Mese: Dicembre 2015

Diabetes and ElectroMagnetic Fields: the evidence

[Vecchio articolo che tratta degli studi diretti dalla dott.ssa Magda Havas, professoressa di Scienze Ambientali in Canada, i quali non solo hanno mostrato una connessione tra l’aumento del Diabete e la esposizione ai CEM, ma anche l’efficacia dei filtri applicati sulle apparecchiature che emettono ELF nel’aiutare a  ridurre la sofferenza ed i sintomi dei diabetici.

Evidenziamo quanto segue:

“The connection between exposure to artificial electromagnetic radiation in high and low frequencies and the changing health of diabetics and MS sufferers is an established fact that has been demonstrated beyond doubt in numerous scientific studies.

“This correlation can be demonstrated not only scientifically but also informally by any diabetic by comparing their glycaemia levels during a few minutes spent in an irradiated zone and in one where the radiation level is low. Those who continue to dismiss this as “pseudo-science” are simply denying the facts.

“It has been observed that the number of children under 10 who suffer from type 1 diabetes is continually increasing and has in fact doubled in the last 15 years . . . 

“In conclusion: the effect of EMF irradiation on a diabetic can be measured directly and immediately. The reading in the personal record provides definite proof, and shows that a diabetic exposed to artificial HF microwave radiation has to increase their dose of insulin significantly…”]

Next-up Organization 11 07 2009

The connection between exposure to artificial electromagnetic radiation in high and low frequencies and the changing health of diabetics and MS sufferers is an established fact that has been demonstrated beyond doubt in numerous scientific studies [1] [2].

This correlation can be demonstrated not only scientifically but also informally by any diabetic by comparing their glycaemia levels during a few minutes spent in an irradiated zone and in one where the radiation level is low. Those who continue to dismiss this as “pseudo-science” are simply denying the facts.

It has been observed that the number of children under 10 who suffer from type 1 diabetes is continually increasing and has in fact doubled in the last 15 years.

Officially the health authorities do not know the reason for this increase.

Genetic factors play a part in type 1 diabetes, but there is no doubt that other factors are responsible, including the environment.

Type 1 diabetes, which is insulin dependant, is an auto-immune illness caused by the hyperactivity of the immune system.

In this pathology, the insulinsecreting cells of the pancreas (the beta cells of the islets of Langerhans) are destroyed. This means that the body can no longer control the level of sugar in the blood (glycaemia). If this is not treated it can lead to a whole series of imbalances that can be fatal.

Exposure to artificial HF microwave radiation during the night significantly reduces ciliary movement thus diminishing the supply of mucus to the pancreas and causing clogging.
Unfortunately this process has received little attention from scientists – why not?

At present the causes of type 1 diabetes have not been clearly defined. Doctors suppose that environmental factors could cause the auto-immune reaction in people who are genetically predisposed. The role of viruses in the onset of the disease has been cited several times.

Certain experts speculate that repeated exposure to different viruses causes the gradual destruction of insulin-producing cells. This may go unnoticed for many years since 90% of them have to be destroyed before the diabetes manifests.

Various tests are being carried out to validate this hypothesis while other scientists are studying different environmental factors that might affect the immune system and set off an auto-immune reaction. There is no doubt that diabetes is a serious condition that often requires several daily insulin injections and in the long run can affect organs such as the eyes, the nerves, the heart, etc.

Dr Magda Havas, professor of environmental sciences in Canada, has directed several studies that have not only shown a connection between the increase in diabetes and EMF exposure, but also the effectiveness of filters on ELF electrical equipment that help to reduce the suffering and the symptoms of diabetics.

“We can take a diabetic person and put them in an environment polluted by EMR and measure their sugar levels,” she explained in an interview with Toronto magazine.

“If we then put them in a clean environment, within half an hour their blood sugar level is invariably lower. When someone is exposed to EM radiation they become a real barometer.”

Scientific publication Informa Health Care: Magda Havas “Electromagnetic Hypersensitivity: Biological Effects of Dirty Electricity with Emphasis on Diabetes and Multiple Sclerosis”

All the diabetics living near relay antennas can easily prove the damaging effects of exposure to artificial HF microwave radiation by observing the spectacular increase in blood sugar levels when they are close to a source of radiation, as can be seen from the reading noted in their personal glycaemia record.
From this it is possible to determine the exact date when a diabetic has been exposed to radiation.
In conclusion: the effect of EMF irradiation on a diabetic can be measured directly and immediately. The reading in the personal record provides definite proof, and shows that a diabetic exposed to artificial HF microwave radiation has to increase their dose of insulin significantly.

Interference of artificial EMFs with the human metabolism

It is important to understand that the human body, which is totally
bio-electromagnetic, cannot function normally without certain conditions. The first of these is living in a safe environment free of
damaging factors.
Whatever the state of the immune system, an environment polluted
by artificial radiation makes it weaker. If it is already stressed the
body can no longer function normally and the endocrine system will
be seriously disrupted.
This creates The Microwave Syndrome.
Having a good immune system is the most important factor in maintaining health. When it is weak our health is endangered,
making us more vulnerable to disease and even to death.

Being in poor health is not hereditary, being in good health is not a matter of chance. Taking a new approach and taking charge of one’s health often means making changes in one’s life-style and in one’s environment, in particular taking simple steps to ward against the worst of environmental pollutions, artificial microwave radiation. Doing this boosts the immune system naturally and rapidly, producing positive results in one or two days for diabetics and for the Electro-HyperSensitive. Hence the urgent need to create White Zones and Refuge Zones for the EHS who desperately need to refresh themselves or simply to exist in peace, a right that is at present denied them.

[1] Scientific publications Bioelectromagnetics, “An Extremely Low Frequency Magnetic Field Attenuates Insulin Secretion From the Insulinoma Cell Line, RIN-m”
[2] Biomed Expert: Bioelectromagnetics, “Exposure to extremely low frequency magnetic fields affects insulin-secreting cells”.


Association of Exposure to Radio-Frequency Electromagnetic Field Radiation (RF-EMFR) Generated by Mobile Phone Base Stations with Glycated Hemoglobin (HbA1c) and Risk of Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus

[Articolo open access di recente pubblicazione, che riporta i dati di uno studio in seguito al quale si è concluso che l’esposizione alle alte frequenze generate da delle stazioni radio base (SRB) prese in esame è associata a livelli elevati di HbA1c ed a rischio di diabete di tipo 2.

In calce alla pagina potete trovare il link per scaricare la versione PDF completa dello studio.]

Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2015, 12(11), 14519-14528; doi:10.3390/ijerph121114519

Sultan Ayoub Meo 1,* , Yazeed Alsubaie 1, Zaid Almubarak 1, Hisham Almutawa 1, Yazeed AlQasemand Rana Muhammed Hasanato 2

1 Department of Physiology, College of Medicine, King Saud University, P.O. Box 2925, Riyadh 11461 Saudi Arabia
2 Department of Clinical Bio-Chemistry, College of Medicine, King Saud University, P.O. Box 2925, Riyadh 11461 Saudi Arabia


Article history
Received: 15 September 2015
Revised: 7 November 2015
Accepted: 11 November 2015
Published: 13 November 2015
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Health Care and Diabetes)

mobile phone radiation
mobile phone base station


Installation of mobile phone base stations in residential areas has initiated public debate about possible adverse effects on human health.
This study aimed to determine the association of exposure to radio frequency electromagnetic field radiation (RF-EMFR) generated by mobile phone base stations with glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) and occurrence of type 2 diabetes mellitus.
For this study, two different elementary schools (school-1 and school-2 )were selected. We recruited 159 students in total; 96 male students from school-1, with age range 12–16 years, and 63 male students with age range 12–17 years from school-2. Mobile phone base stations with towers existed about 200 m away from the school buildings. RF-EMFR was measured inside both schools. In school-1, RF-EMFR was 9.601 nW/cm2 at frequency of 925 MHz, and students had been exposed to RF-EMFR for a duration of 6 h daily, five days in a week. In school-2, RF-EMFR was 1.909 nW/cm2 at frequency of 925 MHz and students had been exposed for 6 h daily, five days in a week. 5–6 mL blood was collected from all the students and HbA1c was measured by using a Dimension Xpand Plus Integrated Chemistry System, Siemens. The mean HbA1c for the students who were exposed to high RF-EMFR was significantly higher (5.44 ± 0.22) than the mean HbA1c for the students who were exposed to low RF-EMFR (5.32 ± 0.34) (p = 0.007). Moreover, students who were exposed to high RF-EMFR generated by MPBS had a significantly higher risk of type 2 diabetes mellitus (p = 0.016) relative to their counterparts who were exposed to low RF-EMFR. It is concluded that exposure to high RF-EMFR generated by MPBS is associated with elevated levels of HbA1c and risk of type 2 diabetes mellitus.


Versione PDF completa dell’articolo scaricabile al seguente link:

RF and DM Type 2 – ijerph-12-14519


Elettrosmog, tribunale francese sancisce l’invalidità civile

«E’ fisiologico che interessi economici, l’inerzia del mondo accademico e i tanti passaggi burocratici ostacolino il fluire delle conoscenze scientifiche, anche quando ne va della salute pubblica. I nostri risultati su benzene, formaldeide e stirene, ad esempio sono stati recepiti dopo oltre 20 anni dalla pubblicazione dei dati. Tutti ostacoli che sono sempre esistiti, che vanno combattuti giornalmente, ma che non ci hanno mai fermato».
Come quando, nel 2011, la dottoressa, in qualità di esperta di Mtbe, un additivo cancerogeno della benzina verde, mise a tacere gli avvocati della Exxon Mobil Corporation, in seguito condannata a risarcire 160 famiglie di Jacksonville (Maryland, USA) con la cifra di 1,5 miliardi di dollari per aver inquinato dolosamente le falde acquifere di un quartiere residenziale attraverso una falla nella cisterna di un distributore di benzina.]

