Written by Arjun Walia
“A long time ago, we used to have smoke on airplanes, people could smoke tobacco on airplanes. And I was involved, as a young scientist, in the committee that actually reviewed the data and recommended that there be no smoking on airplanes. You may be shocked to hear that it was even a question for science at the time, but it was, and when I look at what we know now about mobile phone radiation, I see some very interesting similarities, because there were a lot of questions that were raised about the safety of tobacco on airplanes, and they were in fact legitimate questions, things we did not know. There are a lot of important questions to be asked about mobile phone radiation today, without any doubt, but the reality is we’re not asking those questions.”
Below is a lecture given by Dr. Devra Davis, who’s the Visiting Professor of Medicine at the Hebrew University Hadassah Medical School, and Visiting Professor of Medicine at Ondokuz Mayis University, Turkey. Given at the University of Melbourne, it’s a one-hour exploration of the health effects of mobile phones and wireless radiation.
Davis is an epidemiologist and an electromagnetic radiation expert. In her lecture, she outlines the evolution of mobile phone and smartphone radiation, and touches upon the 20-year-old radiation safety standards (SAR) that clearly need to change.
Davis was also the founding Director of the Center for Environmental Oncology at the University of Pittsburgh Cancer Institute. Her resume is impressive, and today she is an internationally recognized expert on electromagnetic radiation from mobile phones and other wireless transmitting devices, like wireless routers. This is clearly a concern, and is exactly why more than 200 scientists from more than 40 countries are petitioning the United Nations about the issue.
Why are there more than 2,000 peer-reviewed publications raising cause for concern on this topic? According to the appeal sent to Antonio Guterres, Secretary-General of the United Nations:
Numerous scientific publications have found that EMF affects living organisms at levels far below international exposure guidelines adopted by most industrialized nations. There is discrepancy in how this matter is considered at the WHO, however. While WHO accepted its International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC)’s recommendation that classifies both ELF/EMF and RF/EMF as Group 2B “Possible Carcinogens,” it also, in direct contrast to these warnings, recommends the adoption of the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection’s (ICNIRP) guidelines for exposure standards. These guidelines, developed by a self-selected 2 independent industry group, have long been criticized as not protective given the science now established.
You can refer to the article linked below for more information on that, and what you can do to protect yourself.