[Presentazionedatata, ma certamente utile da leggere.]
7 March 2015 – “betweenrockandhardplace.wordpress.com”
Science and Conflict of Interest in Bioelectromagnetics
Key-note presentation of Dariusz Leszczynski at the Jubiläums-Generalversammlungof the Swiss association Gigaherz, celebrating its 15th anniversary of the existence, Thalvil (near Zurich) on March 7, 2015.
25 March 2016 – “www.citizensforsafetechnology.org”
Letter from a teacher to BCTF Magazine, March 22, 2016
” . . . The committee also agreed that children in schools should be protected from unnecessary exposure to wireless technology, particularly when alternative technologies exist, and that the potential risks of exposure to RF fields are a serious public health issue that needs to be brought to the attention of Canadians so that they have the knowledge to use wireless devices responsibly, and are able to make decisions about the use of wireless devices in a manner that protects their health and the health of their families.
“Wouldn’t it be prudent at this point in time that Canada’s school boards who are entrusted with the care of young children implement the precautionary principle, heeding Dr. Magda Havas’ advice from page 16 of this report:
“Safety Code 6 should follow example by protecting the most sensitive people within our population.”
To read more about this, please click on the following link/Continua al seguente link:
Un proyecto limita los niveles máximos de radiación, y establece que en escuelas y hospitales las conexiones de internet deben ser alámbricas. Las instalaciones de antenas serán sometidas a consulta pública. Mercedinos en la trastienda
Por Claudio Fabián Guevara
En la Cámara de Diputados de la Nación se presentó un proyecto de ley para prevenir, reducir, controlar y sancionar la contaminación electromagnética. El texto se titula “Presupuestos mínimos de prevención y control de la contaminación electromagnética”, y fue presentado por la diputada Gabriela Troiano con el acompañamiento de Carlos Rubín, Diana Conti y Carolina Gailard. Cuenta con el respaldo de numerosas ONGs, organizaciones sindicales y barriales.
El proyecto se propone dar de un marco regulador a “las infraestructuras radioeléctricas con sistemas radiantes, antenas y todas aquellas instalaciones susceptibles de generar radiaciones electromagnéticas”, a los fines de “garantizar la protección de la salud pública”, considerando “tanto los efectos térmicos como biológicos”.
La iniciativa parlamentaria buscar dar respuesta a una demanda ciudadana extendida en el país y en el mundo, que ha provocado cientos de movilizaciones, acciones judiciales y peticiones a las autoridades contra el despliegue descontrolado de antenas de celulares, líneas de alta tensión y otros factores de contaminación electromagnética.
La ley parte de una sólida fundamentación científica sobre los efectos de la contaminación electromagnética en la salud y la conducta, y establece medidas y conceptos que la emparentan con otras iniciativas legales del mismo tenor en otros países.
Entre sus aspectos más importantes, el proyecto establece que los dispositivos irradiantes deben instalarse a una distancia mínima de 100 metros de áreas habitadas. Limita los niveles máximos de radiación a 10 µW/cm² (1000 microvatios) para señales de modulación analógica, y 0,1 µW/cm² para señales de modulación digital. También define como “exposición poblacional” a las situaciones en las que el público está expuesto a fuentes de radiación y no pueden ejercer control sobre esto, y como “inmisión”, a la radiación resultante de todas las fuentes de radiación electromagnéticas presentes en un lugar.
►Sin wifi en escuelas y hospitales
En los edificios destinados a usos sanitarios, educativos y culturales deben aplicarse medidas protectoras intensivas. Se prohíbe la instalación de infraestructuras susceptibles de emitir radiaciones o generar campos electromagnéticos sobre, dentro y a menos de cien (100) metros de espacios verdes, instituciones sanitarias, educativas, deportivas o culturales con acceso público. En establecimientos educativos y sanitarios solo podrán utilizarse conexiones alámbricas para las redes de datos y el acceso a Internet. En los hospitales no podrán utilizarse celulares en las áreas que las autoridades sanitarias consideren de mayor riesgo para la salud.
