ART's Treasure Chest
of quotes and excerpts
Here we present some of the top experts in the field who have issued statements regarding the issue of radiofrequency radiation and its potential impact on human health. Cut and paste quotes from this page to use in your own presentation, testimony, article or letter to the editor – with credit to author, of course!
• American Academy of Pediatrics
• National Toxicology Program
The American Academy of Pediatrics letter to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and the Federal Communications Commission.
“Children are not little adults and are disproportionately impacted by all environmental exposures, including cell phone radiation. Current FCC standards do not account for the unique vulnerability and use patterns specific to pregnant women and children. It is essential that any new standard for cell phones or other wireless devices be based on protecting the youngest and most vulnerable populations to ensure they are safeguarded throughout their lifetimes.”
Otis W. Brawley, M.D., former Chief Medical Officer of the American Cancer Society speaks out in an ACS press release on the initial release of partial results from the U.S. National Toxicology Program’s (NTP) animal study of the effects of radiofrequency radiation associated with cell phones.
Quote 1 “The NTP report linking radiofrequency radiation (RFR) to two types of cancer marks a paradigm shift in our understanding of radiation and cancer risk.”
Quote 2 “One of the two cancers linked to cell phone radiation was malignant gliomas in the brain. The association with gliomas and acoustic neuromas had been suspected from human epidemiological studies. The second cancer, called a schwannoma, is an extremely rare tumor in humans and animals, reducing the possibility that this is a chance finding.”
Quote 3 “This new evidence will undoubtedly factor into ongoing assessments by regulators to determine the potential cancer risk posed by cell phones. The ACS eagerly awaits guidance from government agencies, like the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), about the safely of cell phone use.”
Martin Blank, Ph.D., (1933 - 2018) Professor and Researcher, Department of Physiology and Cellular Biophysics, Columbia University, NY. Expert consultant to academia and industry on electric and magnetic field effects in biological cells.
Quote 1 “International exposure guidelines for electromagnetic fields must be strengthened to reflect the reality of their impact on our bodies, especially on our DNA. The time to deal with the harmful biological and health effects is long overdue. We must reduce exposure by establishing more protective guidelines.” Source link
Quote 2 "There are now sufficient scientific data about the biological effects of EMF to limit human exposure. We can state unequivocally that EMF can cause damage (single and double strand breaks) to DNA at exposure levels that are considered safe under the FCC guidelines in the USA. Further, these 11 guidelines do not take into account the accumulation of changes or mutations in DNA that occur with prolonged exposure—and the actual use of the various devices involves prolonged exposure, indeed increasingly prolonged exposure."
Norm Alster, author, "Captured Agency: How the Federal Communications Commission is dominated by the industries it Presumably Regulates” - Harvard University’s Safra Center for Ethics,.
Quote 1 “Industry control, in the case of wireless health issues, extends beyond Congress and regulators to basic scientific research. And in an obvious echo of the hardball tactics of the tobacco industry, the wireless industry has backed up its economic and political power by stonewalling on public relations and bullying potential threats into submission with its huge standing army of lawyers.”
Quote 2 “Most insidious of all, the wireless industry has been allowed to grow unchecked and virtually unregulated, with fundamental questions on public health impact routinely ignored.”
Senator Richard Blumenthal (CT) questions the industry representatives about bringing 5G to market with no safety testing. Partial transcript of Congressional hearing “Winning the Race to 5G and the Next Era of Technology Innovation in the United States” on February 6, 2019 called by the Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation.
SENATOR BLUMENTHAL - “How much money has the industry committed to supporting additional independent research—I stress independent—research? Is that independent research ongoing? Has any been completed? Where can consumers look for it? And we’re talking about research on the biological effects of this new technology.”
BRAD GILLEN, Executive VP of CTIA - “Uh, there are no industry-backed studies to my knowledge right now.”
SENATOR BLUMENTHAL - “So essentially, the answer to my question - how much money? Zero.”
BRAD GILLEN - “To my knowledge there are no active studies being backed by industry today.”
SENATOR BLUMENTHAL - "So there really is no research ongoing. We’re kind of flying blind here as far as health and safety is concerned."
International Scientist Appeal to the United Nations, Member States and the World Health Organization
“The various agencies setting safety standards have failed to impose sufficient guidelines to protect the general public, particularly children who are more vulnerable to the effects of EMF.”
EU 5G Appeal – Scientists warn of potential serious health effects of 5G
“We, the undersigned scientists, recommend a moratorium on the roll-out of the fifth generation, 5G, for telecommunication until potential hazards for human health and the environment have been fully investigated by scientists independent from industry. 5G will substantially increase exposure to radiofrequency electromagnetic fields (RF-EMF) on top of the 2G, 3G, 4G, WiFi etc. for telecommunications already in place. RF-EMF has been proven to be harmful for humans and the environment.”
National Toxicology Program, U.S. Department of Health & Human Services, reports wireless radiation causes cancer and DNA damage:
Quote 1 “The NTP studies found that high exposure to RFR (900 MHz) used by cell phones was associated with clear evidence of an association with tumors in the hearts of male rats. The tumors were malignant schwannomas.”
