FPSS slide image

Meting

Meer energie? Beter slapen? Meer ontspanning?

Pak electrostress aan!

Laat uw huis meten en ontvang praktisch advies.

FPSS slide image

Resolutie van het Europees Parlement van 2 april 2009 over gezondheidsrisico's in verband met elektr

Resolutie van het Europees Parlement van 2 april 2009 over gezondheidsrisico's in verband met elektromagnetische velden (2008/2211(INI)1.   dringt er bij de Commissie op ...

Document details

Details for Cherry on safe exposure levels
PropertyValue
NameCherry on safe exposure levels
Description

Dr. Neil Cherry - Lincoln University - 25/4/2000 

Overview of this report:
Public health protection standards for toxic substances, chemicals, drugs, air pollution, ionizing radiation are set by WHO, IARC, E.U., U.S. EPA and the U.K. Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution primarily using epidemiological evidence and secondarily using animal evidence. WHO and ICNIRP base non-ionizing radiation protection standards on a single biological mechanism, Tissue Heating. They systematically reject or ignore all epidemiological and animal evidence of non-thermal effects, for which there is a large body.
The history and basis of the RF-Thermal View which dominates ICNIRP, WHO, and national authority approaches, is documented and summarized. It will be shown that throughout the post-War period scientific research and leading biological and medical scientists have challenged the RF-thermal assumptions. They present very strong evidence, amounting to proof, that biological systems intrinsically use EMR for body, organ, hormone and cellular functions and regulation, and that extrinsic EMR interferes with these at extremely low exposure levels. These biological effects do not involve heat but do involve non-linear, non-equilibrium resonant interactions between ELF oscillating signals.
The well documented and established nonthermal biological effects of EMR include significant alteration of cellular calcium ion homeostasis, reduction of melatonin and the detection of Schumann Resonances by human and avian brains, DNA strand breakage and enhanced chromosome aberrations.
The human health implications of these biological effects are discussed and documented. This shows that calcium ion efflux/influx and melatonin reduction are separately and jointly linked to DNA strand breaks, chromosome aberrations, enhanced proto oncogene activity, impaired immune system competence and impaired neurological and cardiac functioning. Many projects, from independent labotories, have observed and reported that all of these effects are significantly related to EMR exposure.
Human Biometeorology is a whole body of research that is ignored by ICNIRP. This has provided the proof over 30 years ago that human brains detect and use the Schumann Resonances for synchronization of biological rhythms, i.e. as a Zeitgeber. This observation on its own is an absolute challenge to the validity of the ICNIRP assumptions that there are no established non-thermal biological effects.
Epidemiological reviews by Dr John Goldsmith show that adverse health effects, such as neurological, reproductive and cancer effects have been observed in EMR exposed populations. Based on this, and the traditional public health protection approach, Dr Goldsmith challenges the validity of the ICNIRP guideline and approach.
To summarize the scientific evidence an initial set of eight bioelectromagnetic principles are proposed and a brief summary of the scientific research that supports them is given. They are:
EMR is intrinsic to our bodies.
Our brains are the most electrically sensitive organs in our bodies.
Our hearts are electrically sensitive.
Cells are sensitive to EMR.
Our whole body acts as an aerial.
The brain is linked to organs and cells through EMR-sensitive hormones.
The EMR Spectrum Principle.
The Intrinsic Free Radical Principle.
These principles provide a sound and scientifically reliable approach to assessing EMR impacts on people and animals. They soundly challenge the ICNIRP assumptions and approach. The ICNIRP assessment of biological mechanisms is reviewed and found to be selective, limited and flawed. Their assessment of RF/MW effects on reproductive outcomes is shown to be limited, misleading and flawed. The cancer assessment is shown to be selective, misleading, inappropriate and flawed. An incorrect epidemiological approach is consistently applied.
From the data in the studies cited (and misused) by the ICNIRP and WHO reviews, and supported by a great deal of other available research evidence, a public health protection standard is recommended based on residential dose-response relationships for cancer, neurological effects and reproductive effects.

FilenameCherry on safe exposure levels.pdf
Filesize1.94 MB
Filetypepdf (Mime Type: application/pdf)
Creatoradmin
Created On: 19.02.2006 18:21
ViewersEverybody
Maintained byadmin
Hits456 Hits
Last updated on 19.02.2006 18:24
Homepage