Life Energies - Politics

More dirt on Repacholi & the W.H.O.

sarjuna@aol.com (Shivani) — Thu, 16 Nov 2006 09:25:36 -0700

The actions of Dr. Mike Repacholi while he was head of the World Health Organization EMF project merited a section on my Web site entitled Corruption at the W.H.O.

In August of 2006 Repacholi moved on from W.H.O. and is now a industry consultant for Connecticut Light and Power Company, with the job of helping steer the Connecticut Siting Council away from a strict EMF exposure standard. The two utilities owning the Company commissioned Repacholi to prepare detailed comments to rebut the state Department of Public Health and support a 100 mG exposure level.

This in spite of the fact that:

- Children exposed to 2 mG have a threefold increase in risk and those exposed to 3 mG have a fourfold increase in the risk of leukemia.

- There is a five-fold increase in the risk of childhood leukemia, lymphomas and brain tumours where children living near power lines are exposed to 4 mG.

- A 12 mG magnetic field can block the protective action of melatonin against the growth of cancer cells. (Confirmed by 4 independent studies.)

- 12 mG magnetic fields can block the growth inhibition of tamoxifen, a drug used to control breast cancer

- Dr. Neil Cherry, whose impeccable work is renowned, concluded that "Every person is at risk of neurological effect from living, working or going to school in fields of 0.2 mG or more."

New information has also emerged indicating that the WHO EMF project has been receiving even more industry support than previously acknowledged.

Repacholi is now using the materials he prepared at the W.H.O. with industry money to support industry's policy positions. A wonderful deal for industry. A terrible deal for you and your children.

Please read the Microwave News story for the complete details.

And please send Microwave News a donation so that Dr. Slesin can continue to keep us informed about what's going on behind the scenes.

Bias in Health Advisory Committees

sarjuna@aol.com (Shivani) — Mon, 06 Nov 2006 14:52:51 -0700

Bias in Health Advisory Committees

Monday, November 6. 2006

www.emfacts.com/papers/who_conflict.pdf

Independent researchers and informed/concerned individuals around the
world are ever more aghast regarding the fact that the international
organizations charged with setting standards to protect public health
are instead acting to protect the industries creating what the public
needs protection from.

Don Maisch has written an excellent
paper that briefly examines recent actions taken by the World Health
Organisations (WHO) International EMF Project and the International
Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP).

He concludes that:

"When it comes to non-ionizing
radiation issues (in this case for power
frequency health risk assessment) the evidence
is clear that Michael Repacholi has used his
standing in both WHO and ICNIRP to stack
the WHOs Environmental Health Criteria
Task Group for power frequency exposures
with representatives of the power industry in
contravention of WHO policy.

This action can only be construed as
being aimed at ensuring that industry
involvement in determining the WHO
Environmental Health Criteria will bias
ICNIRPs risk assessment for power frequency
exposure limits for years to come. This will
conveniently provide economic protection for
the industry against the need to spend
enormous sums of money on upgrading
distribution systems as well as risks of
litigation. Such a blatant disregard for the
fundamental principles of credible science, as
well as WHOs mission on protecting world
health, speaks of a desperation to bury
independent science at all costs, even if that
cost is the integrity of WHO."

Please read the entire paper, Conflict of Interest and Bias in Health Advisory Committees:. A case study of the WHOs EMF Task Group, by Don Maisch, for the details on the dirty deeds being done by those charged with protecting your health.
This paper can be found at: www.emfacts.com/papers/who_conflict.pdf

Posted by shivani
in Politics
at
14:45

| Comments (0)

| Trackbacks (0)

The Cult of Negative Results

sarjuna.les@gmail.com (Sarjuna) — Wed, 13 Sep 2006 11:59:20 -0700

Dr. Lous Slesin, creator of the excellent Microwave News Web site, and a marvelous sleuth, has recently written the following. You can download the entire report on this shady business from his home page.

Continue reading "The Cult of Negative Results"

Truth about Chernobyl radiation's effects

sarjuna@aol.com (Shivani) — Fri, 07 Jul 2006 12:58:54 -0700

The statements made by the World Health Organization and the United Nations about the health effects of radiation exposure are becoming less and less believable.

   Although the Life Energies Web site focuses on the various issues involved regarding manmade electromagnetic radiation, there are similar issues involved regarding nuclear radiation. The stinky politics, involving biased "scientific experts", or even "experts for hire", are the same, and deserve scrutiny. Look for more blogs on this subject to follow.

   Many, myself included, believe that the UN's and the WHO's position statements on various issues are directly influenced by whatever industry is involved. The Chernobyl accident was very bad PR for the nuclear power industry, and good PR is priceless to industry.

   WHO's expert, Dr.Repacholi, asserted that the worst effect of the Chernobyl incident was mental health problems brought on by too much worry. (According to him, people were not really suffering from conditions caused by the radiation, they just thought they were. And if the governments of various countries chose to grant death benefits to people who they imagined had died due to radiation poisoning, that was their silly prerogative.)

   The UN 20-year followup released last September would have you believe that only 50 people died due to radiation exposure caused by the accident, most of them workers who cleaned up the site. (They worked with no protection against radiation, by the way, and without having been informed that there might be any risk involved. No point in alarming anybody by talking about risk, right? They might get worried and make themselves ill.)

