Latest update: February 16, 2020
While searching on the web for scientific papers about tree damage caused by cell towers, I found shocking information about the EMF radiation situation in India, in 2011, and the role in it of ICNIRP. In this post I share a collection of scientific information, published by the Indian Professor Girish Kumar, Dept. of Electrical Engineering, IIT Bombay. The content of the PDF files are to be considered as sounding the alarm for an extremely unhealthy situation.
The situation in India is now, 2020, probably worse. In 2017 WHO published a report, with an unbelievable, absolutely shocking content, because of the disdainful criticism of the WHO on what they clearly with disrespect name “activists”. WHO publicly defends ICNIRP. Even the cynical term “myth” is used. This means that the 2nd workshop, organized by Professor Girish Kumar in 2011, has not made any difference in the minds and awareness of those who are deciding the rules and laws in India. Despite lawsuits, despite the protests of the people. Because I am worried that this WHO document, INDIA -National report 2016-17 / Department of Telecommunications / Government of India will be deleted once by WHO, as happened with an ICNIRP document, and where I refer to later in this post, I have downloaded it.
Here follow the links to Professor Girish Kumar’s presentation and reports with scientific conclusions, which WHO and ICNIRP categorize as myths.
1. Intro: 2nd Workshop on Cell Phone / Tower Radiation Hazards & Solutions at Indian Institute of Technology Bombay (IITB) organized by Prof. Girish Kumar, Dept. of Electrical Engineering, IIT Bombay. The 2nd workshop was held on 20th Nov 2011 at VMCC, IIT Bombay. ICNIRP is mentioned in several different chapters in different PDF documents.
2. Workshop on Cell Tower/ Cell Phone Radiation Hazards & Solution
Download Resource material :
a. Cell tower radiation report sent to Department of Telecommunications, India by Prof. Girish Kumar
b. Presentation on Cell Phone/Tower Radiation Hazards & Solutions by Prof. Girish Kumar. https://www.ee.iitb.ac.in/~mwave/GK-Cell%20Tower-%20Hazard-Sept11.pdf Copy: http://www.wiki.leba.eu/_media/infrastruktura/kumar_g._-_cell_phone_tower_radiation_hazards_solutions.pdf
c. Cell Phone Towers Radiation Hazards Submitted to West Bengal Environment Ministry
d. Report on Possible Impacts of Communication Towers on Wild Life Including Birds & Bees
Additional: Cell Phone/Tower Radiation Hazards And Solutions
by Prof. Girish Kumar, IIT Bombay
Published: May 8, 2014
3. A shocking ICNIRP text in an in the meantime removed PDF file
The following text about ICNIRP is copied from the presentation, and interesting, because the ICNIRP document is not available any more on the web.
India adopts ICNIRP guideline for Power density (Pd) = Frequency /200, frequency is in MHz(averaged over 6 min exposure) ICNIRP has given following disclosure:
“ICNIRP is only intended to protect the public against short term gross heating effects and NOT against ‘biological’ effects such as cancer and genetic damage from long term low level microwave exposure from mobile phones, masts and many other wireless devices.” http://www.icnirp.de/documents/emfgdl.pdf [Attention: The PDF file has been removed by ICNIRP. A.J.]
4. Article in The Economic Times / India Times, with a comment on Prof. Girish Kumar’s workshop on Cell Tower/ Cell Phone Radiation Hazards & Solution: Myths about radiation risks from cell tower
1. “In 2008, India adopted the guidelines developed by the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP) for electromagnetic radiation from mobile towers.”
2. “The activists conduct seminars, arrange private talks and employ every trick under the sun to sell their products. “Living in Mumbai is like living in an open microwave oven! The public exposed to EM radiation from cell phone towers is getting cooked!” they say. Reporters obligingly spread the spicy stories. At DoT levels, what will be the temperature increase in the body? Responding to queries from this writer, Dr. Mike Repacholi [Note: ICNIRP Chairman from 1992 until 1996. ICNIRP Emeritus Member since 1996. A.J.] stated that temperature increase in the human body exposed to electromagnetic radiation at the level of ICNIRP standards could not exceed 0.1° C. At DoT levels, it will be 0.01° C! The most glaring disinformation propagated by activists is that the Specific Absorption Rate (SAR) limit for cell phones — a safety standard of 1.6 Wper kg — is actually for six minutes per-day usage! Do not use for more than 18-20 minutes daily, they assert.”