23 novembre, 2015 – “”, di Massimo Nardi


Storica sentenza a Tolosa: il giudice ha riconosciuto una pensione di invalidità per “ipersensibilità elettromagnetica” ad una donna di 39 anni, che percepirà, per i prossimi tre anni, 800 euro al mese. Degli effetti dei campi elettromagnetici sull’uomo ne abbiamo parlato con la Dottoressa Fiorella Belpoggi, Direttore del Centro di Ricerca sul Cancro “Cesare Maltoni” dell’Istituto Ramazzini di Bologna.

Il Tribunale di Tolosa ha riconosciuto una pensione di invalidità per “ipersensibilità elettromagnetica” ad una donna di 39 anni. E’ il primo caso giuridico in materia e rappresenterà indubbiamente un precedente da qui in avanti. Marine Richard, questo il nome della donna, si è vista riconoscere dal giudice un deficit funzionale dell’85% e un indennizzo di 800 euro al mese per tre anni, eventualmente rinnovabile. Lei, ex documentarista e drammaturga, ha dovuto abbandonare la società per rifugiarsi in una casa sui Pirenei, vivendo così isolata, lontano dal wi-fi e da tutti i campi elettromagnetici, causa primaria dei suoi continui mal di testa, formicolii, insonnia.
La nuova casa rappresenta una vera e propria “zona bianca”, un luogo vergine o quasi, esposto a limitati livelli elettromagnetici. Ricordiamo che numerose pubblicazioni scientifiche recenti hanno dimostrato che i campi elettromagnetici non ionizzanti (EMF) influiscono sugli organismi viventi a livelli ben inferiori a molte linee guida sia nazionali che internazionali. Gli EMF includono le apparecchiature che emettono radiazione a radiofrequenza (RFR), quali i cellulari, i telefoni cordless e le loro stazioni base, il wi-fi, le antenne di trasmissione, gli smart-meter e i monitor per neonati, oltre alle apparecchiature elettriche e alle infrastrutture utilizzate nel trasporto e consegna di elettricità che generano un campo elettromagnetico a frequenza estremamente bassa (ELF EMF).
Il caso Richard ci riporta all’Appello di 190 scienziati all’ONU, in cui si chiedeva, tra le altre cose, la creazione di zone bianche nella nostra società. Tra i firmatari c’è anche la Dottoressa Fiorella Belpoggi, Direttore Centro di Ricerca sul Cancro Cesare Maltoni dell’Istituto Ramazzini di Bologna, con cui abbiamo approfondito l’argomento.

Dottoressa Belpoggi, quali sono gli effetti dell’esposizione ai campi elettromagnetici non ionizzanti (EMF) sull’uomo?
«Gli effetti sono tanti e sono stati pubblicati oltre 21.000 articoli sull’argomento. Noi al Centro di Ricerca sul Cancro Cesare Maltoni dell’Istituto Ramazzini ci siamo occupati degli effetti cancerogeni dei campi elettromagnetici a diverse frequenze, da soli o in associazione con altri cancerogeni quali radiazioni ionizzanti e formaldeide. L’Agenzia Internazionale per la Ricerca sul Cancro (IARC) ha classificato I campi magnetici a bassa frequenza e a radiofrequenza come possibile cancerogeno umano (Gruppo 2B), di cui fanno parte 288 agenti».

E sugli animali? In particolare gli esperimenti fatti sui ratti dimostrano risultati inquietanti.
«Sono stati fatti molti studi, ma molti sono risultati limitati nel design sperimentale e nella loro predittività per l’uomo. L’Istituto Ramazzini ha deciso di effettuare un mega-esperimento sui campi elettromagnetici che fosse dirimente, sia per i cittadini che per le agenzie regolatorie, circa la cancerogenicità dei campi magnetici a bassa frequenza (50 Hz) e delle radiofrequenze (1,8 GHz), da sole o in associazione ad altri cancerogeni chimici o fisici. I primi dati che abbiamo pubblicato mostrano un aumento statisticamente significativo di tumori mammari dovuto all’associazione tra campi elettromagnetici e radiazioni a bassissime dosi (10 rad).

Nonostante la pubblicazione di molti dossier che dimostrano effetti negativi, dati alla mano, la comunità scientifica è ancora molto divisa. Perché secondo lei? Dobbiamo pensare che molti scienziati sono sul libro paga di governi e industrie?
«E’ fisiologico che interessi economici, l’inerzia del mondo accademico e i tanti passaggi burocratici ostacolino il fluire delle conoscenze scientifiche, anche quando ne va della salute pubblica. I nostri risultati su benzene, formaldeide e stirene, ad esempio sono stati recepiti dopo oltre 20 anni dalla pubblicazione dei dati. Tutti ostacoli che sono sempre esistiti, che vanno combattuti giornalmente, ma che non ci hanno mai fermato».
Come quando, nel 2011, la dottoressa, in qualità di esperta di Mtbe, un additivo cancerogeno della benzina verde, mise a tacere gli avvocati della Exxon Mobil Corporation, in seguito condannata a risarcire 160 famiglie di Jacksonville (Maryland, USA) con la cifra di 1,5 miliardi di dollari per aver inquinato dolosamente le falde acquifere di un quartiere residenziale attraverso una falla nella cisterna di un distributore di benzina.

In passato abbiamo parlato del libro di Martin Blank, “Overpowered: What science tells us about the dangers of cell phones and other wifi-age devices”, in cui l’autore analizza ed espone gli studi che correlano i cellulari e le alterazioni biologiche negli esseri viventi. E’ una tesi plausibile?
«Martin Blank, come Lennart Hardell, David Gee e tanti altri membri del Collegium Ramazzini (unaccademia indipendente con 180 membri da tutti il mondo) sono stati tra i primi ad evidenziare i rischi correlati ai campi magnetici. A partire dal Prof. Cesare Maltoni, che già 20 anni fa ne cominciò a denunciare i rischi».

Nell’appello all’Onu, in cui lei è anche firmataria, 190 scienziati chiedono l’abbassamento dei limiti quantitativi all’esposizione. In Italia, per esempio, la regolamentazione è stabilita dal Decreto Ministeriale n.381 del 10 settembre 1998, e dalla Legge quadro sulla protezione dalle esposizioni a campi elettrici, magnetici ed elettromagnetici”, datata 22 febbraio 2001. Ma, nella maggior parte dei casi, sono leggi disattese e mancano i controlli. Perchè? Politica assente?
«La lassità dei controlli nel nostro Paese non è certo un problema ascrivibile al solo ambito ambientale, ma parlando solo dei cattivi esempi si finisce per dimenticare e non valorizzare adeguatamente chi il proprio lavoro lo fa e bene. E nel nostro paese sono tanti».

Un punto su cui gli scienziati fanno leva è l’impegno da parte dei cittadini, sia come controllori sia come soggetti comportamentali. Cosa ne pensa? E’ l’unico modo che hanno per difendersi?
«La solidarietà tra uomini e donne consapevoli, siano essi cittadini, scienziati o politici, è la miglior difesa».

Lista agenti patogeni IARC

Risultato studio sui ratti


International EMF Scientist Appeal: Scientists call for Protection from Non-ionizing Electromagnetic Field Exposure / Appello Internazionale: Gli scienziati chiedono protezione dall’esposizione ai Campi Elettromagnetici non ionizzanti

[Appello internazionale di oltre 200 scienziati di 40 nazioni al Segretario Generale dell’ONU Ban Ki-moon, per chiedere protezione dalla esposizione ai Campi Elettromagnetici, soprattutto quelli in Alta Frequenza generati dalle Radiofrequenze/Microonde emesse dai dispositivi Wireless (vd. telefoni cellulari e cordless, Stazioni Radio Base della telefonia mobile, Wi-Fi, antenne radio-televisive, smart meter, baby monitor, ecc.), ma anche quelli in Frequenza Estremamente Bassa generati dalle apparecchiature elettriche e dagli apparati utilizzati per il trasporto della corrente elettrica (vd. tralicci dell’alta tensione).

La versione in Italiano segue quella in lingua originale.]

International EMF Scientist Appeal

To:    His Excellency Ban Ki-moon, Secretary-General of the United Nations; Honorable Dr. Margaret Chan, Director-General of the World Health Organization; Honorable Achim Steiner, Executive Director of the U.N. Environmental Programme; U.N. Member Nations

International Appeal

Scientists call for Protection from Non-ionizing Electromagnetic Field Exposure

We are scientists engaged in the study of biological and health effects of non-ionizing electromagnetic fields (EMF). Based upon peer-reviewed, published research, we have serious concerns regarding the ubiquitous and increasing exposure to EMF generated by electric and wireless devices. These include–but are not limited to–radiofrequency radiation (RFR) emitting devices, such as cellular and cordless phones and their base stations, Wi-Fi, broadcast antennas, smart meters, and baby monitors as well as electric devices and infra-structures used in the delivery of electricity that generate extremely-low frequency electromagnetic field (ELF EMF).

Scientific basis for our common concerns

Numerous recent scientific publications have shown that EMF affects living organisms at levels well below most international and national guidelines. Effects include increased cancer risk, cellular stress, increase in harmful free radicals, genetic damages, structural and functional changes of the reproductive system, learning and memory deficits, neurological disorders, and negative impacts on general well-being in humans. Damage goes well beyond the human race, as there is growing evidence of harmful effects to both plant and animal life.

These findings justify our appeal to the United Nations (UN) and, all member States in the world, to encourage the World Health Organization (WHO) to exert strong leadership in fostering the development of more protective EMF guidelines, encouraging precautionary measures, and educating the public about health risks, particularly risk to children and fetal development. By not taking action, the WHO is failing to fulfill its role as the preeminent international public health agency.

Inadequate non-ionizing EMF international guidelines

The various agencies setting safety standards have failed to impose sufficient guidelines to protect the general public, particularly children who are more vulnerable to the effects of EMF.

The International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP) established in 1998 the “Guidelines For Limiting Exposure To Time-Varying Electric, Magnetic, and Electromagnetic Fields (up to 300 GHz)”[1]. These guidelines are accepted by the WHO and numerous countries around the world. The WHO is calling for all nations to adopt the ICNIRP guidelines to encourage international harmonization of standards. In 2009, the ICNIRP released a statement saying that it was reaffirming its 1998 guidelines, as in their opinion, the scientific literature published since that time “has provided no evidence of any adverse effects below the basic restrictions and does not necessitate an immediate revision of its guidance on limiting exposure to high frequency electromagnetic fields[2]. ICNIRP continues to the present day to make these assertions, in spite of growing scientific evidence to the contrary. It is our opinion that, because the ICNIRP guidelines do not cover long-term exposure and low-intensity effects, they are insufficient to protect public health.

