Message from Victor Leach about ORSAA’s new paper, “The assumption of safety is being used to justify the rollout of 5G technologies”
On 20 January 2022, Dariusz Leszczynski as editor of the Journal Frontiers in Public Health: Radiation and Health, called for researchers to submit opinion pieces in his blog “Between a Rock and A hard Place”; i.e. IMPORTANT OPPORTUNITY: Experts’ Opinions in Radiation and Health (including 5G)
ORSAA took up the challenge. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/367434193 . This opinion piece is open-access so you can download and read it. (Note: There is a small manuscript error that hopefully will be fixed before you download our paper).
I wrote the initial draft of the paper focusing on the effect of real signals used in experimental work versus simulated signals. However, Julie took up the main author role. She felt we needed to (i) present the whole database of millimetre waves (mmWave) papers in a transparent manner so that the research community and policy-makers can see the big picture, and (ii) talk openly about how the science is being communicated to the public, which includes many fallacies that are used in reviews.
The fallacies we have highlighted include the following:
- Faulty analogy (comparing 5G to airport body scanners);
- Equivocation (the term ‘methodological flaw’ is overplayed);
- Red Herring (the focus is on heating only, and that dose-response is linear);
- Straw Person (focusing on weakest points instead of strong points);
- Appeal to Authority (WHO EMF project is top-heavy with ICNIRP scientists who have one view only being acute heating is all that matters);
- Slanting (Use of averages for calculating exposures underestimates harm).
This opinion paper was also built on a significant amount of work by Steve Weller, including an intensive review of mmWave papers and documentation of the findings in a comprehensive spreadsheet (freely available for download on the journal website as supplementary material). Steve’s spreadsheet and the breakdown of the endpoints from each paper formed a foundation that enabled us to create the high-level biological effect balance of the evidence graph. Steve created this spreadsheet to critique Karipidis et al.’s 5G Health review paper. For those interested, Steve’s open-access review of Karipidis et al. publication is provided at the link: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/365748429
ORSAA is a volunteer organisation with limited resources. Two of the authors have other commitments, and this work diverts them from paid work. The third author (myself) is retired, so that I can be more generous with my time. None of this would have been possible without the generous donation of Bruce Rowe’s bequest we have mentioned in the official acknowledgement.
If you live in Australia, you can become a supporter by becoming an associate member.
Best Regards,
Victor Leach
(ORSAA Secretary)
The latest commentary by James Lin is worth a read. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0013935123001615
Download the paper “The assumption of safety is being used to justify the rollout of 5G technologies”
https://ehtrust.org/new-paper-the-assumption-of-safety-is-being-used-to-justify-the-rollout-of-5g-technologies/ Source: Environmental Health Trust