Es de carácter obligatorio para todos los fabricantes o importadores de equipamiento o cualquier producto o dispositivo susceptibles de producir emisiones electromagnéticas, la inclusión de las especificaciones técnicas dónde consten los niveles de radiación que generan. Asimismo, se debe incluir una etiqueta que advierta sobre las consecuencias nocivas para la salud humana que la exposición a dichos niveles pueden provocar.
Las empresas prestadoras de servicios de la comunicación deben en la comercialización de productos de telefonía móvil, incluir la entrega de accesorios o elementos atenuadores de la radiación hacia el cuerpo humano. Informar en el envase del producto sobre los riesgos que generan para la salud humana la utilización de teléfonos móviles, indicando específicamente la no recomendación de uso por parte de los niños.
►Instalación de antenas: consultapública
El articulado de la ley dispone que para autorizar la instalación de una antena, se deberá realizar una Evaluación de Impacto Ambiental (EIA), comunicar por carta certificada a los propietarios e inquilinos de todos los inmuebles que se encuentren comprendidos en un radio de 100 metros del emplazamiento, de las características técnicas del montaje y fecha de convocatoria a la audiencia pública, y la publicación de todos estos mismos antecedentes en periódico de alcance masivo en la localidad.
La autoridad de aplicación debe explicitar, en los fundamentos del acto administrativo que autorice la instalación, de qué manera ha tomado en cuenta las opiniones de la ciudadanía recogidas en la Audiencia Pública.
Todas las infraestructuras susceptibles de emitir radiaciones electromagnéticas no ionizantes, instaladas con anterioridad a la entrada en vigencia de la presente ley o a instalarse, deberán ser modificadas y utilizar la mejor tecnología disponible para estar acorde a los estándares establecidos en esta ley.
Asimismo, se crea el Registro de Fuentes de Emisión de Radiaciones Electromagnéticas No Ionizantes. Deberá contener información completa y actualizada, como mínimo, sobre aspectos técnicos de la red de antenas, y mantenerla actualizada en una página web.
También se crea el Consejo Consultivo de Contaminación Electromagnética, cuya función es proporcionar a la misma información científica, técnica y socio-económica y recomendar medidas de acción y control conducentes al cumplimiento de los objetivos de la presente ley. El Consejo estará integrado por científicos, expertos e investigadores de reconocida trayectoria sobre campos electromagnéticos y sus efectos sobre la salud.
La ley establece una serie de fuertes penalidades para empresas y particulares infractores. Será autoridad de aplicación de la presente ley el organismo que la Nación, las provincias y la ciudad de Buenos Aires determinen para actuar en el ámbito de cada jurisdicción.
►Mercedinos en la trastienda
Algunos mercedinos participaron en la trastienda del proyecto.
El abogado ambientalista Germán Sosena estuvo en la sesión consultiva del proyecto en Diputados, el 16 de marzo, y su trabajo fue reconocido. La encuesta sobre la salud de los vecinos en torno a los mástiles, realizada por Evangelina Vícoli y Claudio Guevara en 2012, fue requerida por los impulsores de la ley como un antecedente.
ONGs, organizaciones barriales y sindicatos, impulsando la iniciativa
Inicialmente presentado en los años 2011, 2012 y 2014 por los diputados Verónica Benas y Antonio Riestra, el proyecto ahora es representado por la diputada Gabriela Troiano y acompañado hasta el momento por los diputados Carlos Rubín, Diana Conti y Carolina Gailalrd. Fue revisado y reimpulsado por las ONGs Aletheia por la Vida, Nuevo Ambiente, Consumidores Responsables, Red de Barrios Irradiados, Vecinos Subestación Sobral Ezpeleta, Asamblea Rigolleau, CTA Autónoma Provincia de Buenos Aires, ATE Provincia de Buenos Aires, Vecinos Autoconvocados de Campo Quijano (Salta), Vecinos autoconvocados de Gral. Güemes (Salta), AVDA Asociación Vecinal en Defensa del Ambiente Gral. Cerri (Bahía Blanca), Sociedad de Fomento y Cultura de Villa Amaducci (Bahía Blanca), Sociedad de Fomento Ing. Pedro Pico, Ayuda-Le “Ayuda al leucémico” (Bahía Blanca), Vecinos Autoconvocados de Gral. Roca, Foro de la Niñez Bahía Blanca, FUNAM, Asociación Vecinal Dr. Enrique Finochietto Ciudad Autónoma, ONG Ambiente Comarca (Tornquist), UETTEL (Unión de empleados y técnicos de las telecomunicaciones) y Salud Ambiental en Acción Bahía Blanca, con el valiosísimo apoyo del SERPAJ Servicio de Paz y Justicia que preside el Dr. Adolfo Pérez Esquivel.