The WHO adopted the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) classification of extremely low frequency electromagnetic field (ELF EMF) in 2002[3] and radiofrequency radiation (RFR) in 2011[4]. This classification states that EMF is a possible human carcinogen (Group 2B). Despite both IARC findings, the WHO continues to maintain that there is insufficient evidence to justify lowering these quantitative exposure limits.

Since there is controversy about a rationale for setting standards to avoid adverse health effects, we recommend that the United Nations Environmental Programme (UNEP) convene and fund an independent multidisciplinary committee to explore the pros and cons of alternatives to current practices that could substantially lower human exposures to RF and ELF fields. The deliberations of this group should be conducted in a transparent and impartial way. Although it is essential that industry be involved and cooperate in this process, industry should not be allowed to bias its processes or conclusions. This group should provide their analysis to the UN and the WHO to guide precautionary action.

Collectively we also request that:

  1. children and pregnant women be protected;
  2. guidelines and regulatory standards be strengthened;
  3. manufacturers be encouraged to develop safer technology;
  4. utilities responsible for the generation, transmission, distribution, and monitoring of electricity maintain adequate power quality and ensure proper electrical wiring to minimize harmful ground current;
  5. the public be fully informed about the potential health risks from electromagnetic energy and taught harm reduction strategies;
  6. medical professionals be educated about the biological effects of electromagnetic energy and be provided training on treatment of patients with electromagnetic sensitivity;
  7. governments fund training and research on electromagnetic fields and health that is independent of industry and mandate industry cooperation with researchers;
  8. media disclose experts’ financial relationships with industry when citing their opinions regarding health and safety aspects of EMF-emitting technologies; and
  9. white-zones (radiation-free areas) be established.


Release date: May 11, 2015
This version’s date: October 15, 2015.

All inquiries, including those from qualified scientists who request that their name be added to the Appeal, may be made by contacting Elizabeth Kelley, M.A., Director,, at

Note: the signatories to this appeal have signed as individuals, giving their professional affiliations, but this does not necessarily mean that this represents the views of their employers or the professional organizations they are affiliated with.



Prof. Sinerik Ayrapetyan, Ph.D., UNESCO Chair – Life Sciences International Postgraduate Educational Center, Armenia


Dr. Priyanka Bandara, Ph.D., Independent Environmental Health Educator/Researcher, Australia; Advisor, Environmental Health Trust and Doctors for Safer Schools

Dr. Bruce Hocking, MD, MBBS, FAFOEM (RACP), FRACGP, FARPS, specialist in occupational medicine; Victoria, Australia

Dr. Gautam (Vini) Khurana, Ph.D., F.R.A.C.S., Director, C.N.S. Neurosurgery, Australia

Dr. Don Maisch, Ph.D., Australia

Dr. Elena Pirogova, Ph.D., Biomed Eng., B. Eng (Hon) Chem. Eng., Engineering & Health College; RMIT University, Australia

Dr.Mary Redmayne, Ph.D., Department of Epidemiology & Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Australia

Dr. Charles Teo, BM, BS, MBBS, Member of the Order of Australia,Director, Centre for Minimally Invasive Neurosurgery at Prince of Wales Hospital, NSW, Australia


Dr. Michael Kundi, MD, University of Vienna, Austria

Dr. Gerd Oberfeld, MD, Public Health Department, Salzburg Government, Austria

Dr. Bernhard Pollner, MD, Pollner Research, Austria

Prof. Dr. Hugo W. Rüdiger, MD, Austria


Dr. Amer Kamal, MD, Physiology Department, College of Medicine, Arabian Gulf University, Bahrain


Prof. Marie-Claire Cammaerts, Ph.D., Free University of Brussels, Faculty of Science, Brussels, Belgium


Vânia Araújo Condessa, MSc., Electrical Engineer, Belo Horizonte, Brazil

Prof. Dr. João Eduardo de Araujo, MD, University of Sao Paulo, Brazil

Dr.Francisco de Assis Ferreira Tejo, D. Sc., Universidade Federal de Campina Grande, Campina Grande, State of Paraíba, Brazil

Prof. Alvaro deSalles, Ph.D., Federal University of Rio Grande Del Sol, Brazil

Prof. Adilza Dode, Ph.D., MSc. Engineering Sciences, Minas Methodist University, Brazil

Dr.Daiana Condessa Dode, MD, Federal University of Medicine, Brazil

Michael Condessa Dode, Systems Analyst, MRE Engenharia Ltda, Belo Horizonte, Brazil

Prof. Orlando Furtado Vieira Filho, PhD, Cellular&Molecular Biology, Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil


Dr. Magda Havas, Ph.D., Environmental and Resource Studies, Centre for Health Studies, Trent University, Canada

Dr. Paul Héroux, Ph.D., Director, Occupational Health Program, McGill University; InvitroPlus Labs, Royal Victoria Hospital, McGill University, Canada

Dr. Tom Hutchinson, Ph.D., Professor Emeritus, Environmental and Resource Studies, Trent University, Canada

Prof. Ying Li, Ph.D., InVitroPlus Labs, Dept. of Surgery, Royal Victoria Hospital, McGill University, Canada

James McKay M.Sc, Ecologist, City of London; Planning Services, Environmental and Parks Planning, London, Canada

Dr. Anthony B. Miller, MD, FRCP, Professor Emeritus, Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Canada

Prof. Klaus-Peter Ossenkopp, Ph.D., Department of Psychology (Neuroscience), University of Western Ontario, Canada

Dr. Malcolm Paterson, Ph.D. Molecular Oncologist (ret.), British Columbia, Canada

Prof. Michael A. Persinger, Ph.D., Behavioural Neuroscience and Biomolecular Sciences, Laurentian University, Canada


Prof. Huai Chiang, Bioelectromagnetics Key Laboratory, Zhejiang University School of Medicine, China

Prof. Yuqing Duan, Ph.D., Food & Bioengineering, Jiangsu University, China

Dr.Kaijun Liu, Ph.D., Third Military Medical University, Chongqing, China

Prof. Xiaodong Liu, Director, Key Lab of Radiation Biology, Ministry of Health of China; Associate Dean, School of Public Health, Jilin University, China

Prof. Wenjun Sun, Ph.D., Bioelectromagnetics Key Lab, Zhejiang University School of Medicine, China

Prof. Minglian Wang, Ph.D., College of Life Science & Bioengineering, Beijing University of Technology, China

Prof. Qun Wang, Ph.D., College of Materials Science & Engineering, Beijing University of Technology, China

Prof. Haihiu Zhang, Ph.D., School of Food & BioEngineering, Jiangsu University, China

Prof. Jianbao Zhang, Associate Dean, Life Science and Technology School, Xi’an Jiaotong University, China

Prof. Hui-yan Zhao, Director of STSCRW, College of Plant Protection, Northwest A & F University, Yangling Shaanxi, China

Prof. J. Zhao, Department of Chest Surgery, Cancer Center of Guangzhou Medical University, Guangzhou, China


Ivancica Trosic, Ph.D., Institute for Medical Research and Occupational Health, Croatia


Prof. Dr. Abu Bakr Abdel Fatth El-Bediwi, Ph.D., Physics Dept., Faculty of Science, Mansoura University, Egypt

Prof. Dr. Emad Fawzy Eskander, Ph.D., Medical Division, Hormones Department, National Research Center, Egypt

Prof. Dr. Heba Salah El Din Aboul Ezz, Ph.D., Physiology, Zoology Department, Faculty of Science, Cairo University, Egypt

Prof. Dr. Nasr Radwan, Ph.D., Neurophysiology, Faculty of Science, Cairo University, Egypt


Dr. Hiie Hinrikus, Ph.D., D.Sc, Tallinn University of Technology, Estonia

Mr. Tarmo Koppel, Tallinn University of Technology, Estonia


Dr. Mikko Ahonen, Ph.D, University of Tampere, Finland

Dr. Marjukka Hagström, LL.M., M.Soc.Sc, Principal Researcher, Radio and EMC Laboratory, Finland

Prof. Dr. Osmo Hänninen, Ph.D., Dept. of Physiology, Faculty of Medicine,   University of Eastern Finland, Finland; Editor-In-Chief, Pathophysiology

Dariusz Leszczynski, Ph.D., Adjunct Professor of Biochemistry, University of Helsinki, Finland; Member of the IARC Working Group that classified cell phone radiation as possible carcinogen

Dr. Georgiy Ostroumov, Ph.D., (in the field of RF EMF), independent researcher, Finland


Prof. Dr. Dominique Belpomme, MD, MPH, Professor in Oncology, Paris V Descartes University, ECERI Executive Director

Dr. Pierre Le Ruz, Ph.D., Criirem, Le Mans, France


Prof. Besarion Partsvania, Ph.D., Head of Bio-cybernetics Department of Georgian Technical University, Georgia


Prof. Dr. Franz Adlkofer, MD, Chairman, Pandora Foundation, Germany

Prof. Dr. Hynek Burda, Ph.D., University of Duisburg-Essen,Germany

Dr. Horst Eger, MD, Electromagnetic Fields in Medicine, Association of Statutory Health Insurance Physicians, Bavaria, Germany

Dr. rer. nat. Lebrecht von Klitzing, Ph.D., Head, Institute of Environ. Physics; Ex-Head, Clinical Research, Fribourg Medical University, Germany

Dr.Sc. Florian M. König, Ph.D., Florian König Enterprises (FKE) GmbH, Munich, Germany

Dr. Ulrich Warnke, Ph.D., Bionik-Institut, University of Saarlandes, Germany


Dr.Adamantia F. Fragopoulou, M.Sc., Ph.D., Department of Cell Biology & Biophysics, Biology Faculty, University of Athens, Greece

