Blog

The FDA is trying to stop progress and is misinterpreting science showing EMF Health Risk. The FDA just published (Feb 2020) it’s new report on 125 studies that were published in the passing decade on the research of possible health effects of RF and EMF and about its’ ability to cause cancer. The FDA report try to playdown the finding of the studies about the existing biological effect and the possible health effect.

The FDA is trying to push back the growing number of studies that show biological influences , damage and sickness caused by exposure to EMF. It is doing so by using empty worlds. The FDA is no longer saying there is no data showing possible health effect, it is now trying to downgrade and discredit the importance and the relevancy of the studies that do find biological effects, health effects and link to cancer. The other technique it uses is to argue that there is ” no clear and consistent pattern” and that “ these studies were subject to flaws and inaccuracies”.

“No Clear pattern”

Yes, it is true, not all the studies found change, effect & sickness. It is true that there are some that did not. But it seems that the FDA accept those that did not find effect as a fact and chose to pray on & criticise the studies that did. The FDA hint about problems in exposure planing and design in the studies that do find an effect while some issues can occur in studies that don’t find an effect (and which are excepted with not doubt).

It is absolutely natural and possible that when testing if a possible cause do cause an health effect, some of the tests will show no effect. Simply because that not all tested pathways and procedures tested are contributing to the effect. Not all studies test the right thing, the right way, with the right procedure and the right protocol. So clearly not all will show an effect. It is important to focus on those that do manage to find biological or health effects, in order to understand the effects and the mechanisms. But the FCC choose to wait for consistency.

Can Animals studies predict what will happen to Humans?

For decades that is exactly what is done in science. You test small groups of animals for an effect, using high doses of exposure, and if there is some elevated risk, even the smallest one, or other influence in the small exposure group, you can predict that it will happen also in human, at least to some extent.

But no, in case of EMF and RF the FDA dismiss the finding of animals studies while claiming the exposure in this studies was very high and that the animals were constrained in small cages. Then it goes on saying “In vivo studies are of immense value in medical science, but they are less useful than studying effects on the human population, where that is feasible” …..right.

Animals are constrained, humans are free

The FDA even try to detail some of the the problems it sees in “In VIVO” studies, for example that the animals are constrained while exposure, which can have an effect on the outcome. The FDA is maybe forgetting that in case the animals are constrained, both exposed groups and both control are handled the same way. In addition it is forgetting the both in the NTP and the Ramazini studies that fond effects of RF on the rudents, the rudants were free to roam the cages, drink and eat.

Since humans are free to roam the hearth and are not in small cages, it is possible to say that the conditions in these “In VITRO” studies are different from the real world. It is possible to say that if the restrainment have an amplifying effect on the results. But if the is an effect, even if it was amplified, a10% increase in risk in the experiment, might signal a 1% over the human population. a 1% of the people using mobile phones effected is a very big thing,

The exposure in animals studies is higher than on humans

The FDA also point out that in the animal studies the exposure is rather high. Well in some cases it is. This what you do when you search an effect on small groups. You increase the exposure and if there is a 10% increase in risk, that may mean that in the human population the risk can be significant, even if the exposure in the human population is lower.

Actually both the “restrain” and the “high exposure” issues are best practice in all fields of studies, not just RF or EMF.

Bottom line

The FDA is trying to cover up that there are more and more studies that already show biological and health effect of RFR and EMF, both “In Vitro” and “In Vivo”. Some even show a link to cancer. It praise epidemic studies on humans but dismiss the one that found added risk as being inconsistent (for example the Interphone study and hardel studies).

Turning a blind eye

The FDA is turning a blind eye for the accumulating evidence, as it is doing for years and years to people who already got hurt, and their health destroyed by the exposure to EMF and particular RF.

Maybe it does so because of policis, maybe because it does not want to hurt the industry, maybe because it does not want to change his mind.