Formal response from ICNIRP

The following response to “The Round-Table Initiative”  I received from ICNIRP:

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Dear Dariusz,

You know that the World Health Organization is currently engaged in reviewing the scientific evidence with respect to health effects from exposure to radiofrequency fields. The International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection is in parallel updating its guidance in that spectral band. 

ICNIRP is committed to its established, disciplined procedures for the scientific evaluation of non ionizing radiation biological effects and the provision of practical radiation protection guidelines. These procedures include public consultation and the engagement of external experts.

We do not consider that participation in the suggested Round Table would bring any added value to our science-based approach.  

With kind regards

Rüdiger Matthes

signing on behalf of ICNIRP and the individual members of its Main Commission

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

 

About these ads

2 thoughts on “Formal response from ICNIRP

  1. Excuse me — ICNIRP saying that their procedures include “public participation”? I mean — excuse me? When does ICNIRP ever consult the wider public, or indeed answer any query of any kind from the public? I have never come across such a closed, arrogant, completely unresponsive organisation in my whole life. I have addressed several queries to ICNIRP, making sure it was copied to all senior members of the organisation, and the only response I ever got was from the secretary — saying sorry, her mother was ill, and she didn’t have time to answer my email. I wished her mother good health. I never heard from her again.

    Please, will ICNIRP here indicate how in any way they facilitate public participation in their investigations? And can they now answer the one query I have made over and over again: how is it that their guidelines are used for 24/7/365 exposure to mobile phone tower emissions, when by their own admission these are SHORT-TERM guidelines, intended only for ACUTE exposures, with a measurement interval of just six minutes, and state explicitly that ICNIRP has no scientific basis to set long-term emission guidelines? Yet the operators (especially in Africa) quote the ICNIRP guidelines for base station emissions as if they are holy writ found on stone tablets that came down from Mount Sinai.

    I have heard from many other concerned citizens that ICNIRP does not respond to any queries.

    I am sorry, but this is genuinely offensive reading. Highly, highly offensive. You can lie to your sponsors and yourselves, but don’t try lying to the public, we know you only too well.

  2. pretty short and pretty clear…

    hopefully, the actual WHO is a bit at least slightly more “diplomatic”…

    (did you “invite” them too? )

Leave a Reply

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