Dr. Christos Georgiou, Ph.D., Biology Department, University of Patras, Greece

Prof. Emeritus Lukas H. Margaritis, Ph.D., Depts. Cell Biology, Radiobiology & Biophysics, Biology Faculty, Univ. of Athens, Greece

Dr. Aikaterini Skouroliakou, M.Sc., Ph.D., Department of Energy Technology Engineering, Technological Educational Institute of Athens, Greece

Dr. Stelios A Zinelis, MD, Hellenic Cancer Society-Kefalonia, Greece


Dr. Ceon Ramon, Ph.D., Affiliate Professor, University of Washington, USA; Professor, Reykjavik University, Iceland


Prof. Dr. B. D. Banerjee, Ph.D., Fmr. Head, Environmental Biochemistry & Molecular Biology Laboratory, Department of Biochemistry, University College of Medical Sciences, University of Delhi, India

Prof. Jitendra Behari, Ph.D., Ex-Dean, Jawaharlal Nehru University; presently, Emeritus Professor, Amity University, India

Prof. Dr. Madhukar Shivajirao Dama, Institute of Wildlife Veterinary Research, India

Associate Prof. Dr Amarjot Dhami, PhD., Lovely Professional University, Phagwara, Punjab, India

Dr. Kavindra K. Kesari, MBA, Ph.D., Resident Environmental Scientist, University of Eastern Finland, Finland; Assistant Professor, Jaipur National University, India

Prof. Girish Kumar, Ph.D., Electrical Engineering Department, Indian Institute of Technology, Bombay, India

Dr. Pabrita Mandal Ph.D.,Department of Physics, Indian Institute of Technology, Kanpur, India

Prof. Rashmi Mathur, Ph.D., Head, Department of Physiology, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India

Sivani Saravanamuttu, M.Sc., M.Phil., Dept. Advanced Zoology and Biotechnology, Loyola College, Chennai, India

Prof. N.N. Sareesh, Ph.D., Melaka Manipal Medical College, Manipal University, India

Dr. R.S. Sharma, MD, Sr. Deputy Director General, Scientist – G & Chief Coordinator – EMF Project, Indian Council of Medical Research, Dept. of Health Research, Ministry/Health and Family Welfare, Government of India, Ansari Nagar, New Delhi, India

Prof. Dr. Dorairaj Sudarsanam, M.Sc., M.Ed., Ph.D., Fellow – National Academy of Biological Sciences, Prof. of Zoology, Biotechnology & Bioinformatics, Dept. Advanced   Zoology & Biotechnology, Loyola College, Chennai, So India

Iran (Islamic Republic of)

Prof. Dr. Soheila Abdi, Ph.D., Physics, Islamic Azad University of Safadasht, Tehran, Iran

Prof. G.A. Jelodar, D.V.M., Ph.D., Physiology, School of Veterinary Medicine, Shiraz University, Iran

Prof. Hamid Mobasheri, Ph.D., Head, BRC; Head, Membrane Biophysics & Macromolecules Lab; Institute of Biochemistry and Biophysics, University of Tehran, Iran

Prof.  Seyed Mohammad Mahdavi, PhD., Dept of Biology, Science and Research, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran

Prof. S.M.J. Mortazavi, Ph.D., Head, Medical Physics & Engineering; Chair, NIER Protection Research Center, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Iran

Prof. Amirnader Emami Razavi, Ph.D., Clinical Biochem., National Tumor Bank, Cancer Institute, Tehran Univ. Medical Sciences, Iran

Dr. Masood Sepehrimanesh, Ph.D., ​Gastroenterohepatology Research Center, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Iran

Prof. Dr. Mohammad Shabani, Ph.D., Neurophysiology, Kerman Neuroscience Research Center, Iran


Michael Peleg, M.Sc., radio communications engineer and researcher, Technion – Israel Institute of Technology, Israel

Dr. Yael Stein, MD, Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Hadassah Medical Center, Israel

Dr. Danny Wolf, MD, Pediatrician and General Practitioner, Sherutey Briut Clalit, Shron Shomron district, Israel

Dr. Ronni Wolf, MD, Assoc. Clinical Professor, Head of Dermatology Unit, Kaplan Medical Center, Rehovot, Israel


Prof. Sergio Adamo, Ph.D., La Sapienza University, Rome, Italy

Prof. Fernanda Amicarelli,Ph.D., Applied Biology, Dept. of Health, Life and Environmental Sciences, University of L’Aquila, Italy

Dr. Pasquale Avino, Ph.D., INAIL Research Section, Rome, Italy

Dr. Fiorella Belpoggi, Ph.D., FIATP, Director, Cesare Maltoni Cancer Research Center, Ramazzini Institute, Italy

Prof. Emanuele Calabro, Department of Physics and Earth Sciences, University of Messina, Italy

Prof. Franco Cervellati, Ph.D., Department of Life Science and Biotechnology, Section of General Physiology, University of Ferrara, Italy

Vale Crocetta, Ph.D. Candidate, Biomolecular and Pharmaceuthical Sciences, “G. d’Annunzio” University of Chieti, Italy

Prof. Giovanni Di Bonaventura, PhD, School of Medicine, “G. d’Annunzio” University of Chieti-Pescara, Italia

Prof. Stefano Falone, Ph.D., Researcher in Applied Biology, Dept. of Health, Life and Environmental Sciences, University of L’Aquila, Italy

Prof. Dr. Speridione Garbisa, ret. Senior Scholar, Dept. Biomedical Sciences, University of Padova, Italy

Dr. Settimio Grimaldi, Ph.D., Associate Scientist, National Research Council, Italy

Prof. Livio Giuliani, Ph.D., Director of Research, Italian Health National Service, Rome-Florence-Bozen; Spokesman, ICEMS – International Commission for Electromagnetic Safety, Italy

Prof. Dr. Angelo Levis, MD, Dept. Medical Sciences, Padua University, Italy

Prof. Salvatore Magazù, Ph.D., Department of Physics and Science, Messina University, Italy

Dr. Fiorenzo Marinelli, Ph.D., Researcher, Molecular Genetic Institute of the National Research Council, Italy

Dr. Arianna Pompilio, PhD, Dept. Medical, Oral & Biotechnological Sciences. “G. D’Annunzio” University of Chieti-Pescara, Italy

Prof. Raoul Saggini, University G. D’Annunzio, Chieti, Italy

Dr. Morando Soffritti, MD, Honorary President, National Institute for the Study and Control of Cancer and Environmental Diseases B. Ramazzini, Bologna, Italy

Prof. Massimo Sperini, Ph.D., Center for Inter-University Research on Sustainable Development, Rome, Italy


Prof. Tsuyoshi Hondou, Ph.D., Graduate School of Science, Tohoku University, Japan

Prof. Hidetake Miyata, Ph.D., Department of Physics, Tohoku University, Japan


Prof. Mohammed S. H. Al Salameh, Department of Electrical Engineering, American University of Madaba, Madaba,


Dr. Timur Saliev, MD, Ph.D., Life Sciences, Nazarbayev University, Kazakhstan; Institute Medical Science/Technology, University of Dundee, UK

New Zealand

Dr. Bruce Rapley, BSc, MPhil, Ph.D., Principal Consulting Scientist, Atkinson & Rapley Consulting Ltd., New Zealand


Dr. Idowu Ayisat Obe, Department of Zoology, Faculty of Science, University of Lagos, Akoka, Lagos, Nigeria

Prof. Olatunde Michael Oni , Ph.D, Professor of Radiation & Health Physics, Ladoke Akintola University of Technology, Ogbomoso, Nigeria


Prof. Najam Siddiqi, MBBS, Ph.D., Human Structure, Oman Medical College, Oman


Dr. Pawel Bodera, Pharm. D., Department of Microwave Safety, Military Institute of Hygiene and Epidemiology, Poland

Prof. Dr. Stanislaw Szmigielski, MD, Ph.D., Military Institute of Hygiene and Epidemiology, Poland

Republic of China

Prof. Dr. Tsun-Jen Cheng, MD, Sc.D., National Taiwan University, Republic of China

Russian Federation

Prof. Vladimir N. Binhi, Ph.D., A.M.Prokhorov General Physics Institute of the Russian Academy of Sciences; M.V.Lomonosov, Moscow State University

Dr. Oleg Grigoriev, DSc., Ph.D., Deputy Chairman, The Russian National Committee on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection, Russian Federation

Prof. Yury Grigoryev, MD, Chairman, Russian National Committee on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection, Russian Federation

Dr. Anton Merkulov, Ph.D., Russian National Committee on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection, Moscow, Russian Federation

Dr. Maxim Trushin, PhD., Kazan Federal University, Russia


Dr. Snezana Raus Balind, Ph.D., Research Associate, Institute for Biological Research “Sinisa Stankovic”, Belgrade, Serbia

Prof. Danica Dimitrijevic, Ph.D., Vinca Institute of Nuclear Sciences, University of Belgrade, Serbia

Dr. Sladjana Spasic, Ph.D., Institute for Multidisciplinary Research, University of Belgrade, Serbia

Slovak Republic

Dr. Igor Belyaev, Ph.D., Dr.Sc., Cancer Research Institute, Slovak Academy of Science, Bratislava, Slovak Republic

South Korea (Republic of Korea)

Prof. Young Hwan Ahn, MD, Ph.D, Ajou University Medical School, South Korea (Republic of Korea)

Prof. Kwon-Seok Chae, Ph.D., Molecular-ElectroMagnetic Biology Lab, Kyungpook National University, South Korea (Republic of Korea)

Prof. Dr. Yoon-Myoung Gimm, Ph.D., School of Electronics and Electrical Engineering, Dankook University, South Korea (Republic of Korea)

Dr. Myung Chan Gye, Ph.D., Hanyang University, South Korea (Republic of Korea)

Dr. Mina Ha, MD, Dankook University, South Korea (Republic of Korea)

Prof. Seung-Cheol Hong, MD, Inje University, South Korea (Republic of Korea)

Prof. Dong Hyun Kim, Ph.D., Dept. of Otorhinolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Incheon St. Mary’s Hospital, Catholic University of Korea, South Korea (Republic of Korea)

