EMF and health; ‘Scientific proof’ versus ‘observation’ and ‘experiences’

vrijdag, 06 februari 2015 - Categorie: Artikelen

Electromagnetic fields from wireless communications and health
‘Scientific proof’ versus ‘observation’ and ‘experiences’

pdf/EMF,%20scientific%20proof,%20health.pdf .
6 febr. 2015 (second version)

A contribution by StopUMTS, written in English because the problems we are faced with in getting electrohypersensitivity (EHS) recognized are universal. The introductory part is reproduced below, for the complete communication see the link above.
www.powerwatch.org.uk/news/2015-01-20-eesc-final-opinion.asp .
Alasdair Philips, webmaster of PowerWatch referred in the following way to our communication:
» An excellent new document on RF fields and health regarding 'Scientific proof' versus 'observation' and 'experiences' by Dr Leendert Vriens is well worth reading in our opinion.
This shows the advantage of writing in English, the audience becomes larger.

(first version)

According to the telecom industry, as well as to many governments, there is no ‘scientific
proof’ that electromagnetic fields (EMF), cq. radiofrequency (RF) radiation, from cell towers, cell phones, smart phones and WiFi are hazardous to our health. Therefore they don’t find it necessary to take precautionary measures and to inform the public about the potential dangers of wireless communications. ‘Observations’ and ‘experiencies’ of thousands of victims which have become electro-hypersensitive (EHS) are given no weight. No help is offered. The victims have to survive in a world which for them is becoming more and more inhabitable. With the continuously increasing radiation densities and the introduction of 4G and WiFi hotspots their numbers are increasing and their health problems are becoming more severe.

In this communication I will illustrate by many examples from history that ‘observations’ and ‘experiences’ should be considered much more important than ‘scientific proof’ in coming to a decision and an acceptance about whether something is hazardous or benificial to our health or not and whether a theory or a hypotheses is correct or not. Thereafter I describe the ‘scientific method’ used in fact in all these cases and describe the implications when this method is applied to the subject ‘RF radiation and health’.

This communication is based in part on an earlier article written in Dutch with Jan van Gils and Michiel Haas as co-authors:
Artikelen/8543/overheidsbeleid_gebaseerd_op_ontkenning_van_gezondheidsschade_door_emv .
30 july 2014

Lees verder in de categorie Artikelen | Terug naar homepage | Lees de introductie