Two members of the EU Parliament, Claus Buchner and Michèle Rivasi, published on June 19, 2020 a document on ICNIRP. It shows the many conflicts of interest that exist among the ICNIRP members.
It clearly also shows that the ICNIRP guidelines should not be used for radiofrequency radiation. At pages 48-49 this is concluded:
“We think that the call for more independent scientific assessment in this area is, for all the arguments mentioned above and in what follows, fully justified. 49 That is the most important conclusion of this report: for really independent scientific advice we cannot rely on ICNIRP. The European Commission and national governments, from countries like Germany, should stop funding ICNIRP. It is high time that the European Commission creates a new, public and fully independent advisory council on non-ionizing radiation. The funds currently allocated to ICNIRP could be used to set up this new organisation. And given the overall rise in R&D funding via Horizon Europe, with a foreseen budget (for 2021-2027) of between 75 and 100 billion euros, funding should in no way constitute an insurmountable hurdle to setting up this new, truly independent, body.”
In a new article the outdated guidelines for radiofrequency radiation by ICNIRP are discussed.
These guidelines are used by many countries. The recent publication by ICNIRP gives even higher levels for exposure compared with the previous ones. Only heating (thermal) effects are considered.
The conclusion in the article is that:
“..the ICNIRP has failed to conduct a comprehensive evaluation of health risks associated with RF radiation. The latest ICNIRP publication cannot be used for guidelines on this exposure.”
This article by Naren et al informs about electromagnetic radiation from different devices. It is important reading for all concerned. The results are also shown in illustrative figures. The whole article is free to download from internet. A summary by the authors follows here:
“In this work, we determine the radiation concern levels in several scenarios using a handheld radiation meter by correlating the findings with several international standards, which are determined based on thorough scientific evidence. This study also analyzes the EMR from common devices used in day to day life such as smartphones, laptops, Wi-Fi routers, hotspots, wireless earphones, smartwatches, Bluetooth speakers and other wireless accessories using a handheld radio frequency radiation measurement device. The procedure followed in this paper is so presented that it can also be utilized by the general public as a tutorial to evaluate their own safety with respect to EMR exposure. We present a summary of the most prominent health hazards which have been known to occur due to EMR exposure.”
At a meeting in Paris on 17 April 2019 Eric van Rongen, the present ICNIRP chairman presented a draft on new ICNIRP guidelines for radiofrequency radiation (RFR) exposure. The presentation is freely available at the web although labeled as a ’draft – do not cite or quote’.
Most remarkable is that the science on health effects is still based on thermal (heating) effect from RFR just as the evaluations published 1998 and updated in 2009.
In the draft only thermal effects are considered for health effects (page 7). Van Rongen states there is ’No evidence that RF-EMF causes such diseases as cancer’ (page 8).
These comments are based on the power point presentation. However, there is no evidence that non-thermal effects are considered and thus a large majority of scientific evidence on human health effects, not to mention hazards to the environment. Thus the basis for new guidelines is flawed and the whole presentation should be dismissed as scientifically flawed.
If this draft represents the final version on ICNIRP guidelines it is time to close down ICNIRP since their evaluation is not based on science but on selective data such as only thermal effects from RFR, see also www.emfcall.org.
The draft represents a worst-case scenario for public health and represents wishful thinking.
We have published results on measurements of radiofrequency (RF) radiation in central parts of Stockholm, Sweden. The published article can be found here. Especially high levels were found at the Hay Market and Sergel Plaza; mean levels 10,728 and 7,768 microWatt/m2, respectively. Also at central streets high ambient RF radiation was found from nearby base stations.
The figure below shows the result for the Hay Market. We have inserted the 30-60 microWatt/m2 line for lowest level of biological effects (red line).
We measured radiofrequency (RF) radiation at the Järntorget square in the Stockholm Old Town in a new study recently published. In a previous study of the Old Town we found especially high RF radiation at that square. The maximum level in the present study was 11.6 V/m at the center of the square, where the antenna was focused. Järntorget’s mean value was 5.2 V/m, median 5.0 V/m, range 1.2-11.6 V/m.
Of interest is that this level can be compared to life-span carcinogenicity study on rats exposed to 1.8 GHz GSM environmental radiation performed at the Ramazzini Institute (RI) in Italy. A statistically significant increase in the incidence of malignant Schwannoma in the heart was found in male rats at the highest dose, 50 V/m. In treated female rats at the highest dose the incidence of malignant glial tumors was increased, although not statistically significant. In conclusion our study showed RF radiation levels at one square, Järntorget, in Sweden was only one order of magnitude lower than those showing increased incidence of tumours in the RI animal study. An increased cancer risk cannot be excluded for those working next to or at Järntorget for longer time periods.
These results indicate that it is pertinent to measure RF radiation levels in the environment and in homes. Such exposure levels should be declared for those intending to settle down in any dwelling.
The mission of this Agency is according to their home page:
The Public Health Agency of Sweden has a national responsibility for public health issues and works to ensure good public health. The agency also works to ensure that the population is protected against communicable diseases and other health threats.