Quote 2 “NTP scientists found that RFR exposure was associated with an increase in DNA damage. Specifically, they found RFR exposure was linked with significant increases in DNA damage in the frontal cortex of the brain in male mice, the blood cells of female mice, and the hippocampus of male rats.”
The Ramazzini Institute performed a life-span carcinogenic study on lab animals to evaluate the carcinogenic effects of RFR from distant cell towers.
"The RI findings on far field exposure to RFR are consistent with and reinforce the results of the NTP study on near field exposure, as both reported an increase in the incidence of tumors of the brain and heart in RFR-exposed Sprague-Dawley rats....These experimental studies provide sufficient evidence to call for the re-evaluation of IARC conclusions regarding the carcinogenic potential of RFR in humans."
Ronald Melnick, Ph.D., former Senior Toxicologist - U.S. National Toxicology Program (NTP), National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences
Quote 1 "[The] study by the National Toxicology Program/National Institutes of Health (NTP/NIH) shows clear evidence of a causal link between cancer and exposure to wireless cell phone signals. Results from the $30 million NTP studies demonstrated that cell phone radiation caused Schwann cell cancers of the heart and brain gliomas in rats, as well as DNA damage in the brain."
Quote 2 “ …Health concerns for children may be greater than that for adults due to increased penetration of cell phone radiation within the brains of children. Simply ignoring the cancer data from the NTP studies is not in the interest of public health. Because of the widespread use of cell phones among the general public, even a small increase in cancer risk would have a serious public health impact."
Quote 3 "We can no longer assume that any current or future wireless technology, including 5G, is safe without adequate testing."
The United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit issued a ruling in EHT/CHD et al. v. the FCC regarding the decision by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to retain its outdated 1996 safety limits for human exposure to wireless radiation.
Quote 1 “The Commission failed to provide a reasoned explanation for its determination that its guidelines adequately protect against the harmful effects of exposure to radiofrequency radiation unrelated to cancer.”
Quote 2 “…the Commission’s failure to provide a reasoned or even relevant explanation of its position that RF radiation below the current limits does not cause health problems unrelated to cancer renders its explanation as to the effect of RF radiation on children arbitrary and capricious.”
Quote 3 The [FCC] demonstrated “a complete failure to respond to comments concerning environmental harm caused by RF radiation.”
Biological Effects of Radiofrequency Radiation - a draft report from the EPA dated 1983, before the agency's radiation program was defunded.
"The existing database provides sufficient evidence about the relation between RF-radiation exposure and biological effects to permit development of exposure limits to protect the health of the general public."
Scientists call for Protection from Non-ionizing Electromagnetic Field Exposure.
"Numerous recent scientific publications have shown that EMF affects living organisms at levels well below most international and national guidelines. Effects include increased cancer risk, cellular stress, increase in harmful free radicals, genetic damages, structural and functional changes of the reproductive system, learning and memory deficits, neurological disorders, and negative impacts on general well-being in humans. Damage goes well beyond the human race, as there is growing evidence of harmful effects to both plant and animal life."
Anthony Miller, Ph.D., Professor Emeritus, Epidemiology Division, Center for Global Health, University of Toronto.
Quote 1 “It has now been well demonstrated that adverse biological effects occur at far
lower levels of radiofrequency fields that do not induce tissue heating.”
Quote 2 “It is important to recognize that there are no safe levels of exposure to human
carcinogens. Risk increases with increasing intensity of exposure, and for many
carcinogens, even more with increasing duration of exposure. The only way to avoid the
carcinogenic risk is to avoid exposure altogether.”
Quote 3 “To avoid a potential epidemic of cancer caused by radiofrequency fields from wi-fi and other devices, we should introduce means to reduce exposure as much as reasonably achievable, use hard wire connections to the internet and strengthen the codes that are meant to protect the public.”
Devra Davis, Ph.D., renowned epidemiologist, toxicologist, and author of three books about environmental hazards. Dr. Davis is the founder of the Environmental Health Trust.
“Cell phone radiation can and does produce damage to human cells by changing their shape and changing how they function. And this cell damage, in turn, translates to a real impact on children’s well-being as well as their physical health over the long term.“
Martin Pall, Ph.D., Professor Emeritus of Biochemistry and Basic Medical Sciences at Washington. State University.
“Pulsed EMFs are usually much more biologically active than are non-pulsed (also known as continuous wave) EMFs of identical frequency and similar average intensity This pattern of action is particularly important because all wireless communication devices, including Wi-Fi communicate via pulsations and are likely to be particularly dangerous as consequence of this.”
Joel Moskowitz, Ph.D., Director, Center for Family and Community Health, University of California at Berkeley.
"The latest cellular technology, 5G, will employ millimeter waves for the first time in addition to microwaves that have been in use for older cellular technologies, 2G through 4G. Given limited reach, 5G will require cell antennas every 100 to 200 meters, exposing many people to millimeter wave radiation.... Millimeter waves are mostly absorbed within a few millimeters of human skin and in the surface layers of the cornea. Short-term exposure can have adverse physiological effects in the peripheral nervous system, the immune system and the cardiovascular system. The research suggests that long-term exposure may pose health risks to the skin (e.g., melanoma), the eyes (e.g., ocular melanoma) and the testes (e.g., sterility)."