Prof. Hak-Rim Kim, Dept.of Pharmacology, College of Medicine, Dankook University, South Korea (Republic of Korea)

Prof. Myeung Ju Kim, MD, Ph.D., Department of Anatomy, Dankook University College of Medicine, South Korea (Republic of Korea)

Prof. Jae Seon Lee, MD,  Department of Molecular Medicine, NHA University College of Medicine, Incheon 22212, South Korea

Prof. Yun-Sil Lee, Ph.D., Ewha Woman’s University, South Korea

Prof. Dr. Yoon-Won Kim, MD, Ph.D., Hallym University School of Medicine, South Korea (Republic of Korea)

Prof. Jung Keog Park, Ph.D., Life Science & Biotech; Dir., Research Instit.of Biotechnology, Dongguk University, South Korea (Republic of Korea)

Prof. Sungman Park, Ph.D., Institute of Medical Sciences, School of Medicine, Hallym University, South Korea (Republic of Korea)

Prof. Kiwon Song,Ph.D., Dept. of Chemistry, Yonsei University, South Korea (Republic of Korea)


Prof. Dr. Miguel Alcaraz, MD, Ph.D., Radiology and Physical Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, University of Murcia, Spain

Dr. Alfonso Balmori, Ph.D., Biologist, Consejería de Medio Ambiente, Junta de Castilla y León, Spain

Prof. J.L. Bardasano, D.Sc, University of Alcalá, Department of Medical Specialties, Madrid, Spain

Dr. Claudio Gómez-Perretta, MD, Ph.D., La Fe University Hospital, Valencia, Spain

Prof. Dr. Miguel López-Lázaro, PhD.,  Associate Professor, Department of Pharmacology, University of Seville, Spain

Prof. Dr. Elena Lopez Martin, Ph.D., Human Anatomy, Facultad de Medicina, Universidad de Santiago de Compostela, Spain

Prof. Enrique A. Navarro, Ph.D., Department of Applied Physics and Electromagnetics, University of Valencia, Spain


Dr. Michael Carlberg, MSc, Örebro University Hospital, Sweden

Dr. Lennart Hardell, MD, Ph.D., University Hospital, Örebro, Sweden

Prof. Olle Johansson, Ph.D., Experimental Dermatology Unit, Dept. of Neuroscience, Karolinska Institute, Sweden

Dr. Bertil R. Persson, Ph.D., MD, Lund University, Sweden

Senior Prof. Dr. Leif Salford, MD. Department of Neurosurgery, Director, Rausing Laboratory, Lund University, Sweden

Dr. Fredrik Söderqvist, Ph.D., Ctr. for Clinical Research, Uppsala University, Västerås, Sweden


Dr. nat. phil. Daniel Favre, Association Romande Alert, Switzerland

Taiwan (Republic of China)

Prof. Dr. Tsun-Jen Cheng, MD, Sc.D., National Taiwan University, Republic of China


Prof. Dr. Mehmet Zülküf Akdağ, Ph.D., Department of Biophysics, Medical School of Dicle University, Diyarbakir, Turkey

Prof. Dr. Halil Ibrahim Atasoy MD, Faculty of Medicine, Abant Izzet Baysal University, Turkey

Prof. Ayse G. Canseven (Kursun), Ph.D., Gazi University, Faculty of Medicine, Dept. of Biophysics, Turkey

Prof. Dr. Mustafa Salih Celik, Ph.D., Fmr. Head, Turkish Biophysical Society; Head, Biophysics Dept; Medical Faculty, Dicle Univ., Turkey

Prof. Dr. Suleyman Dasdag, Ph.D., Dept. of Biophysics, Medical School of Dicle University, Turkey

Prof. Omar Elmas, MD, Ph.D., Mugla Sitki Kocman University, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Physiology, Turkey

Prof. Dr. Ali H. Eriş, MD, faculty, Radiation Oncology Department,  BAV University Medical School, Turkey

Dr. Arzu Firlarer, M.Sc. Ph.D., Occupational Health & Safety Department, Baskent University, Turkey

Prof. Suleyman Kaplan, Ph.D., Deputy Chancellor; Dir. Health Services; Head, Dept. Histology & Embryology, Turkey

Dr. Mustafa Nazıroğlu, Ph.D., Biophysics Dept, Medical Faculty, Süleyman Demirel University, Isparta, Turkey

Prof. Dr. Ersan Odacı, MD, Ph.D., Karadeniz Technical University, Medical Faculty, Trabzon, Turkey

Dr. Elcin Ozgur, Ph.D., Biophysics Department, Faculty of Medicine, Gazi University, Turkey

Dr. Cemil Sert, Ph.D., Department of Biophysics of Medicine Faculty, Harran University, Turkey

Prof. Dr. Nesrin Seyhan, B.Sc., Ph.D., Medical Faculty of Gazi University; Chair, Biophysics Dept; Director GNRK Ctr.; Panel Mbr, NATO STO HFM; Scientific Secretariat Member, ICEMS; Advisory Committee Member, WHO EMF, Turkey

Dr. Bahriye Sirav (Aral), ABD, Gazi University Faculty of Medicine, Dept of Biophysics, Turkey


Dr. Oleg Banyra, MD, 2nd Municipal Polyclinic, St. Paraskeva Medical Centre, Ukraine

Prof. Victor Martynyuk, PhD., ECS “Institute of Biology”, Head of Biophysics Dept, Taras Shevchenko National University of Kiev, Ukraine

Prof. Igor Yakymenko, Ph.D., D.Sc., Instit. Experimental Pathology, Oncology & Radiobiology, National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine

United Kingdom

Mr. Roger Coghill, MA,C Biol, MI Biol, MA Environ Mgt; Member, Institute of Biology; Member, UK SAGE Committee on EMF precautions, UK

David Gee, Associate Fellow, Institute of Environment, Health and Societies, Brunel University, UK

Dr. Andrew Goldsworthy BSc Ph.D., Lecturer in Biology (retired), Imperial College, London, UK

Dr. Mae-Wan Ho, Ph.D., Institute of Science in Society, UK

Dr. Gerard J. Hyland, Institute of Biophysics. Neuss, Germany, UK

Dr. Isaac Jamieson, Ph.D., Biosustainable Design, UK

Prof. Michael J. O’Carroll, Emeritus Professor, former Pro Vice-Chancellor, Sunderland University, UK.

Alasdair Phillips, Electrical Engineer, UK

Dr. Syed Ghulam Sarwar Shah, M.Sc., Ph.D., Public Health Consultant, Honorary Research Fellow, Brunel University London, UK

Dr. Sarah Starkey, Ph.D., UK


Dr. Martin Blank, Ph.D., Columbia University, USA

Prof. Jim Burch, MS, Ph.D., Dept.of Epidemiology & Biostatistics, Arnold School of Public Health, University of South Carolina, USA

Prof. David O. Carpenter, MD, Director, Institute for Health and the Environment, University of New York at Albany, USA

Prof. Simona Carrubba, Ph.D., Biophysics, Daemen College, Women & Children’s Hospital of Buffalo Neurology Dept., USA

Dr. Zoreh Davanipour, D.V.M., Ph.D., Friends Research Institute, USA

Dr. Devra Davis, Ph.D., MPH, President, Environmental Health Trust; Fellow, American College of Epidemiology, USA

Prof. Om P. Gandhi, Ph.D., Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of Utah, USA

Prof. Beatrice Golomb, MD, Ph.D., University of California at San Diego School of Medicine, USA

Dr.Martha R. Herbert, MD, Ph.D., Harvard Medical School, Harvard University, USA

Dr. Donald Hillman, Ph.D., Professor Emeritus, Michigan State University, USA

Elizabeth Kelley, MA, Fmr. Managing Secretariat, ICEMS, Italy; Director,, USA

Dr. Henry Lai, Ph.D., University of Washington, USA

Blake Levitt, medical/science journalist, former New York Times contributor, EMF researcher and author, USA

Dr. Albert M. Manville, II, Ph.D. and C.W.B., Adj. Professor, Johns Hopkins University’s Krieger Graduate School of Arts & Sciences; Migratory Bird Management, U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, USA

Dr. Andrew Marino, J.D., Ph.D., Retired Professor, LSU Health Sciences Center, USA

Dr.Marko Markov, Ph.D., President, Research International, Buffalo, New York, USA

Jeffrey L. Marrongelle, DC, CCN, President/Managing Partner of BioEnergiMed LLC, USA

Dr. Samuel Milham, MD, MPH, USA

Lloyd Morgan, Environmental Health Trust, USA

Dr. Joel M. Moskowitz, Ph.D., School of Public Health, University of California, Berkeley, USA

Dr. Martin L. Pall,Ph.D., Professor Emeritus, Biochemistry & Basic Medical Sciences, Washington State University, USA

Dr. Jerry L. Phillips, Ph.D. University of Colorado, USA

Dr. William J. Rea, M.D., Environmental Health Center, Dallas, Texas, USA

Camilla Rees, CEO,; CEO, Wide Angle Health, LLC, USA

Prof. Narenda P. Singh, MD, University of Washington, USA

Prof. Eugene Sobel, Ph.D., Retired, School of Medicine, University of Southern California, USA

David Stetzer, Stetzer Electric, Inc., Blair, Wisconsin, USA

Dr. Lisa Tully, Ph.D., Energy Medicine Research Institute, Boulder, CO, USA

Concerned Scientists who have published peer reviewed papers in related fields

Michele Casciani, MA, Environmental Science, President/Chief Executive Officer, Salvator Mundi International Hospital, Rome, Italy
Enrico Corsetti, Engineer
, Research Director, Salvator Mundi International Hospital, Rome, Italy
Prof. Dr. Karl Hecht, MD
, former Director, Institute of Pathophysiology, Charité, Humboldt University, Berlin, Germany
Xin Li, PhD candidate MSc, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Stevens Institute of Technology, New Jersey, USA
Dr. Robin Maytum, PhD, Senior Lecturer in Biological Science, University of Bedfordshire, Luton, UK
Prof. Dr. Raúl A. Montenegro, Ph.D, Evolutionary Biology, National University of Cordoba; President, FUNAM; Recognitions: Scientific Investigation Award from University of Buenos Aires, UNEP ‘Global 500’ Award (Brussels, Belgium), the Nuclear Free Future Award (Salzburg, Austria), and Alternative Nobel Prize (Right Livelihood Award, Sweden), Argentina.
Georgiy Ostroumov, Ph.D. (in the field of RF EMF), independent researcher, Finland
Claudio Poggi, Electronics Engineer, Research Director, Sistemi s.r.l., (TN), Genoa, Italy
Dr. Hugo Schooneveld, PhD, Biologist, Neuroscientist, Adviser to the Dutch EHS Foundation, Netherlands




Appello Internazionale

A: Onorevole Mr, Ban Ki-moon, Segretario Generale delle Nazioni Unite; Onorevole Dr. Margaret Chan, Direttore Generale dell’Organizzazione Mondiale della Sanità; Stati membri delle Nazioni Unite.

