(THIS ARTICLE IS MACHINE TRANSLATED by Google from Norwegian)
It surprises me to read that Lars Klæboe and the Directorate for Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety (DSA) is obviously not aware that several government expert committees in other European countries conclude that there is a real risk of harmful effects of wireless technology below our limit values.
Is the radiation protection administration not obliged to get acquainted with this? Has the DSA had its head in the sand in recent years?
An example is the Swiss state The BERENIS Committee, which recently concluded that even weak electromagnetic fields (EMF) can lead to changes in the oxidant balance (oxidative stress), and that this can potentially lead to serious health damage in children and vulnerable groups. The committee states that the majority of the studies find that the exposure to weak EMF is linked to a significant degree of oxidative stress.
Previously showed a public French expert committee to possible detrimental effects on children's cognitive and mental health, based on findings in several studies. Among other things, they recommended that children's exposure to mobile telephony is reduced. Disturbing findings in a number of published studies on animals and humans are the background for that France and other other countries has introduced restrictions on the use of wireless technology (WiFi) in kindergartens and schools and that some countries have much lower limit values. This is of course relevant, even if the DSA tries to portray it as unimportant.
In Norway, we unfortunately have a radiation protection that is based exclusively on sources dominated by a small clique of professionals and consultants associated with the private German foundation, ICNIRP. Among these is an ICNIRP-established two-person office in the WHO, and various sample reports dominated by the same narrow ICNIRP network. But ICNIRP is criticized for conflicts of interest, bias, one-sidedness and lack of transparency. NRK's Brennpunkt journalists found in their time connection to both telecom and defense interests. DSA's line here ensures that a policy that gives the telecom industry as much room for maneuver as possible, without regard to all published research that finds damage that is not related to heating – even far below the limit values.
Klæboe further skips over the fact that a majority of research reports make findings that contradict DSA's conclusions – and that reputable institutions and many professionals criticize this type of radiation protection as stern and dangerous for health and the environment (see Source collection at Folkets Strålevern)
And of course the DSA fails to help: As a professional authority, the DSA lays the groundwork for the health service's work. The health service thus has in reality a ban on believing that radiation that the DSA thinks is okay – can harm. In addition, the DSA is currently participating in the National Cooperation Forum for EMF and Health, which, judging by the minutes, may seem to be throwing suffering people with radiation-related ailments "under the bus" – based on DSA's assessments.
Se the debate post as commented here.
