- 0 Comments
Declaration: Scientists call for Protection from Radiofrequency Radiation Exposure
[Note: This includes–but is not limited to–radiofrequency radiation-emitting devices, such as cell phones and cordless phones and their base stations, Wi-Fi, broadcast antennas, smart meters and baby monitors.]
We are scientists engaged in the study of electromagnetic fields (EMF) radiofrequency radiation (RFR) health and safety. We have serious concerns regarding Health Canada’s Safety Code 6 Guideline.
Canada’s Safety Code 6 Guideline is fundamentally flawed.
Health Canada’s Safety Code 6 is based on an obsolete account and analysis of RFR research and has disregarded or minimized certain recent studies, such as cancer, DNA damage, protein synthesis, stress response, and detrimental biological and health effects in humans that occur at RFR intensities below the existing Code 6 Guideline.
The World Health Organization classified electromagnetic fields at both extremely low frequency (2001) and radiofrequency (2011) ranges as a “Group 2B, possibly carcinogenic to humans” and included reviews and studies reporting low-intensity biological effects.
Canada’s Safety Code 6 Guideline does not protect people.
Currently, RF exposure guidelines in various countries (China, Russia, Italy, Switzerland), based on biological effects, are 100 times more stringent than the guidelines based on an outdated understanding of RFR that relies primarily on thermal effects that includes Health Canada’s Safety Code 6. Following a recent review of Safety Code 6 (Royal Society of Canada Report entitled, “A Review of Safety Code 6 (2013): Health Canada’s Safety Limits for Exposure to Radiofrequency Fields”), Health Canada has decided not to lower the existing guidelines and arbitrarily to include a maximum exposure that is 1000 times higher than the 6-minute average exposure. Furthermore, Health Canada does not adhere to the Precautionary Principle used by states when serious risks to the public or the environment exist but lack scientific consensus.
Many Canadians and people worldwide share a growing perception of risk due to the proliferation of RF sources encountered in daily life and reports of adverse health effects. Since the start of the Wireless Age in the 1990s, health studies show more people reacting adversely to electromagnetic fields and electromagnetic radiation. Epidemiological studies show links between RF exposure and cancers, neurological disorders, hormonal changes, symptoms of electrical hypersensitivity (EHS) and more. Laboratory studies show increased cancers, abnormal sperm, learning and memory deficits, and heart irregularities.
People who suffer from functional impairment due to RF exposure and those who prefer to live, work and raise their children in a low EMF environment are increasingly unable to find such places. Worker productivity, even the capacity to make a living, is diminishing. Some people are being forced into an isolated, nomadic lifestyle, with few resources to sustain them. The medical community in North America is largely unaware of the biological responses to RF exposure and does not know how to treat those who have become ill. The typical methods to alleviate symptoms and promote healing are not working due, in part, to ubiquitous exposure.
Our urgent call for public health protection.
The public’s health and the health of the environment are threatened by ever-evolving RF emitting technologies, without due consideration for what the potential cumulative impacts on biological systems are likely to be in the future.
We urgently call upon Health Canada . . .
- i) to intervene in what we view as an emerging public health crisis;
- ii) to establish guidelines based on the best available scientific data including studies on cancer andDNA damage, stress response, cognitive and neurological disorders, impaired reproduction,
developmental effects, learning and behavioural problems among children and youth, and the broad
range of symptoms classified as EHS; and
iii) To advise Canadians to limit their exposure and especially the exposure of children.