fact that Swedish law requires all public servants, including academic researchers, to report all such paid commissions, Rylander consistently failed to disclose his consultant status to the university and government authorities by whom he was employed. Further, when this unholy alliance finally came to light in Sweden in 2002, Rylander categorically denied the association, publicly stating "I have never been a consultant for Philip Morris," according to the Hardell article.

Further examples of conflict of interest cited by the paper include the case of Professor Hans-Olov Adami of the prestigious Karolinska Institute, who, along with Dimitrios Trichopoulos, Professor Emeritus at Harvard, attended the Dioxin 2001 conference in Korea, and there delivered a presentation that downplayed the toxicity of dioxins and described them as non-carcinogenic. But both Profs. Adami and Trichopoulos were at that time being paid by the US consultancy firm Exponent, Inc., which was actively engaged in an attempt to soften dioxin's image on behalf of industry clients that included Dow Chemical.

The growing interdependence of industry and academia inevitably carries with it an inherent risk of conflict of interest. But, as the authors of the paper point out, the secrecy surrounding paid consultancy amplifies the corrupting influence immeasurably. "Conflict of interest in itself is widespread, but its potential for generating misinformation is greatly increased when it is undeclared," the authors state.

Epidemiology holds the key to controlling the environmental triggers of cancer. The chemical and tobacco industries evidently realized this long ago, and took steps to subvert the science that had the potential to dent their profits severely, if not put them out of business entirely. Ultimately, it is the health of the public that suffers most because of the selfishness and dishonesty of a few greedy researchers and their corporate seducers.

Ralph W. Moss, Ph.D.

References:
Doll R, Peto R. The causes of cancer: quantitative estimates of avoidable risks of cancer in the United States today. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1981; 66(6):1191-308
Doll R. Effects of exposure to vinyl chloride: an assessment of the evidence. Scand J Work Environ Health 1988; 14(2):61-78.
Hardell L, Walker MJ, Walhjalt B, et al. Secret ties to industry and conflicting interests in cancer research. Am J Ind Med. 2006 Nov 3.

EN
Funkturm-Umgebungsstudie aus Ägypten

22.11.2006

Die Redaktion des Newsletter Elektrosmognews gibt Ihnen eine Information aus der Lektüre medizinischer Fachliteratur des Jahres 2006 aus Ägypten weiter. Wir haben diesen englischen Artikel für Sie ins Deutsche übersetzen lassen.

Neuropsychologische Auswirkungen bei Menschen rund um Funktürme

Zusammenfassung

Hintergrund: Grund zu der Annahme, dass hochfrequente elektromagnetische Strahlung von Funktürmen gesundheitsgefährdend auf das menschliche Nervensystem wirkt.

Ziel: Mögliche neuropsychologische Defizite bei Personen, die in der Nähe von Funktürmen leben, auszumachen.

Methodik: Es wurde eine Querschnittsstudie bei 85 Personen durchgeführt, die in der Nähe des ersten Funkturms im Gouvernorat Menoufiya in Ägypten leben. Während 37 Personen im Gebäude unter dem Funkturm leben, leben 48 gegenüber der Funkanlage. Eine Kontrollgruppe von 80 Personen wurde mit der bei dem Funkturm lebenden Gruppe auf Alter, Geschlecht, Beruf und Bildungsniveau abgeglichen. Zusätzlich zum Eysenck personality questionnaire (EPQ) füllten alle Teilnehmer einen klar strukturierten Fragebogen aus, der Fragen über die persönliche Entwicklung, die Bildungs- und Krankengeschichte, Grund- und neurologische Untersuchungen und eine neuropsychologische Testbatterie [dies umfasst Tests zur visuell-motorischen Geschwindigkeit, Problemlösungen, Aufmerksamkeit und Gedächtnis] enthielt.

Ergebnisse: Die Prävalenz von neuropsychiatrischen Beschwerden wie Kopfschmerzen (23.5%), Veränderungen im Gedächtnis (28.2%), Schwindel (18.8%), Zucken (9.4%), Depressionen (21.7%) und Schlafstörungen (23.5%) waren bei den in Reichweite des Funkturms lebenden Personen deutlich höher als bei den Kontrollpersonen (10%), (5%), (5%), (0%), (8.8%) und (10%), jeweils (P < 0.05). Die neuropsychologische Testbatterie ergab, dass die in der Nähe des Funkturms lebenden Personen eine deutlich niedrigere Leistungsfähigkeit in einem der Aufmerksamkeits- und auditiven Kurzzeitgedächtnistest [Paced Auditory Serial Addition Test (PASAT)] aufwiesen als die Kontrollpersonen. Die Personen, die gegenüber der Anlage lebten, wiesen weiterhin eine niedrigere Leistungsfähigkeit im Problemlösungstest (Block Design) als die Bewohner unter der Anlage auf. Alle Bewohner erbrachten bessere Leistungen in den beiden Tests zur visuell-motorischen Geschwindigkeit (Digit Symbol und Trailmaking B) und in einem der Aufmerksamkeitstests (Trailmaking A) als die Kontrollpersonen. Die zuletzt gemessenen Werte der hochfrequenten elektromagnetischen Strahlung des ersten Funkturms im Gouvernorat Menoufiya waren niedriger als die erlaubten Höchstwerte ('Digital Symbol' und 'Trailmaking' sind zwei spezielle Aufmerksamkeitsteste, d.Hrsg.).

