…from a recent work by Ms Joanne Rowling, a housewife in Edinburgh…

The fear of electronic appliances is a real disease with persuasive symptoms, but that doesn’t mean that it has a non-cognitive basis. I used to be scared of the microwave. really.

What reality?

Still, I guess the former approach saves having to actually think about why all these unfortunate people are so distressed – no need to have to think about complicated things like Why Humans Feel Unwell, etc. It’s really hard to explain to people that simple questions – which ought always to be welcomed – don’t always have simple answers.

Para 1: “Following this paper, it is becoming increasingly likely that there is a significant proportion of self-assessed Electrically Sensitive people whose response is entirely nocebo – whether induced by fear of harm or other reasons, the cause is not radiofrequency EMFs.”

That’s a massive concession to make given the veracity of previous arguments made by Powerwatch.

Para 2: “So whilst it cannot be entirely ruled out that a small minority are truly sensitive, the proportions of any truly sensitive people are likely to be far lower than the 3% – 35% that has been quoted.”

Like 0%? This is of course always true – no study can definitively disprove a hypothesis… but you can’t prove to me that there aren’t fairies at the bottom of my garden either.

Perhaps its time for Powerwatch and the associated organisations to embrace the idea of there being a psychological cause of the symptoms suffered by some individuals. Perhaps buying a £70/m^2 piece of screening material isn’t the most cost effective method of dealing with these symptoms after all…

can you describe an experiment that would convince you that there are no ill effect associated with exposure to wifi/mobile phones?

what experiment would kill your hypothesis dead and change your position on wifi/moible masts etc?

There must be one, otherwise you are operating from a fixed position along the lines of “mobiles can cause illness in some people” which nothing can change.

interesting to hear your thoughts.

“Conclusion

Following this paper, it is becoming increasingly likely that there is a significant proportion of self-assessed Electrically Sensitive people whose response is entirely nocebo – whether induced by fear of harm or other reasons, the cause is not radiofrequency EMFs.

There are fundamental flaws in the idea of evaluating subjective responses in a double blind system that simply cannot be avoided regardless of the care taken on experiment design (such as the potentially large proportion of nocebo responses). There is also a chance that chronic exposure may give rise to genuine symptoms whereas acute exposure may not, but that cannot be addressed by this study.

So whilst it cannot be entirely ruled out that a small minority are truly sensitive, the proportions of any truly sensitive people are likely to be far lower than the 3% – 35% that has been quoted.”

Have they been “got at” by the telcos?

www.ehponline.org/docs/2007/10286/abstract.html

www.powerwatch.org.uk/news/20070725_essex_provocation.asp

Best Regards,
- Graham
Pow£rwatch

For anyone interested, check the following verbals from the site – refers to one of the cheapest of BIOPRO’s products, the US$ 34.95 BIOPRO Cell Chip:

www.mybiopro.com/BioProTemplate.aspx?ItemID=1450&ID=internalbalance

“Day in and day out, you may be exposing yourself to more stress than you thought by simply using your Cell Phone, PDA or Bluetooth headset, etc. Electromagnetic radiation (EMR) emitted from these devices has been linked to various stress-induced problems and illnesses and could very well be compromising your health and well being. As a leader in the field of bioenergetics, BIOPRO has introduced the BIOPRO Cell ChipTM, the most advanced dual action technology designed to significantly address this newest source of stress in our daily lives.

BIOPRO’s Cell Chip combines the benefits of two powerful, innovative and scientifically substantiated technologies: BIOPRO’s patented noise field nano-technology MRET (Molecular Resonance Effect Technology), and its proprietary subtle energy innovation ERT (Energy Resonance Technology). Individually and collectively, these cutting-edge technologies offer a groundbreaking and effective way to deal with the cumulative stress associated with living in today’s electronic environment.”

Not immediately clear what you are supposed to do with the “Cell Chip”. I wondered if you were supposed to swallow it so that your body would repel the evil rays, but since they sell it in multi-packs I think you must be meant to stick one to each of your evil EMF emitting devices.

