Niederländischer Gesundheitsrat sorgt sich um 5G bei 26 GHz (Allgemein)

Dariusz Leszczynski, Dienstag, 08.09.2020, 18:25 (vor 1538 Tagen) @ H. Lamarr

You, as well as Thomas Whitney alias Doubting Thomas, did some cherry picking.

The Executive Summary is trying to satisfy both sides of the debate. Namely, the ICNIRP-side and the doubting-ICNIRP-side. It is very nicely seen in this quote:

"...the committee recommends using the latest guidelines from the International Commission on Non-Ionising Radiation Protection (ICNIRP) as the basis for exposure policy in the Netherlands. Because it cannot be excluded that exposure under the latest ICNIRP standards also has the potential to affect health, the committee recommends taking a cautious approach and keeping exposures as low as reasonably achievable..."

On the one side the Committee had no choice but to recommend use of ICNIRP guidelines but... there were apparently meaningful doubts and the Committee added that there might be health effects at the ICNIRP guidlines level and cautious approach is recommended.

This doesn't sound like limitless support for the ICNIRP guidelines.

The same approach of satisfying both sides of the debate is in this quote, that Whitney cherry picked:

"...For the majority of other biological processes it has neither been demonstrated nor is it probable that changes in them are associated with exposure to radiofrequency electromagnetic fields, although this cannot be excluded..."

Again claim that effects were not demonstrated and are not probable but... there is a possibility that effects can't be excluded (might be discovered later?).

So, the Committee should have made up their mind and decide that either, the effects are indeed "not probable" or that the effects, however, "cannot be excluded". In this sentence they indicate both "yes" and "no" claim.

Throughout the whole Executive Summary is felt this approach to try to satisfy the both sides of the debate.

The committee had to endorse ICNIRP guidelines but clearly the Committee members had some reservations.

The conflict between what is recommended by ICNIRP and what science says and the Committee has understood, is when 5G 26GHz issue is presented:

“...There has been almost no research into the effects of exposure to frequencies around 26 GHz...”

and...

“...The committee recommends not using the 26 GHz frequency band for 5G for as long as the potential health risks have not been investigated...”

Carte blanche given by ICNIRP to telecom industry is in error, especially the part where research has not been done almost at all - the millimeter-waves of the 5G. In my next BRHP blog will be few words about this issue.