Evidence of the Undue Influence of the Telecommunications and Wireless Industries on Policies and Research
The Harvard Press book “Captured Agency: How the Federal Communications Commission is Dominated by the Industries It Presumably Regulates” provides ample evidence of the ties between the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and the wireless industry, which is the very reason this website needs to exist.
“It is these hardball tactics that recall 20th century Big Tobacco tactics. It is these tactics that heighten suspicion that the wireless industry does indeed have a dirty secret. And it is those tactics that intensify the spotlight on an FCC that so timidly follows the script of the fabulously wealthy, bullying, billion-dollar beneficiaries of wireless.”
(Norm Alster, 2014. Captured Agency…)
Oncology Letters published “ Health risks from radiofrequency radiation, including 5G, should be assessed by experts with no conflicts of interest” “There seems to be a cartel of individuals monopolizing evaluation committees, thus reinforcing the no-risk paradigm. We believe that this activity should qualify as scientific misconduct.”
- The International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP) has repeatedly ignored scientific evidence on adverse effects of RF radiation to humans and the environment.
- “All countries should declare a moratorium on 5G until independent research, performed by scientists without any ties to the industry, confirms its safety or not. 2G, 3G, 4G and WiFi are also considered not to be safe, but 5G will be worse regarding harmful biological effects.
Read more at Ehtrust.org
”This Nation investigation reveals that the wireless industry not only made the same moral choices that the tobacco and fossil-fuel industries did; it also borrowed from the same public-relations playbook those industries pioneered. The playbook’s key insight is that an industry doesn’t have to win the scientific argument about safety; it only has to keep the argument going. That amounts to a win for the industry, because the apparent lack of certainty helps to reassure customers, even as it fends off government regulations and lawsuits that might pinch profits.” …
“A closer look reveals the industry’s sleight of hand. When Henry Lai, the professor whom Carlo tried to get fired, analyzed 326 safety-related studies completed between 1990 and 2005, he learned that 56 percent found a biological effect from cell-phone radiation and 44 percent did not; the scientific community apparently was split. But when Lai recategorized the studies according to their funding sources, a different picture emerged: 67 percent of the independently funded studies found a biological effect, while a mere 28 percent of the industry-funded studies did. Lai’s findings were replicated by a 2007 analysis in Environmental Health Perspectives that concluded industry-funded studies were two and a half times less likely than independent studies to find a health effect.”
Democracy Now! | April 5, 2018.
We continue our conversation with Mark Hertsgaard, The Nation’s environment correspondent and investigative editor, who co-authored a major new exposé, “How Big Wireless Made Us Think That Cell Phones Are Safe.” He discusses how wireless companies “war-gamed the science” by funding friendly studies and attacking critical ones; the potential dangers of the pending expansion of 5G with the “internet of things”; the role of the telecommunications industry officials turned federal regulators; and how companies deliberately addicted customers to this technology through the addition of social media.
Investigate Europe’s Three Part Investigation on 5G details how ICNIRP is industry tied and plagued with conflicts of interest. The journalists identified a group of fourteen scientists who either helped create, or defend, the EMF exposure guidelines disseminated by ICNIRP, a non- governmental organization (NGO) based in Germany. ICNIRP’s self-selected members argue that the thousands of peer-reviewed studies that have found harmful biologic or health effects from chronic exposure to non-thermal levels of EMF are insufficient to warrant stronger safety guidelines. “The ICNIRP Cartel: Who’s Who in the EMF Research World,” an interactive graphic developed by Investigate Europe (German ICNIRP Cartel). Dr. Moskowitz PDF of ICNIRP Cartel
- 5G The Mass Experiment (Part 1)
- How Much is Safe? Finances Effect Research (Part 2)
- Real 5G issues overshadowed by Covid-19 conspiracy theories ( Part 3)
“At least three studies over the years have documented that there is often a link between conclusions of studies and the source of the money that paid for the research. Science funded by industry is less likely to find health risks than studies paid for by institutions or authorities….Studies which are solely financed by industry are likely to be biased” – Investigate Europe, 2019 Investigate Europe alleges the existence of an “ICNIRP cartel.”
Watch the Investigative Europe video summary.
Friedman, Michael and Lee Friedman. “Financial Conflicts of Interest and Study Results in Environmental and Occupational Health Research.” Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, vol. 58, no. 3, 2016, pp. 238-47.
Hardell L., et al. “Secret ties to industry and conflicting interests in cancer research.” American Journal of Industrial Medicine, vol. 50, no. 3, 2007, pp. 227–33.
Bekelman, Justin E., Li, Yan and Cary P. Gross. “Scope and impact of financial conflicts of interest in biomedical research: a systematic review.”Journal of the American Medical Association, vol. 289, no. 4, 2003, pp. 454-65.
Read more at Ehtrust.org