My scientific bullsh*t detector was ringing at the combination of “nano-technology” with “Molecular Resonance Effect Technology”, and the following site about the latter speaks for itself:

www.honeycombtechnology.com/mret.html

This woeful (Woo-full?) site uses the classic “bogus science” trick of dragging in the names of some eminent real scientists, here Alfred Gilman and (the late) Marty Rodbell, who won the Nobel Prize in 1994 for their discovery of GTP-binding proteins (G proteins) and their role in signal tranduction.

nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/medicine/laureates/1994/

Needless to say their work had nothing whatsoever to do with “resonance effects”, or “magic water”.

www.mybiopro.com/BIOPROventionProgram.aspx?ID=internalbalance

A nice range of magic boxes to neutralise EMF in the home:

www.mybiopro.com/BioProTemplate.aspx?ItemID=1166&ID=internalbalance

Some qlink pendant rip offs:

www.mybiopro.com/BioProTemplate.aspx?ItemID=842&ID=internalbalance

and the compulsory vitamins.

www.mybiopro.com/BioProTemplate.aspx?ItemID=1094&ID=internalbalance

It would be rather a shame if the electrosensitivity evidence started coming back negative.

If nobody gets any symptoms at all obviously the experiment won’t be able to test the association. Probably the researchers have built into their design something demonstarting that symptoms occur when sufferers know they are being exposed to radiation.

good to see “Mast Sanity” wading in with their mast sanity.

Mast Sanity Press Release 24th July 2007

MTHR Essex University Study

The results of the Industry and Government funded Mobile Telecommunications and Health Research Programme (MTHR) study ” to investigate whether emissions from mobile phone base stations can elicit a variety of symptoms in those exposed to them ” [1] run by Professor of Psychology Elaine Fox at the University of Essex [2] is to be published on Wednesday 25th July at the Science Media Centre.

Firstly we should state that we don’t know why this research is being done by psychologists as there is already evidence showing changes in the important mast cells in human skin upon exposure to microwaves [3] .

This Essex study will not be able to give us any insights into the long term effects such as cancer and genetic damage as has been highlighted in other research and so we think is just tinkering at the edges.

In doing this research one is subjecting the volunteers to harm. As such this research is unethical. We know of at least one person who had to stop doing it because it made him so unwell. Lab tests have already identified disruptions to the immune system, surely if this were a drug we would not go on to do further tests on human subjects as there is already enough evidence?

Some subjects of the study were sent summaries showing 90-100% ability to identify the 3G(UTMS) and 2G (GSM) signals from the SHAM (No signal) conditions without prior knowledge of which was which. Additionally, physical markers such as anxiety was 2-4 times higher, tension and arousal 1.5 times higher, discomfort 4-6 times higher and fatigue 3.5 – 5.5 times higher under the 2G and 3G signals. Clearly these individuals experienced real effects, not psychological problems.

Yet being unable to complete the study has led to the exclusion of these individuals from the results, we believe.

As Dr Carlo, Safe Wireless Initiative and former Chairman of the US $28 million research programme into mobile phone research, says:

” Because of the imprecisions in the Essex study [4],[5], findings of ‘no effect’ are likely to be false negatives in that the study was not designed well enough to pick up all of the effects among the participants. ”

” Any findings of ‘effect’ are likely underestimates of the true risk for the same reasons of imprecision in the study design. ”

We also do not know how much of a part has been played by the so-called ‘Wessely School’ of psychiatry in separate earlier comparable studies with sufferers from farm Organophosphate Poisoning, Gulf War Syndrome and Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (ME / CFS) [6] . In each case the researchers’ conclusion was that each condition was just a case of unfounded mental anxiety, which would be relieved by their form of psychotherapy and exercise. This in spite in every case findings of physical evidence of nerve system damage. In the case of electrosensitivity studies undertaken in Sweden are able to pinpoint the sort of damage that sufferers endure [7] .

Mast Sanity Spokesperson Yasmin Skelt says “Isn’t it time that the Government woke up to the reality of electrosensitivity instead of attempting to persuade sufferers that it is all in their minds?”

