“ICBE-EMF’s primary purpose is to make recommendations, based on the best peer-reviewed scientific research publications, that include, and go beyond establishing numerical exposure guidelines. We are dedicated to ensuring the protection of humans and other species from the harmful effects of non-ionizing radiation.” ICBE-EMF
ICBE-EMF
The International Commission on the Biological Effects of Electromagnetic Fields (ICBE-EMF) has just published their much anticipated second peer reviewed paper on wireless radiofrequency radiation(RFR) exposure standards, Cell Phone Radiation Exposure Limits and Engineering Solutions. The ICBE-EMF was recently formed as an independent scientific authority with goals similar to the International Commission on Non-ionizing Radiation protection(ICNIRP), but with a different perspective. Both address the key issue of safety and exposure standards of non-ionizing radiofrequency radiation from burgeoning wireless devices and infrastructure. The ICNIRP, however, is criticized by the ICBE-EMF, among others, for using outdated and flawed criteria and creating exposure standards that are 1) based only on heat 2) Do not consider long term exposure 3) do not take into account sensitive populations 4) do not consider new research into health effects and biological harm at levels that are far below current standards.
ICNIRP and FCC Wireless Standards are Invalidated by Scientific Studies
The first paper of this independent group of scientists and physicians, Scientific evidence invalidates health assumptions underlying the FCC and ICNIRP exposure limit determinations for radiofrequency radiation: implications for 5G, was published in October 2022.
The ICBE-EMF authors carefully review the surprising history and enduring standards for wireless RFR developed using 5 monkeys and 8 rats with a 40-60 minute exposure and an endpoint of behavioral cues, along with a heat absorption standard (SAR). It was assumed there could be no health effects other than heating thus appropriate premarket research was not performed. The paper examines an encyclopedia of scientific research linking wireless RFR from common electronic devices with ambient everyday exposures to DNA damage, cardiomyopathy, carcinogenicity, sperm damage, and neurological effects, including electromagnetic hypersensitivity. The paper also lists 14 flawed assumptions which are the basis of the current flawed ICNIRP/FCC guidelines. They note, “Thus, urgently needed are health protective exposure limits for humans and the environment. These limits must be based on scientific evidence rather than on erroneous assumptions, especially given the increasing worldwide exposures of people and the environment to RFR, including novel forms of radiation from 5G telecommunications for which there are no adequate health effects studies.”
Engineering Solutions to Lower the Wireless Emissions of Cell Phones
The ICBE-EMF treats us to a second concise and equally well written paper, Cell Phone Radiation Exposure Limits and Engineering Solutions, which first reveals the 1990 history of the RFR risk assessment for human exposure provided by the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE), discussing seven “blind spots” in their risk assessment. They follow this with practical engineering solutions the Telecommunications Industry can use to provide protection from these devices we have become increasingly dependent on with close and constant RFR exposures.
Regulatory “Blind Spots”
***A clear explanation of the Blind Spots is provided in the article.
Blind Spot #1: RFR Toxicology and Risk Assessment
Blind Spot #2: 40–60 Min Is Not a Lifetime
Blind Spot #3: Averaging Human Exposures over 6 or 30 Min
Blind Spot #4: RFR’s Human Costs
Blind Spot #5: Specific Absorption Rates Determined at Unrealistic Distances
Blind Spot #6: Specific Absorption Rates Averaged over 1 or 10 g
Blind Spot #7: Enclosing the RFR Source
Engineering Solutions
*ICB-EMF discusses three practical approaches to cell phone exposure abatement:
- Blocking the phone’s RFR emissions, but not its reception, when it is positioned close to the head/body.
- Modifying the antenna emission pattern (to hemispherical) to radiate away from the head and the body.
- Limiting call durations according to an estimation of the effective radiated power emitted by the antenna over a specific period.
Heroux et al note that cell phone manufacturers have received patents since the mid-1990s to reduce cell phone radiation to consumers. There are 25 different designs in publications between 2005-2020 that have been proposed to reduce cumulative radiation exposure and harm, without degrading the quality of communications. It is hoped that this paper is a call to action for industry to advance public health protections, rather than profits from our closely and constantly connected phones which are emitting more powerful radiation, having more antennas, and transmitting a wider variety of frequencies and pulsed modulated signals.