Schlussfolgerungen und Empfehlungen: Personen, die in der Nähe von Funktürmen leben, können neuropsychiatrische Probleme entwickeln und sowohl positive als auch negative Veränderungen in ihrer Leistungsfähigkeit hinsichtlich der neuropsychologischen Funktionen erfahren. Deswegen wird eine Überarbeitung der offiziellen Richtlinien zur Exposition der Öffentlichkeit von hochfrequenter elektromagnetischer Strahlung von Funktürmen und die Benutzung einer neuropsychologischen Testbatterie zur regelmäßigen Bewertung und Früherkennung biologischer Effekte auf Bewohner rund um solcher Anlagen empfohlen.

Übersetzung des Originalartikels ins Englische von G. Abdel-Rassoul et al.

Neurobehavioral effects among inhabitants around mobile phone base stations,NeuroToxicology (2006), doi:10.1016/j.neuro.2006.07.012
G. Abdel-Rassoul , O. Abou El-Fateh, M. Abou Salem, A. Michael, F. Farahat, M. El-Batanouny, E. Salem
Community, Environmental and Occupational Medicine Department, Faculty of Medicine, Menoufiya University, Shebin El-Kom, Egypt

Eingang: 20 Oktober 2005; Veröffentlichung: 18 Juli 2006

Übersetzung: Anne von Gladiß

Anm. umtsno: die o.g. Untersuchungen betreffen Werte von Leistungsflußdichte (Werte 67000 bis 1000 Mikrowatt/m²), die weit unter den Grenzwerten für die Schweiz oder Polen liegen und als sehr "niedrig und gesund" von Mobilfunkbetreiber angepriesen werden.

Keywords: Neurobehavioral effects; Mobile phone base stations; Radiofrequency radiations (RFR)

umtsno: see also

Association of mobile phone radiation with fatigue, headache, dizziness, tension and sleep disturbance in Saudi population

Microwaves from GSM Mobile Telephones Affect 53BP1 and gamma-H2AX Foci in Human Lymphocytes from Hypersensitive and Healthy Persons

Eva Markovà,^1,2 Lena Hillert,^3,4 Lars Malmgren,⁵ Bertil R. R. Persson,⁶ and Igor Y. Belyaev<sup>1,7

1</sup>Department of Genetics, Microbiology and Toxicology, Stockholm University, Stockholm, Sweden; ²Laboratory of Molecular Genetics, Cancer Research Institute, Bratislava, Slovak Republic; ³Occupational and Environmental Health, Stockholm County Council, Stockholm, Sweden; ⁴Department of Public Health Sciences, Division of Occupational Medicine, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden; ⁵MAX-lab, Lund University, Lund, Sweden; ⁶Department of Medical Radiation Physics, Lund University Hospital, Lund, Sweden; ⁷Laboratory of Radiobiology, General Physics Institute, Russian Academy of Science, Moscow, Russia

Japanese scientists have found a strong link between childhood leukemia and magnetic fields. Powerlines and childhood leukemia High magnetic fields in the bedroom may increase the risk of childhood leukemia by up to five times.

This is the finding of a new Japanese study published recently. The research was conducted in five urban areas in Japan, home to over ten million children and accounting for over half of the Japanese population below 15 years of age.

more

Well Being-Studie aus Zürich, Dringender Zeugenaufruf

Schwarzenburg, 12.6.06

Da es eigentlich keine Replikation der TNO-Studie, sondern eine neue Studie mit neuem Design und neuen Parametern war, sind die Untersuchungsergebnisse an der ETH/UNI-Zürich sehr unglaubwürdig ausgefallen. Dies bestätigen uns kritische Wissenschafter laufend.

Zum Beispiel wurde in Zürich behauptet, dass keine Auswirkungen kurzfristiger Mobilfunkstrahlung auf das Wohlbefinden und die kognitiven Fähigkeiten des Menschen gefunden wurden. Das ist schlichtweg unwahr.

more

 

Objectives: The objectives of this study were to assess whether people who report hypersensitivity to weak electromagnetic fields (EMFs) are better at detecting EMF under blind or double-blind conditions than nonhypersensitive individuals, and to test whether they respond to the presence of EMF with increased symptom reporting.

more

Dear Colleagues:

How often have you been told that there are no biological effects of weak EMFs that can be replicated in more than one lab?

Like much of what you hear about EMFs, this is propaganda that seeks to cut off further research.

In past commentaries, we have described how WHO and industry officials refuse to acknowledge that EMFs can cause DNA breaks. Here is another example:

more

BLINDING PHONES?
29 Oct 2005
Localized Effects of Microwave Radiation on the Intact Eye Lens in Culture Conditions
.pdf, 228 KB

more

see hier Cell phones and eyesight

---

1. Here at the moss reports
2. Part one
   
3. Effects on Melatonin
   
4. Part 2:
   
5. What the Science Shows
   
6. Part 3: Some Studies Find a Link
   
7. What To Do
   
8. REFERENCES
   
9. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
   
   more
   
   

WHO reagiert auf Forderungen nach epidemiologischen Studien und der Anwendung des Vorsorgeprinzips

Quelle: Webseite der Weltgesundheitsorganisation WHO

WHO kündigt erneut epidemiologische Untersuchungen HF-belasteter Bevölkerungsgruppen an - wann erfolgt die Umsetzung?

mehr