Appello Internazionale:

Gli scienziati chiedono protezione dall’esposizione ai Campi Elettromagnetici non ionizzanti

Siamo scienziati impegnati nello studio degli effetti biologici e sanitari dei campi elettromagnetici non ionizzanti (EMF). Basandoci sulle ricerche pubblicate da riviste peer-reviwed, siamo seriamente preoccupati riguardo all’esposizione ubiquitaria e sempre più in aumento agli EMF generati da apparecchiature elettriche e wireless. Queste includono – ma non si limitano – le apparecchiature che emettono radiazione a radiofrequenza (RFR), quali i cellulari, i telefoni cordless e le loro stazioni base, il Wi-Fi, le antenne di trasmissione, gli smart-meter e i monitor per neonati oltre alle apparecchiature elettriche e alle infrastrutture utilizzate nel trasporto e consegna di elettricità che generano un campo elettromagnetico a frequenza estremamente bassa (ELF EMF).

Basi scientifiche per la nostra comune preoccupazione

Numerose pubblicazioni scientifiche recenti hanno mostrato che i EMF influiscono gli organismi viventi a livelli ben inferiori a molte linee guida sia nazionali che internazionali. Gli effetti includono l’aumentato rischio di tumori, lo stress cellulare, l’aumento di radicali liberi dannosi, danno genetico, modifiche strutturali e funzionali del sistema riproduttivo, deficit di apprendimento e di memoria, disturbi neurologici, e impatti negativi sul generale benessere degli esseri umani. Il danno va molto oltre la razza umana, visto che ci sono sempre più in aumento le prove degli effetti dannosi sia sulla vita delle piante che su quella degli animali. Queste scoperte giustificano il nostro appello alle Nazioni Unite (UN) e, a tutti gli Stati Membri nel mondo, per incoraggiare l’Organizzazione Mondiale della Sanità (OMS) ad esercitare una forte leadership nella promozione dello sviluppo di linee guida più protettive nei confronti dei EMF, incoraggiando misure precauzionali, ed educando il pubblico riguardo ai rischi per la salute, particolarmente al rischio per lo sviluppo dei bambini e del feto. Con un mancato intervento. L’OMS viene a mancare all’adempimento del suo ruolo quale preminente ente internazionale di salute pubblica.

Linee guida per gli EMF non ionizzanti inadeguate

I vari enti che fissano norme di sicurezza hanno fallito nell’imporre linee guida sufficienti a proteggere il pubblico in generale, e i bambini in modo particolare che sono più vulnerabili agli effetti degli EMF.

La Commissione Internazionale sulla Protezione dalle Radiazioni Non-Ionizzanti (ICNIRP) ha stabilito nel 1998 le “Linee guida per limitare l’esposizione ai campi elettromagnetici, magnetici, elettrici variabili nel tempo (fino a 300 GHZ)”.1 Queste linee guida sono state accettate dall’OMS e da molti paesi in tutto il mondo. L’OMS sta chiedendo a tutte le nazioni di adottare le linee guida dell’ICNIRP per incoraggiare l’armonizzazione internazionale degli standard. Nel 2009, l’ICNIRP ha rilasciato una dichiarazione dicendo che stava riaffermando le proprie linee guida del 1998, perché secondo la loro opinione, la letteratura scientifica pubblicata fino ad allora “non aveva fornito prova di alcun effetto negativo al di sotto dei limiti stabiliti e non si rendeva necessaria una revisione immediata della sua guida per la limitazione dell’esposizione ai campi elettromagnetici ad alta frequenza.2 La nostra opinione è che, poiché le linee guida ICNIRP non considerano l’esposizione a lungo termine e gli effetti a bassa intensità, esse sono insufficienti a proteggere la salute pubblica.

L’OMS ha adottato la classificazione dell’Agenzia Internazionale per la Ricerca sul Cancro (IARC) del campo elettromagnetico a frequenza estremamente bassa (ELF EMF) nel 2002 e della radiazione a radiofrequenza (RFR) nel 2011. Questa classificazione dichiara che l’EMF è un possibile cancerogeno umano (Gruppo 2B). Nonostante entrambe le scoperte IARC, l’OMS continua a sostenere che non vi sono prove sufficienti per giustificare l’abbassamento di tali limiti quantitativi di esposizione.

Poiché vi è polemica circa un fondamento logico per fissare norme per evitare gli effetti negativi per la salute, si raccomanda che il Programma Ambientale delle Nazioni Unite (UNEP) convochi e finanzi un comitato multidisciplinare indipendente che esplori i pro e i contro di pratiche alternative a quelle correnti che possano abbassare sostanzialmente l’esposizione umana alle RF e ai campi ELF. Le decisioni di questo gruppo dovrebbero essere prese in modo trasparente e imparziale. Nonostante sia essenziale che l’industria venga coinvolta e cooperi in questo processo, non dovrebbe essere permesso all’industria di influenzare il processo decisionale del gruppo o le conclusioni raggiunte. Questo gruppo dovrebbe fornire le proprie analisi alle Nazioni Unite e all’OMS per guidare l’azione precauzionale.

Collettivamente chiediamo anche che:

1. Vengano protetti i bambini e le donne incinta;
2. Si rinforzino le linee guida e gli standard regolamentari;
3. I produttori vengano incoraggiati a sviluppare tecnologia più sicura;
4. I servizi di utilità pubblica (società dell’energia elettrica, telefonia, etc.) responsabili della produzione, trasmissione, distribuzione, e monitoraggio del mantenimento dell’elettricità, mantengano di un’adeguata qualità della corrente elettrica e assicurino cavi elettrici appropriati per minimizzare i danni prodotti dalla corrente a terra;
5. Il pubblico venga pienamente informato riguardo ai rischi potenziali per la salute derivanti dall’energia elettromagnetica e vengano loro insegnate le strategie per la riduzione del danno;
6. Ai professionisti del campo medico si provveda un’educazione adeguata riguardo agli effetti biologici dell’energia elettromagnetica e sia provvista una formazione al trattamento di pazienti che soffrono di elettrosensibilità;
7. I governi finanzino formazione e ricerca sui campi elettromagnetici e la salute che sia indipendente dall’industria e impongano la cooperazione tra industria e ricercatori;
8. I mass media rivelino i rapporti tra gli esperti della finanza con l’industria quando citano le loro opinioni riguardo gli aspetti sulla salute e la sicurezza delle tecnologie di emissione di EMF; e
9. Vengano stabilite delle zone-bianche (aree libere da radiazioni).

Data proposta di sottomissione: 23 Ottobre 2014
Domande possono essere poste a Elizabeth Kelley, M.A., Directore,, a:

Le firme seguono secondo la nazione….
Nota: i firmatari hanno firmato come individui, dando la loro affiliazione professionale, ma questo non necessariamente significa che questo rappresenti la visione dei loro datori di lavoro o delle organizzazioni professionali alle quali sono affiliati.
Magda Havas, Ph.D, Trent University, Peterborough, Ontario Canada
Martin Blank, Ph.D, Columbia University, USA
Elizabeth Kelley, MA, Electromagnetic Safety Alliance, Arizona, USA
Henry Lai, Ph.D, University of Washington, USA
Joel M. Moskovitz, Ph.D, University of California at Berkeley, USA



PDF della versione in Italiano dell’Appello scaricabile al seguente link:

Reliable disease biomarkers characterizing and identifying electrohypersensitivity and multiple chemical sensitivity as two etiopathogenic aspects of a unique pathological disorder

[Importantissimo studio del prof. Belpomme, finalmente pubblicato ma non ancora open-source, che si spera metterà freno al mare di bugie dette sinora riguardo ad EHS e MCS, in quanto ha individuato dei marker di malattia e soprattutto ha messo questi ultimi rispettivamente in relazione con la esposizione ai CEM e alle sostanze chimiche. 
Ergo adesso sarà molto più difficile, per certune persone, AFFERMARE FALSAMENTE che non esistono prove delle suddette relazioni e che, nel caso della EHS, alla base di tutto ci sia l’EFFETTO NOCEBO.
Basta bugie! Perché i malati di EHS e MCS non possono continuare a pagare il fatto di avere delle malattie scomode!

La traduzione in Italiano dell’ABSTRACT segue l’ABSTRACT stesso.]

Rev Environ Health. 2015 Dec 1;30(4):251-71. doi: 10.1515/reveh-2015-0027.

Belpomme D, Campagnac C, Irigaray P.


Article history
Received: 11 September, 2015
Accepted: 2 November, 2015

Cerebral hypoperfusion
Limbic system
Multiple chemical sensitivity


Much of the controversy over the causes of electrohypersensitivity (EHS) and multiple chemical sensitività (MCS) lies in the absence of both recognized clinical criteria and objective biomarkers for widely accepted diagnosis.

Since 2009, we have prospectively investigated, clinically and biologically, 1216 consecutive EHS and/or MCS-self reporting cases, in an attempt to answer both questions. We report here our preliminary data, based on 727 evaluable of 839 enrolled cases: 521 (71.6%) were diagnosed with EHS, 52 (7.2%) with MCS, and 154 (21.2%) with both EHS and MCS.

