The results of the Industry and Government funded Mobile Telecommunications and Health Research Programme (MTHR) is to be published on Wednesday 12th September at the Wellcome Trust in conjunction with the Science Media Centre.

We do not expect the MTHR report to be representative of real research carried out into relevant areas of the Mobile Phone Mast / Health issue. The MTHR studies have largely avoided the research areas where actual health effects from microwave emissions would be seen. The Electrical Engineering bias of the MTHR is apparent in the studies they have commissioned. Humans are biological organisms not machines or computers. Biologists and Biophysicists would carry out more useful studies.

The MTHR's recent release of the University of Essex study into electrosensitivity, which was carried out from a psychological viewpoint, proved hugely controversial, with accusations of misrepresentation and spin to present findings required by Government and the Industry, who funded the study. According to the published results electrosensitivity has no connection with phone masts.

Mast Sanity stringently contests the validity of the study, and the results, noting participants who could not complete the tests due to illness (at least partially from the microwave exposure given to them as part of the study) were eliminated. Studying the complete publication rather than just the press release, reveals that the information publicising the study is at odds with the actual findings.

Given the disingenuous press release, the tone of the subsequent reports has been predictably biased, generally writing off electrosensitivity as the product of a psychological problem rooted in a belief that the technology was harmful.

Unfortunately, we expect no better from the rest of the MTHR reports. We would strongly suggest that the results of the MTHR report be discounted, due to the conflict of interest of most of its members^[1], who are also part of the very bodies that would be adversely affected by any critical findings, and of its funding, which comes from Industry and Government. The British Public and Press would be better served by looking at the Independent and more representative "Bioinitiative" report^[2], by an international working group of Independent scientists, researchers and public health policy professionals (The BioInitiative Working Group) which was released on 31st August this year. They document serious scientific concerns about current limits regulating how much electromagnetic field (EMF) is allowable from power lines, mobile phones, mobile phone masts, wi-fi and many other sources of EMF exposure in daily life.

Mast Sanity Spokesperson Yasmin Skelt says “Why do we listen to industry-funded research reports from the likes of the MTHR? In all other aspects of our lives we would ignore reports that come from the interested party. If an Alternative Therapy group reported on the success of its therapy, it would be immediately dismissed as untrustworthy because of its bias. This happened recently. The Tobacco Companies told us that smoking was safe . So why are we prepared to listen to researchers using Mobile Phone Industry money on research chosen by the industry itself? It is ludicrous and dangerous.”

The Bioinitiative report documents scientific evidence raising worries about childhood leukaemia (from power lines and other electrical exposures), brain tumours and acoustic neuromas (from cell and cordless phones) and Alzheimer’s disease. There is evidence that EMFs, such as from Mobile Phone Masts, is a risk factor for both childhood and adult cancers. Public health expert and co-editor of the Report Dr. David Carpenter, Director, Institute for Health and the Environment at the University of Albany, New York says “this report stands as a wake-up call that long-term exposure to some kinds of EMF may cause serious health effects. Good public health planning is needed now to prevent cancers and neurological diseases linked to exposure to power lines and other sources of EMF [such as Mobile Phone Masts 'Cell Towers']. We need to educate people and our decision makers that “business as usual” is unacceptable.”

The crux of the Bioinitiative report is that the existing ICNIRP guidelines followed by the UK and other countries for their microwave emission limits is far too high. It confirms the position of the Benevento Resolution^[3] and the late Dr. Neil Cherry^[4] who said “the ICNIRP guideline exposure level is set many orders of magnitude too high to accomplish this [protection of public health]. This [view] has been intransigently maintained in the face of compelling laboratory and epidemiological evidence of adverse health effects that would have had a chemical declared carcinogenic, neuropathogenic, cardiogenic and teratogenic for humans many years ago.”

The MTHR – containing many ICNIRP members - will attempt to reiterate the current status-quo, we believe.

Mast Sanity Spokesperson Yasmin Skelt says "We see the publication of the MTHR report at this time as a cynical attempt to contradict the BioInitiative Report and its calls for much lower microwave emission limits. It will serve as nothing more than an attempt by the Mobile Phone Industry and other Wireless pedlars to target young children, the sick and the elderly as the adult and teenage markets reach saturation point. Mast Sanity believe that vulnerable groups in particular and the Public in general should be protected from microwave emissions and unsafe mobile/wireless devices which should carry clear warning labels like cigarettes now do. The Swedish and German precautionary approaches are much more enlightened than that for the UK."

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

END.

Notes and References:

[1] www.mthr.org.uk/members/members.htm - It seems that the same small group of 'Experts' are on the committees of virtually all institutions charged with looking at electromagnetic fields world-wide. Many have Industry or Government connections.

[2] www.bioinitiative.org .An international working group of scientists, researchers and public health 

policy professionals (The BioInitiative Working Group) has just released its report on electromagnetic 

fields (EMF) and health. It raises serious concern about the safety of existing public limits that regulate 

how much EMF is allowable from power lines, cell phones, and many other sources of EMF exposure 

in daily life.

[3] http://www.icems.eu/docs/BeneventoResolution.pdf - Benevento Resolution - International Commission for electromagnetic safety, a group of scientists publicly standing against ICNIRP.

[4] www.tetrawatch.net/papers/hyland_icnirp.pdf – Late Dr Neil Cherry's critique of the ICNIRP guidelines.