“History has shown that many now commonly accepted physical conditions were initially dismissed as psychological, with the patients subjected to all kinds of tests and quack remedies.”

“Electrosensitivity has been recognised by medics in Sweden since 2000, and its government calculates 3.1 per cent of its population – 200,000 people – suffer from the condition. In fact this figure has more recently been revised upwards to nearer 9%. That is an awful lot of people.”

“This study has been such a waste of money. The World Health Organisation already recognise electrosensitivity [8] . Why was the money not used to translate the 1500-subject Russian long-term epidemiological studies into English?”

Mast Sanity reiterate their call on the Government to stop talking and start doing something. The UK should adopt the Precautionary Principle and halt the roll-out and proliferation of microwave transmitters of all types. If the new Brown Government is serious about protecting public health then they will readily accept our recent request for urgent talks and take action. Too many lives have been blighted or completely ruined already.

END .

The Mast Sanity Press Office can be contacted on 08704 867 807 .

Notes and References:

[1] www.essex.ac.uk/psychology/EHS/pages/MTHR%20press%20release.htm

[2] EMH Lab: www.essex.ac.uk/psychology/EHS/pages/emh%20lab%20launch1.htm

Professor Fox Profile: www.essex.ac.uk/psychology/psy/PEOPLE/fox/foxResearch.html

[3] www.radiationresearch.org/pdfs/olle_johansson.pdf

[4] Previous electrosensitivity studies: www.electrosensitivity.org.uk/Travesty.htm

[5] The electrosensitive volunteers’ degree of electrical sensitivity and sensitivity to other environmental factors such as chemicals and heavy metals combined with imprecise measurements has invalidated the results from many previous so-called “provocation” studies (see [4] above) . With only 56 electrosensitive volunteers the sample in the Essex study is certainly not large enough to even out the degree of sensitivity.

Electrosensitive people are not all sensitive to the same frequency ranges, so the use of only two ranges for 2G/GSM and 3G/UMTS, might not trigger a response in some genuinely electrosensitive volunteers. Also multiple research studies have found that using empty “carrier” signals without speech or data does not trigger the “biological pathway” that a non-empty signal does. The Essex study appears to use “scaled” signal strengths, which are unlikely to be realistic.

[6] Previous “psychological” studies: www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200607/cmselect/cmhealth/503/503we79.htm

[7] Physical evidence of electrosensitivity (Search on “You mention mast cells in the skin”) www.feb.se/ARTICLES/OlleJ.html

[8] The World Health Authority recognises that EHS ” symptoms are certainly real

and can vary widely in their severity “. The WHO urges that Governmentsshould provide appropriately targeted and balanced information about potential health hazards of electromagnetic field to EHS individuals,

health-care professionals and employers. Ref: Fact sheet N°296 December 2005

www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs296

Contact List:

Please contact any of the following scientists for comment:

Roger Coghill

01495

Admin: Joanne Strange

jo@cogreslab.co.uk

Dr Grahame Blackwell

01647

Alasdair Philips

Powerwatch

01353

Barry Trower

Ex government scientist and author of the TETRA Report for the Police

Federation

01626

Dr med. Gerd Oberfeld

Salzburg Public Health Dept

Austria +43 06 62

Prof Olle Johansson

Karolinska Institute

Sweden +468 524

Dr George Carlo

Chairman,

Science & Public Policy Institute,

Washington, USA

Secretary Personal Mob

Voice mail: (202) 756-

Also you can contact the following Electrosensitive people:-

Phil Watts (took part in the Essex study) 01782 599

Andy Davidson (took part in the Essex study) 01273 678

Karen Wren (applied to take part in Essex study) 01333

Brian Stein 01807 0

The Mast Sanity Press Office can be contacted on 08704 .

(Please See Attached Version in PDF/Acrobat format)

Yours faithfully,

Mast Sanity Press Office

It’s also about electrostatic charge – big static fields that make airborne guck stick to you the way VDU screens get dusty – not electromagnetic radiation.

www3.imperial.ac.uk/newsandeventspggrp/imperialcollege/newssummary/news_20-7-2007-15-52-57?newsid=14854