Two out of three patients with EHS and/or MCS were female; mean age (years) was 47.

As inflammation appears to be a key process resulting from electromagnetic field (EMF) and/ or chemical effects on tissues, and histamine release is potentially a major mediator of inflammation, we systematically measured histamine in the blood of patients.
Near 40% had a increase in histaminemia (especially when both conditions were present), indicating a chronic inflammatory response can be detected in these patients. Oxidative stress is part of inflammation and is a key contributor to damage and response.

Nitrotyrosin, a marker of both peroxynitrite (ONOO°-) production and opening of the blood-brain barrier (BBB), was increased in 28% the cases. Protein S100B, another marker of BBB opening was increased in 15%.

Circulating autoantibodies against O-myelin were detected in 23%, indicating EHS and MCS may be associated with autoimmune response.

Confirming animal experiments showing the increase of Hsp27 and/or Hsp70 chaperone proteins under the influence of EMF, we found increate Hsp27 and/or Hsp70 in 33% of the patients.

As most patients reported chronic insomnia and fatigue, we determined the 24 h urine 6-hydroxymelatonin sulfate (6-OHMS)/creatinin ratio and found it was decreased ( < 0.8) in all investigated cases.

Finally, considering the self-reported symptoms of EHS and MCS, we serially measured the brain blood flow (BBF) in the temporal lobes of each case with pulsed cerebral ultrasound computed tomosphygmography.
Both disorders were associated with hypoperfusion in the capsulothalamic area, suggesting that the inflammatory process involve the limbic system and the thalamus.

Our data strongly suggest that EHS and MCS can be objectively characterized and routinely diagnosed by commercially available simple tests. Both disorders appear to involve inflammation-related hyper-histaminemia, oxidative stress, autoimmune response, capsulothalamic hypoperfusion and BBB opening, and a deficit in melatonin metabolic availability; suggesting a risk of chronic neurodegenerative disease. Finally the common co-occurrence of EHS and MCS strongly suggests a common pathological mechanism.




Gran parte della controversia sulle cause di Elettro-Ipersensibilità (EHS) e Sensibilità Chimica Multipla (MCS) sta nell’assenza sia di criteri clinici riconosciuti che di biomarcatori oggettivi per una diagnosi che sia largamente riconosciuta.

Sin dal 2009, abbiamo studiato prospetticamente, da un punto di vista clinico e biologico, 1216 casi auto-riferiti di EHS e/o  MCS in successione, nel tentativo di rispondere ad entrambe le domande.
Riportiamo qui i nostri dati preliminari, basati su 727 casi valutabili di 839 registrati: 521 (71,6%) sono stati diagnosticati con EHS, 52 (7,2%) con MCS, e 154 (21,2%) sia con EHS che MCS.

Due pazienti su tre con EHS e/o MCS erano femmine; l’età media era di 47 anni.

Poichè l’infiammazione sembra essere un processo chiave derivante dagli effetti di campi elettromagnetici (CEM) e/o agenti chimici sui tessuti, e il rilascio di istamina è potenzialmente un principale mediatore dell’infiammazione, abbiamo sistematicamente misurato l’istamina nel sangue di pazienti.
Intorno al 40% aveva un aumento della istaminemia (specialmente quando entrambe le condizioni erano presenti), indicando che una risposta infiammatoria cronica può essere rilevata in questi pazienti.

Lo stress ossidativo è parte dell’infiammazione ed è un elemento chiave nel contribuire a danni e risposta. La Nitrotirosina, un marker sia della produzione di perossinitrito (ONOO ° -) che di apertura della Barriera EmatoEncefalica (BEE ), era aumentata nel 28% dei casi.
La proteina S100B, un altro marcatore di apertura BEE, era aumentata nel 15% dei casi.

Nel 23% dei casi sono stati rilevati autoanticorpi circolanti contro la O-mielina, indicativi del fatto che EHS ed MCS possono essere associate ad una risposta autoimmune.

A conferma degli esperimenti sugli animali che mostravano un aumento delle chaperonine Hsp27 e/o Hsp70 sotto l’influenza dei CEM, abbiamo trovato Hsp27 e/o Hsp70 aumentate nel 33% dei pazienti.
Poichè la maggior parte dei pazienti hanno riferito insonnia e stanchezza cronica, abbiamo determinato il rapporto 6-idrossimelatonina solfato (6-OHMS)/creatinina sulla urina delle 24 ore e trovato che era ridotto (<0,8) in tutti i casi esaminati.

Infine, considerando i sintomi auto-riferiti di EHS e MCS, abbiamo misurato in modo seriale il flusso di sangue al cervello nei lobi temporali di ciascun caso con la tomosfigmografia computerizzata cerebrale a ultrasuoni pulsati.
Entrambi i disturbi sono stati associati ad ipoperfusione nell’area capsulotalamica, suggerendo che il processo infiammatorio coinvolge il sistema limbico e il talamo.

I nostri dati suggeriscono fortemente che EHS e MCS possono essere oggettivamente caratterizzate e routinariamente diagnosticate tramite semplici test disponibili in commercio.
Entrambi i disturbi sembrano coinvolgere iper-istaminemia in relazione con l’infiammazione, stress ossidativo, risposta autoimmune, ipoperfusione capsulotalamica e apertura della BEE, e un deficit nella disponibilità metabolica di melatonina; cosa che suggerisce un rischio di malattie neurodegenerative croniche.
Infine, la comune concomitanza di EHS e MCS, suggerisce fortemente un meccanismo patologico comune.


Mother claims wifi allergy killed her daughter and accuses school of failing to safeguard children

[==English version below==

Continua la copertura mediatica della triste vicenda di Jenny Fry, una ragazzina di 15 anni che si è tolta la vita a causa della estrema sofferenza provocatale dalla Elettrosensibilità, e questo ci porta a fare una serie di considerazioni.

La Elettrosensibilità, soprattutto nelle sue forme più gravi, è una malattia terribile che allo stato attuale non viene riconosciuta come tale e conseguentemente i malati non ricevono alcuna forma di assistenza ed aiuto.
A questo si aggiunge l’ignoranza dei più, che non si fanno scrupolo di arrecare danni ai malati con i loro comportamenti scriteriati.

E così succede che i vicini di casa lascino i loro router accesi 24 ore su 24 irradiando, oltre che il proprio appartamento, anche quelli attigui; o che in una scuola non vengano prese precauzioni per consentire ad un allievo Elettrosensibile di poter continuare a frequentare le lezioni.

Ma una cosa che sfugge a tantissima (troppa) gente, è che tutto questo non riguarda solo gli Elettrosensibili.
Le emissioni Wireless, costituite da microonde, danneggiano l’organismo anche di chi non è in grado di percepirne gli effetti dannosi.

E allora, a voler esaminare bene la questione, si configurano diversi tipi di reato quando qualcuno (vedi i casi di cui sopra del vicino di casa e della scuola – ma gli esempi potrebbero essere ben più numerosi) espone qualcun altro a ciò che l’OMS (tramite la IARC, Agenzia Internazionale per la Ricerca sul Cancro) ha dichiarato essere un possibile cancerogeno per l’uomo (per la verità attualmente pure sottostimato nei suoi effetti dannosi).
Getto pericoloso di cose e lesioni personali con l’aggravante della reiterazione sono i primi che vengono alla mente.
Poi, nel caso degli Elettrosensibili, si configura pure il disturbo delle occupazioni o del riposo delle persone (Art. 659 c.p.).

Ma in questo strano mondo non sono i disturbatori ad essere allontanati o puniti, bensì gli Elettrosensibili a dover abbandonare le proprie abitazioni per smettere di stare male.

Voi direte, ad esempio nel caso dei vicini, “ma loro hanno il diritto di poter usare quegli strumenti”. Liberissimi di farlo, purché non invadano le altrui abitazioni!
Quando quelle emissioni varcano i muri perimetrali ed invadono massicciamente le abitazioni intorno, allora le cose non vanno più bene!

Si dice che la libertà di un individuo finisca dove inizia quella di un altro, ma in materia di Campi Elettromagnetici pare che si possa essere dei banditi e la prevaricazione regni sovrana.

Non sarebbe il momento di iniziare a regolamentare tutto questo?

Tornando alla Elettrosensibilità, non è in realtà solo una allergia, bensì una sindrome immuno-tossica che compromette diverse funzioni dell’organismo, portando nei casi gravi a livelli estremi di compromissione fisica.
Per rendere l’idea, immaginatevi di essere celiaci e di essere costretti ad ingoiare ogni giorno ingenti quantità di glutine.

Pensate che sareste in grado di sopravvivere a lungo?

E proprio questo si chiede agli Elettrosensibili: di esporsi ogni giorno a ciò che per loro è veleno.

Ma siccome a nessuno piace l’idea di soffrire ed infine morire, i malati di Elettrosensibilità sono costretti a rinunciare a tutte le loro attività, riducendosi spesso a vivere nell’isolamento più totale.

Senza un lavoro non si campa e comunque non è bello essere di peso ai propri familiari (sempre che li sia abbia!) nonché rinunciare a tutto ciò che la vita offre, così capita che qualcuno non regga al peso delle condizioni di vita cui è costretto e faccia la fine di Jenny Fry.

E’ accettabile che ciò avvenga, tra l’altro a causa di qualcosa che sta danneggiando la salute DI TUTTI?

La Elettrosensibilità è certamente una malattia scomoda e c’è tutto l’interesse a fare in modo che non venga riconosciuta.

Ammettere la sua esistenza significherebbe ammettere che i Campi Elettromagnetici in Alta Frequenza sono in grado di arrecare danni all’organismo e questo causerebbe un danno economico enorme a chi fa business con la tecnologia Wireless.

Ed è così che queste persone, grazie alle loro enormi possibilità economiche, fanno di tutto per frenare la presa di coscienza della popolazione riguardo ai rischi derivanti dall’uso estremo ed irragionevole di ogni sorta di gadget Wireless.

..E intanto c’è gente che continua ad ammalarsi, soffrire ed anche morire come Jenny Fry (quando non muore di cancro al cervello, leucemia o linfoma, ovviamente), mentre altra arricchisce i propri conti in banca.