However, when it comes to radiofrequency radiation and health their report from 2017 gives a wrong evaluation of the state of knowledge. Cancer risks are denied. It was written by a former and a present member of ICNIRP so no doubt the message is not different from that provided by ICNIRP. Our critique is published only in Swedish but can be read here.
Our research group published recently a study on radiofrequency (RF) radiation in schools using an exposimeter. RF emissions in the classroom were measured by the teachers in order to approximate the children’s exposure. Teachers in grades 7–12 carried a body-borne exposimeter, EME-Spy 200, in school during 1–4 days of work. Eighteen teachers from seven schools participated. The mean exposure to RF radiation ranged from 1.1 to 66.1 μW/m2. The highest mean level, 396.6 μW/m2, occurred during 5 min of a lesson when the teacher let the students stream and watch YouTube videos. Maximum peaks went up to 82,857 μW/m2 from mobile phone uplink. The exposure levels varied between the different Wi-Fi systems, and if the students were allowed to use their own smartphones on the school’s Wi-Fi network or if they were connected to GSM/3G/4G base stations outside the school. An access point over the teacher’s head gave higher exposure compared with a school with a wired Internet connection for the teacher in the classroom. All values were far below International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection’s reference values, but most mean levels measured were above the precautionary target level of 3–6 μW/m2 as proposed by the Bioinitiative Report. The length of time wireless devices are used is an essential determinant in overall exposure. Measures to minimize children’s exposure to RF radiation in school would include preferring wired connections, allowing laptops, tablets and mobile phones only in flight mode and deactivating Wi-Fi access points, when not used for learning purposes.
In Table 10 in the article examples of methods to reduce children’s exposure to RF radiation in schools are given
1. Wired connection to both teachers and students and no wireless networks or devices in school is the optimal choice. If this is not possible:
2. Wired connection to each classroom
a. to the teacher’s laptop,
b. for the students to download large files and videos.
3. To reduce exposure from Wi-Fi networks in school:
a. turn off Wi-Fi access points when not used for learning purposes,
b. position Wi-Fi access points outside of classrooms,
c. use directional Wi-Fi access points, which radiate into the direction of the client’s device.
4. Keep laptops and tablets in flight mode when Internet is not needed for learning purposes.
5. Wired connection to a landline telephone in each classroom could minimize the need for mobile phones for contact.
6. Mobile phones, including smart phones, could be left at home or collected in turned off mode. If allowed, they should be carried only in flight mode during school hours.
Exposure to radiofrequency (RF) radiation was classified as a possible human carcinogen, Group 2B, by the International Agency for Research on Cancer at WHO in 2011. Outdoor RF radiation levels were measured during five tours in Stockholm Old Town in April, 2016 using the EME Spy 200 exposimeter with 20 predefined frequencies. The results were based on 10,437 samples in total. The mean level of the total RF radiation was 4,293 μW/m2 (0.4293 μW/cm2). The highest mean levels were obtained for global system for mobile communications (GSM) + universal mobile telecommunications system (UMTS) 900 downlink and long‑term evolution (LTE) 2600 downlink (1,558 and 1,265 μW/m2, respectively). The town squares displayed highest total mean levels, with the example of Järntorget square with 24,277 μW/m2 (min 257, max 173,302 μW/m2). Measurements in the streets surrounding the Royal Castle were lower than the total for the Old Town, with a mean of 756 μW/m2 (min 0.3, max 50,967 μW/m2). The BioInitiative 2012 Report defined the scientific benchmark for possible health risks as 30‑60 μW/m2. Our results of outdoor RF radiation exposure at Stockholm Old Town are significantly above that level. The full report can be found here.
We measured the radiofrequency (RF) radiation at the Stockholm Central Station in Sweden in November 2015. The full study can be read here. The exposimeter EME Spy 200 was used and it covers 20 different RF bands from 88 to 5,850 MHz. In total 1,669 data points were recorded. The median value for total exposure was 921 µW/m2 (or 0.092 μW/cm2; 1 μW/m2=0.0001 μW/cm2) with some outliers over 95,544 µW/m2 (6 V/m, upper detection limit). The mean total RF radiation level varied between 2,817 to 4,891 µW/m2 for each walking round.
Hot spots were identified, for example close to a wall mounted base station yielding over 95,544 µW/m2 and thus exceeding the exposimeter’s detection limit, see Figure below. A man is standing with his smartphone just a couple of meters below a base station (see arrow). In that area maximum measured power density in the GSM +UMTS 900 downlink band from the base station was 95,544 µW/m2, which is the upper limit of measurement for EME Spy 200.
Almost all of the total measured levels were above the precautionary target level of 3 to 6 µW/m2 as proposed by the BioInitiative Working Group in 2012. That target level was one-tenth of the scientific benchmark providing a safety margin either for children, or chronic exposure conditions. Considering the rapid progress of this technology, including 5G that is to be launched in the near future, it is important to monitor current RF radiation exposure in the environment.