3. “Dr. Kari Jokela [Note: ICNIRP SCIII Member 1994-2012 – ICNIRP Commission Member 2008-2016 – ICNIRP SEG Member 2016-2019, A.J.] member of ICNIRP and research professor at the Radiation and Nuclear Safety Authority, Finland, in an email message stated that Dr. Girish Kumar’s interpretations of ICNIRP guidelines are incorrect. The studies thus far are reassuring. More research is needed to reduce the uncertainties. This writer trusts the safety standards for electromagnetic radiation prescribed by the ICNIRP, which is formally recognised by the WHO, the International Labour Organization and the EU. Sixty-three countries accepted ICNIRP limits. Our limits are 10 times lower. Have we to lose sleep over the alleged risks of cell tower radiation?” Full article: https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/myths-about-radiation-risks-from-cell-tower/articleshow/18263811.cms
Author: K.S. Parthasarathy
The author is former secretary of the Atomic Energy Regulatory Board
The article was last updated on Jan 31, 2013
The article is also published on the WordPress blog of K.S. Parthasarathy: https://ksparthasarathy.wordpress.com/2013/01/31/myths-about-radiation-risks-from-cell-tower/
Extra 1: Additional a review of the situation in India, in 2013, to underline the emergency call of Professor Kumar, in 2011, to expose the ignorance of journalist Dr. K.S. Parthasarathy, and to underline the impossibility to create a healthy electromagnetic environment in India, because of ICNIRP’s and WHO’s demands for an amount of research that is not available and cannot be provided because of the total absence of the right support. The available high quality reports though are sufficient enough to understand the seriousness of the situation, and to open the highly needed discussions, but both WHO and ICNIRP are downplaying facts, and cover-up their mistakes, with bluffing arrogant lies. After reading all the available information one may conclude that scientists are sabotaged, by ICNIRP and WHO. From the review: “Short-term studies on the impacts of RF-EMF on frogs, honey bees, house sparrows, bats, and even humans are scarce and long-term studies are non-existent in India.” To understand what this means for India I refer to the quote in the post “ICNIRP“, §12 in which becomes clear what exactly the ICNIRP- and WHO demands are, in general, not only for India, but for all countries. Scientists in India cannot follow up these demands, because they is missing the right support, are even sabotaged, which means that both ICNIRP and WHO are creating an explosive environmental catastrophe in India.
Biology and Medicine, 4 (4): 202–216, 2012
Impacts of radio-frequency electromagnetic field (RF-EMF) from cell phone towers and wireless devices on biosystem and ecosystem – a review
S. Sivani*, D. Sudarsanam
Department of Advanced Zoology and Biotechnology, Loyola College, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India.
Published: 6th Jan 2013
This paper summarizes the effect of radio-frequency electromagnetic field (RF-EMF) from cell towers and wireless devices on the biosphere. Based on current available literature, it is justified to conclude that RF-EMF radiation expo-sure can change neurotransmitter functions, blood-brain barrier, morphology, electrophysiology, cellular metabolism, calcium efflux, and gene and protein expression in certain types of cells even at lower intensities. The biological consequences of such changes remain unclear. Short-term studies on the impacts of RF-EMF on frogs, honey bees, house sparrows, bats, and even humans are scarce and long-term studies are non-existent in India. Identification of the frequency, intensity, and duration of non-ionizing electromagnetic fields causing damage to the biosystem and ecosystem would evolve strategies for mitigation and would enable the proper use of wireless technologies to enjoy its immense benefits, while ensuring one’s health and that of the environment.
Keywords: Radio-frequency electromagnetic field; cell phone tower; power density; SAR; non-ionizing radiation; non-thermal
Science Direct: the review
Extra 2: A question of conscience to WHO and ICNIRP
Now the electromagnetic environmental situation in Bombay, India, is documented I ask WHO and ICNIRP to answer the following question of conscience:
How is the electromagnetic environmental situation in Wuhan, China?
Why this question? Answer: Wuhan is an 11.000.000 citizens counting city, providing all citizens internet via (how many exactly?) cell towers, and of course all 11.000.000 citizens have a mobile with internet, which are active 24/7, via antennas. What are the consequences of the total of 11.000.000 active mobiles plus shining polluting screens on the environment, on health? It is known that mobiles have a much higher radiation than allowed, so what is the total of radiation of 11.000.000 active mobiles and thousands of cell towers, the impact of it on ill people, on healthy people, on pregnant women, babies, toddlers, children, teenagers, adults, elderly people, on trees, plants, insects, animals, on bacteria and viruses, on sudden epidemics of new viruses? There IS a link between electromagnetic radiation and flu, and yes the coronavirus is a flu variant. Last but not least: Wuhan is also China’s first 5G test city.