Riposa in pace, Jenny Fry, sei nei nostri cuori.

[EN] – Thanks to Dave Ashton of the Facebook page “UK Electrosensitives” for his precious help.

The media coverage of the sad story of Jenny Fry, a 15 year old girl who took her own life because of the extreme suffering caused by EHS, is ongoing, and there are some important issues raised by this case.

EHS, especially in its most severe form, is a terrible disease that is generally not recognized as such, and consequently those who are affected do not get any form of assistance and help.
In addition to this, there is the ignorance of many people, who have no qualms about damaging EHS people with their obnoxious behavior.

As a result, neighbours leave their radiating Wi-Fi routers switched on 24/7, affecting not only their own homes, but also their neighbours’ homes; and in schools, no precautions are taken to allow Electrosensitive students to go on attending classes.

But a lot of people (too many) are missing the fact that this ever-present radiation doesn’t just affect EHS people.
Wireless emissions , consisting of radio and microwaves, also damage the bodies of those who are not able to perceive the damaging effects.

On examination, a crime is committed when someone (see the cases mentioned above about the neighbor and the school – but there are many other examples) exposes another person to what the the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC – part of WHO) has classified as a possible carcinogen to humans, though a number of scientists say that this classification actually underestimates the harmful effects.
The discharge of a dangerous toxin, and the personal injury aggravated by repeated exposure, come to mind.
Also, in the case of EHS people, the crime of disturbing their occupation or the rest of the people arises (Art. 659 of the penal Code: according to the Italian law).

But, in this weird world, it’s not the troublemakers who are held accountable and punished, but the EHS people, who sometimes have to flee from their homes in order to protect themselves.

You might say, regarding the neighbours, “but they have the right to use these technologies.” Yes, they are free to do so, as long as their radiation does not invade other people’s homes!
When these emissions cross the perimeter walls and penetrate the nearby homes, then things are very wrong!

It’s said that one person’s freedom ends where another’s begins, but it seems that in the matter of electromagnetic radiation, it is possible to be a criminal with impunity, and prevarication reigns supreme.

Isn’t it time to start regulating all of this?

Returning to EHS, it’s not just an allergy, but is an immuno-toxic syndrome compromising several body functions, and leading, in the most severe cases, to extreme levels of physical impairment.

As an example, imagine being celiac and being forced to swallow huge amounts of gluten every day.

Do you think you would be able to survive for long?

And this is what is asked of EHS people: to expose themselves every day to what is poisonous to them.

But since no one likes the idea of suffering and in the end dying, EHS sufferers are forced to give up all their activities, often being also forced to live in the most total social isolation.

It’s not possible to go on living without a job, and it is not nice being a burden to the family (if there is one!), or renouncing to what life has to offer, so some who cannot bear the weight of living in such a state end up the way Jenny Fry did.

Can we accept this happening, because of something that is damaging the health of EVERYONE?

EHS is certainly an inconvenient disease, and there are many interests ranged against it to prevent it from being recognised as real.

Admitting its existence would mean admitting that High Frequency Electromagnetic Fields can harm the body, and this would cause huge economic damage to those whose business is linked to wireless technology.

And so these people, thanks to their huge potential for profit, do anything they can to curb the awareness of the population about the risks related to the extreme and unreasonable use of any sorts of wireless gadgets.

… And in the meantime there are people who continue to fall ill, suffer and die as Jenny Fry did – if they don’t die of brain cancer, leukemia or lymphoma, of course – while the people who are linked to wireless technologies enrich their bank accounts.

Rest in peace, Jenny Fry, you’re in our hearts.]

Jenny Fry, 15, was found in woodland near her home in Chadlington

30 November, 2015 – “The Telegraph” (UK), by Lucy Clarke-Billings

Jenny Fry had been suffering from the rare condition electro-hypersensitivity (EHS)

The inquest heard Jenny Fry had been suffering from the rare condition electro-hypersensitivity (EHS) Photo: © Facebook/Newsteam


A mother claims a Wi-Fi allergy killed her daughter and is accusing an Oxfordshire school of failing to safeguard children against the physical effects of wireless technology, an inquest has heard.

Jenny Fry, 15, was found in woodland near her home in Chadlington, on June 11 this year after texting a friend telling her she would not be going to school and intended to kill herself.

An inquest heard the teenager was intelligent and organised but that her life had been made a misery due to the prolonged effects of a condition known as electro-hypersensitivity (EHS).

Jenny’s mother, Debra Fry, said her daughter suffered with tiredness, headaches and bladder problems as a direct result of wireless internet connections at Chipping Norton School.

"Wi-Fi and children do not mix. Much more research needs to be done into this because I believe that Wi-Fi killed my daughter,"
Mrs Fry, Jenny's mother

Mrs Fry told Oxfordshire Coroners’ Court that Jenny had started showing signs of EHS in November 2012 and that the closer she was to a wireless router, the worse she felt.

“Jenny was getting ill and so was I” said Mrs Fry. “I did some research and found how dangerous Wi-Fi could be so I had it taken out of the house.

“Both Jenny and I were fine at home but Jenny continued to be ill at school in certain areas.

Jenny Fry had been suffering from the rare condition electro-hypersensitivity (EHS)Jenny Fry  Photo: © Facebook/Newsteam

“She was receiving lots of detentions, not for being disruptive in class or misbehaving, but often because she used to take herself out of the classroom to find another where she was able to work. She took her schoolwork seriously.

“I took lots of information into school to show the headteacher, Simon Duffy, but he said there was equally the same information available claiming Wi-Fi was safe.

“I also had a heated exchange with teachers telling them Jenny was allergic to Wi-Fi and that it made no sense making her take detentions in rooms that were making her ill.”

The World Health Organisation does not characterise EHS as a medical diagnosis but does recognise the symptoms.

Grandmother spends £4,000 WiFi-proofing home

In a 2005 report, WHO concluded: “EHS is characterized by a variety of non-specific symptoms that differ from individual to individual. The symptoms are certainly real and can vary widely in their severity.

“Whatever its cause, EHS can be a disabling problem for the affected individual. EHS has no clear diagnostic criteria and there is no scientific basis to link EHS symptoms to EMF exposure.

“Further, EHS is not a medical diagnosis, nor is it clear that it represents a single medical problem.”

"I remember saying to the school 'if someone had a peanut allergy you wouldn't make them work surrounded by peanuts',"
Mrs Fry, Jenny's mother

The inquest also heard Jenny previously spoke of suicidal thoughts in November 2014 following the death of close friend Tom Boomer.

The family is now campaigning to raise awareness of EHS and how wireless technology can affect health. They hope to get the use of wireless technology in schools changed.

Mrs Fry said: “Jenny died after making a cry for help. She texted her friend saying she was intending to die but told her where she was.

“If she had intended to kill herself she wouldn’t have said where she was. Unfortunately the friend did not have her phone with her so never saw the message in time.

“Jenny left letters for us where she said she couldn’t cope with her allergies from wifi anymore.

“She left them for us in case things went too far but I don’t believe she wanted to die.

“She wanted to do well at school and go to university but she knew Wi-Fi was having a bad effect on her studies.

“It got to the stage where she would hide herself away in unused classrooms in the school to work just so she could escape the Wi-Fi.

“In the classroom she had a seating plan but if she was near where the router was she would suffer headaches and feel very hot and bothered.

“As soon as Jenny walked away from a router she felt instantly better so she was almost hunting out areas of the school which weren’t covered by Wi-Fi just to do her work.

“I remember saying to the school ‘if someone had a peanut allergy you wouldn’t make them work surrounded by peanuts’.

“Just because Wi-Fi is new and all around us doesn’t mean it is safe. Wi-Fi and children do not mix. Much more research needs to be done into this because I believe that Wi-Fi killed my daughter.”

Simon Duffy, headteacher of Chipping Norton School, said: “The safety of our students whilst they are in school is paramount and Jenny’s safety at school was just as important as anyone else’s.

“Just like many other public spaces, Chipping Norton School does have Wi-Fi installed to enable use to operate effectively.

“The governors are content that the installed equipment complies with the relevant regulations and will ensure this continues to be the case.”

Oxfordshire coroner Darren Salter recorded a narrative verdict but did not include the factors relating to EHS as he said there were no medical notes to prove Jenny did suffer from it.

Is EHS real?

‘Radiowave sickness’ was first named and described in 1932, with most of the early cases being discovered in military personnel.

In 2011, an American woman told of how she was forced to abandon her family farm in the state of Iowa and moved to Green Bank, West Virginia – a tiny village of 143 residents in the heart of the Allegheny Mountains.

Green Bank is part of the US Radio Quiet Zone, where wireless is banned across 13,000 sq miles (33,000 sq km) to prevent transmissions interfering with a number of radio telescopes in the area.

Diane Schou said the community enables her to escape symptoms such as red, itching skin, blurred vision and headaches.

However the condition is yet to be identified by official health bodies as a medical diagnosis. At present, there are no accepted research criteria other than ‘self-reported symptoms’, and for clinicians there is no case definition or clinical practice guideline.

Dr Jill Meara, Director of Public Health England’s (PHE) Centre for Radiation, Chemical and Environmental Hazards, said: “Public Health England is aware that some people report that they have symptoms that are brought on or made worse by exposure to electro-magnetic fields (EMF), so-called electrical sensitivity.

“The overall scientific evidence does not support the suggestion that such exposure causes acute symptoms or that some people are able to detect radiofrequency fields. Nevertheless effective treatments need to be found for these symptoms.”

However in August this year, a French court ruled that electromagnetic hypersensitivity to mobile and wifi waves is a “serious handicap”, setting a legal precedent that lawyers say could lead to “thousands” of claims.

Although France does not recognise EHS as a medical problem, a court in Toulouse decided that claimant Marine Richard should be awarded £500 a month in disability allowance as she displayed “irrefutable clinical signs” of suffering from a syndrome linked to electromagnetic waves.

French courts had previously refused pay disability benefits to people who suffer from electromagnetic sensitivity, so after winning the case, Ms Richard said that her win was a ‘breakthrough’.