   These absurd assertions brought strong condemnation from physicians, environmental organizations, religious groups and even some political parties in the countries affected by the radiation. Now some genuine information is becoming available.

   Below are some excerpts from an article, Chernobyl killed 1,000 British babies, in the March 23rd UK Life Style Extra. (Regarding the effects on British babies, keep in mind that Britain was far from the most-affected area. The research just happened to be done there. Also, radiation-damaged foetuses that were miscarried are not included in the research numbers.)

Excerpts:

In the days that followed the nuclear disaster...large clouds of radiation swept westwards across northern Europe, including Scandinavia, France and the UK.... the Met Office tracked several plumes of the radiation moving across Britain, and radioactive particles fell as 'black rain' when the plumes met the patchy rain clouds overhead that day.... a map showing highest mortality almost exactly matched a Met Office map of contaminated areas.

In contaminated areas... infant deaths increased by 11 per cent during the years 1986 to 1989, and in other areas rose by 4 per cent....at a time when infant mortality had been falling by an average four per cent a year.

.... the chance that the increases were due to random fluctuations was about 1 in 4,000. ...Neo-natal deaths rose by 4 per cent in contaminated areas but fell by 5 per cent in unaffected areas.

... apart from the radiation there was no factor that applied only to the contaminated areas.... the malign influence was three times stronger in the radioactive areas."

Earlier research has shown that an increase in northern England of thyroid cancer, associated with radioactive iodine, was probably due to Chernobyl fallout. But...no scientist has looked for a link to infant deaths before.

Chernobyl: Effects & Politics

sarjuna@aol.com (Shivani) — Wed, 12 Apr 2006 12:05:52 -0700

The statements made by World Health Organization and the United Nations about the health effects of radiation exposure are becoming less and less believable.

Many, myself included, believe that the UN's and the WHO's position statements on various issues are directly influenced by whatever industry is involved. The Chernobyl accident was very bad PR for the nuclear power industry, and good PR is priceless to industry.

WHO's expert, Dr.Repacholi, asserted that the worst effect of the Chernobyl incident was mental health problems brought on by too much worry. (According to him, people were not really suffering from conditions caused by the radiation, they just thought they were. And if the governments of various countries chose to grant death benefits to people who they imagined had died due to radiation poisoning, that was their silly prerogative.)

The UN 20-year followup released last September would have you believe that only 50 people died due to radiation exposure caused by the accident, most of them workers who cleaned up the site. (They worked with no protection against radiation, by the way, and without having been informed that there might be any risk involved. No point in alarming anybody by talking about risk, right? They might get worried and make themselves ill.)

These absurd assertions brought strong condemnation from physicians, environmental organizations, religious groups and even some political parties in the countries affected by the radiation. Now some genuine information is becoming available.

Below are some excerpts from an article, Chernobyl Killed 1,000 British Babies, from the March 23rd UK Life Style Extra re. the effects on British infants. Keep in mind that Britain was not the most-affected area. The research just happened to be done there.

"In the days that followed the nuclear disaster...large clouds of radiation swept westwards across northern Europe, including Scandinavia, France and the UK.... the Met Office tracked several plumes of the radiation moving across Britain, and radioactive particles fell as 'black rain' when the plumes met the patchy rain clouds overhead that day.... a map showing highest mortality almost exactly matched a Met Office map of contaminated areas.

In contaminated areas... infant deaths increased by 11 per cent during the years 1986 to 1989, and in other areas rose by 4 per cent....at a time when infant mortality had been falling by an average four per cent a year.

.... the chance that the increases were due to random fluctuations was about 1 in 4,000. ...Neo-natal deaths rose by 4 per cent in contaminated areas but fell by 5 per cent in unaffected areas.

... apart from the radiation there was no factor that applied only to the contaminated areas.... the malign influence was three times stronger in the radioactive areas."

Earlier research has shown that an increase in northern England of thyroid cancer, associated with radioactive iodine, was probably due to Chernobyl fallout. But...no scientist has looked for a link to infant deaths before."

Endemic political/industrial corruption of science in Australia

sarjuna@aol.com (Shivani) — Tue, 14 Mar 2006 20:25:49 -0700

Filed under: Corporate Corruption of Science

The Australian Four Corners TV program has returned to the airwaves for 2006 with an important documentary titled The Greenhouse Mafia that exposes the deep seated industry / Federal government suppression of scientific advice that runs counter to government policy on global warming.

Sound familar?

Although the program deals with the greenhouse gas / climate change issue and suppression of scientists from the Commonwealth Science and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO), a similar story can be told of the dismantling of the CSIROs radiophysics division that was investigating non-ionizing radiation bioeffects and the sacking of scientists who dared speak out for public health over corporate profits. The government even went to the extent of having a respected science communication expert sacked from the CSIRO to be replaced by a new communications director whos only qualifications were stated to be that she was highly respected in both government and corporate circles. It turned out that her previous job experience was by chance having executive positions with both the Australian Tobacco Institute and Philip Morris as a spin doctor!! Depending on ones viewpoint these can be good qualifications - If one can work spinning science for Big Tobacco theres nothing one wouldnt do to hopple inconvenient science.

You can go to the Four Corners web site and download all the transcripts. Well worth a read.

Continue reading "Endemic political/industrial corruption of science in Australia"