ICB-EMF – International Commission on the Biological Effects of Electromagnetic Fields https://icbe-emf.org/
Paper #1 October 2022. International Commission on the Biological Effects of Electromagnetic Fields (ICBE-EMF). Scientific evidence invalidates health assumptions underlying the FCC and ICNIRP exposure limit determinations for radiofrequency radiation: implications for 5G. Environmental Health. 21, 92 (2022). Published Oct 18, 2022. https://ehjournal.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12940-022-00900-9
Paper #2 March 2022. Cell Phone Radiation Exposure Limits and Engineering Solutions. ICBE-EMF. Heroux P, Belyaev I, Chamberlin K, et al. nt. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2023, 20(7), 5398; https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/20/7/5398
ICNIRP. International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection. https://www.icnirp.org
Self-referencing authorships behind the ICNIRP 2020 radiation protection guidelines. (2022) Else K Nordhagen, Einar Flydal. Rev Environ Health. 2022 Jun 27. https://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/10.1515/reveh-2022-0037/html
New Challenge to ICNIRP: Dissident Scientists Seek Tighter Health Limits. Will They Succeed Where Others Failed? https://www.microwavenews.com/news-center/new-challenge-icnirp
Aspects on the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP) 2020 Guidelines on Radiofrequency Radiation. (2021) Hardell L et al. J Cancer Sci Clin Ther 2021; 5 (2): 250-285. https://www.fortunejournals.com/articles/aspects-on-the-international-commission-on-nonionizing-radiation-protection-icnirp-2020-guidelines-on-radiofrequency-radiation.pdf
Berenis disagrees with ICNIRP, BRHP. Dariusz Leszcynski. January 26, 2021 https://betweenrockandhardplace.wordpress.com/2021/01/26/berneis-disagrees-with-icnirp/
Science, Politics, and Groupthink. May 2021. James C Lin IEEE Health Matters. https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/stamp.jsp?tp=&arnumber=9393739
The International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection: Conflicts of interest, corporate capture and the push for 5G. June 2020. Laus Buchner and Michele Rivasi. https://www.michele-rivasi.eu/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/ICNIRP-report-FINAL-JUNE-2020_EN.pdf
AVAATE Publishes White Paper on Industry Influence at ICNIRP. THERE APPEARS TO BE A CONFLICT OF INTEREST BETWEEN THE WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION AND THE INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION NON-IONIZING RADIATION: https://www.avaate.org/documentos/article/conflictos-de-interes-existentes-en-la-comision-internacional-para-la or go to https://www.avaate.org/IMG/pdf/escrito_web_icnirp_ingles_final.pdf
Regarding ICNIRP’S Evaluation of the National Toxicology Program’s Carcinogenicity Studies on Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Fields. Correspondence. Melnick R. Health Physics. June 2020; 118(6): 678-682. https://journals.lww.com/health-physics/Citation/2020/06000/Regarding_ICNIRP_S_Evaluation_of_the_National.11.aspx
Dr. Lennart Hardell Letter to Swiss Confederation about ICNIRP, Roosli and Reevaluation of radiofrequency and 5G. Jan 2, 2020 – Highlights scientific flaws in ICNIRP assessment. Lettter Hardell -re: Roosli to Mrs. SommarugaSwiss Confederation Reevalaution of safety Standards, ICNIRP 5G -BERENIS_UVEK_January 2, 2020
See Also
SAFER EMR- ICNIRP’s Exposure Guidelines for Radio Frequency Fields. Safer EMR. https://www.saferemr.com/2018/07/icnirps-exposure-guidelines-for-radio.html
Environmental Health Trust. ICNIRP: PUBLISHED RESEARCH ON CONFLICTS OF INTEREST AND LACK OF PROTECTION. https://ehtrust.org/icnirp-published-research-on-conflicts-of-interest-and-lack-of-protection/
Industry Influence in Science. Physicians for Safe Technology.