Other question to WHO and ICNIRP: Are there neutral scientists in China who are allowed to publish scientific facts about the non-thermal effects of the extreme high percentages of electromagnetic radiation? We know the answer. What are the scientific research results about the thermal effects? Wuhan must be like a microwave oven. Microwave ovens can boil food.
Extra 3: Does cellphone use kill birds? Experts weigh in on idea promoted by Shankar’s ‘2.0’ [India]
By: Priyanka Thirumurthy, India
Published: December 04, 2018
Quote 1: “In India an expert group was formed by the Ministry of Environment and Forest [Note A.J.: Published: January 10, 2011. / The links on this page show all: “The specified URL cannot be found.” Therefore: see the report in PDF] to study the possible impacts of communication towers on wildlife, including birds and bees. It pointed out that India is likely to become one of the world’s largest markets for cellphones and was devoid of any policy on infrastructure development and location of cell phone towers. They studied 919 reports on the effects of EMF, with 81% of the reports cataloguing effects on humans, 3% recording effect on birds and just 2% on wildlife. But even in the 30 existing studies, 23 concluded that EMF had a negative impact on birds while 6 out of 7 studies concluded negative impact on bees.”
Quote 2: “Jayanthi Kallam meanwhile says that time is of essence and that EMF radiation cannot be ruled out merely because only birds and insects seem to be affected: “The same was thought of pesticides. We saw it first affect insects, then birds and finally we saw what happened to humans who ate food sprayed with the chemical. And now we are all trying to switch to organic produce,” she says. “In the case of EMF, we need to recognise its danger with thorough studies and counter it before we can see the adverse effects it will have on human beings.”
Quote 3: Jayanthi Kallam further points out that the feathers of birds act as receptors of high levels of EMF: “When exposed to high EMF, these birds receive a small electric shock that can impact their flight and even the path they take. Birds use magnetic navigation to travel, but then contrasting magnetic fields present in the atmosphere will leave them completely disoriented,” she points out. “In urban areas they are already exposed to high levels of noise and air pollution. Increased levels of EMF could just be the straw that broke the camel’s back,” she adds.
Extra 4: In his article in The Economic Times / India Times (chapter 4 in this post) Dr. Parthasarathy also names Arthur Firstenberg. He obviously did not take so much time to learn to know Arthur Firstenberg. If he was a real investigative journalist, as one may expect from an academic, he would not have been satisfied with some shallow Google search results about Firstenberg, but he would, as he did obviously with Dr. Mike Repacholi, and Dr. Kari Jokela, have asked him for a comment on Prof. Girish Kumar’s seminar as well. When going through Parthasarathy’s blog posts I notice that he mostly refers to WHO. That only seems to be perfect, because the WHO acts as ICNIRP‘s ventriloquist’s dummy. In order to hide that, WHO is not offering any transparency on their website about who they exactly are, what the board of directors studied, where, when. What their ethics are. See article.
Shortly: WHO is a branch of UN, and UN is a trade organization, interested in economy, and health: health as a business market product to keep the economy growing. WHO’s ventriloquist ICNIRP’s guidelines are proved to be fraudulent, and one of its members, Martin Röösli is exposed lately as a fraud creating danger for the health of all world citizens in a public whistle blower letter to the Swiss president Simonetta Sommaruga. When the lies of the industry, their guardian angel ICNIRP, and its allies WHO and UN, are finally unveiled, the world economy will experience an economical crisis. Of course we all want to avoid that, but not on the expense of health, and life, not with deadly illnesses, and even the extinction of animals, birds, bees, amphibians, plants, trees, forests, and…. human beings as a result. People are waking up, and protest, start lawsuits.
Dr. K.S. Parthasarathy is not an investigative journalist. Arthur Firstenberg however is, but he is also an excellent educator: this creates an understanding of utterly complex science. Understanding science is essential for all human beings, and a human right. It is essential for making the right choices, and knowing why. It creates insight in health, and taking responsibility for health, life. I invite you, K.S. Parthasarathy, to start to learn from Arthur Firstenberg here.