A project limits the maximum levels of radiation, and states that in schools and hospitals Internet connections should be wired. Antenna installations will be subject to public consultation.Mercedinos in the backroom
By Claudio Fabián Guevara
In the Chamber of Deputies a bill to prevent, reduce, control and sanction electromagnetic pollution it was presented.The text is titled “minimum prevention and control of electromagnetic pollution” and was presented by Deputy Gabriela Troiano with accompanying Carlos Rubin, Diana Conti and Gailard Carolina.It has the support of many NGOs, trade unions and neighborhood organizations.
The project aims to provide a regulatory framework to “radio infrastructure with radiant systems, antennas and all installations capable of generating electromagnetic radiation” in order to “ensure the protection of public health” considering “both thermal effects as biological “.
The parliamentary initiative seek to respond to widespread public demand in the country and the world, which has caused hundreds of protests, lawsuits and petitions to the authorities against uncontrolled deployment of cellular antennas, power lines and other factors electromagnetic pollution.
The law part of a solid scientific basis on the effects of electromagnetic pollution on health and behavior, and establishes measures and concepts that emparentan with other legal initiatives along the same lines in other countries.
Among its most important aspects, the bill provides that the irradiating devices should be installed at a minimum distance of 100 meters from inhabited areas.Limits the maximum radiation levels 10 μW / cm² (1000 microwatts) for analog modulation, and 0.1 μW / cm² for digital modulation signals.Also defined as “population exposure” to situations in which the public is exposed to radiation sources and can not exercise control over this, and as “immission” radiation resulting from all sources of electromagnetic radiation present in a place .
►Sin wifi in schools and hospitals
In buildings used for health, education and cultural uses intensive protective measures should be applied.installing infrastructure capable of emitting radiation or generate electromagnetic fields within and less than one hundred (100) meters of green spaces, health, educational, sporting and cultural institutions with public access is prohibited.In education and health facilities only wired connections to data networks and Internet access may be used.In hospitals phones may not be used in areas that health authorities have higher health risk.
It is mandatory for all manufacturers or importers of equipment or any product or device capable of producing electromagnetic emissions, including technical specifications stating where radiation levels they generate.It should also include a label warning on harmful to human health that exposure to such levels can cause consequences.
The companies providing communication services must in marketing mobile phone products, including delivery of accessories or attenuators elements of radiation to the human body.Report on the packaging of the product on the risks posed to human health, the use of mobile phones, specifically indicating no recommendation for use by children.
►Instalación antenna: public consultation
The articles of the law provides that to authorize the installation of an antenna, you must perform an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA), communicate by letter to the owners and tenants of all properties that are within a radius of 100 meters site, the technical characteristics of the assembly and call date of the public hearing and the publication of these same background in newspaper massive scope in the locality.
The enforcement authority must explain, in the grounds of the administrative act authorizing installation, how has taken into account the views of citizens gathered at the Public Hearing.
All infrastructures likely to emit non-ionizing electromagnetic radiation, installed prior to the effective date of this Act or installed, should be modified and use the best available technology to be consistent with the standards established in this law.
In addition, the Registry of Emission Sources Non-Ionizing Electromagnetic Radiation is created.It must contain complete and updated information at least on technical aspects of the antenna array, and keep it updated on a website.
the Advisory Council on Electromagnetic Pollution is also created, whose function is to provide the same scientific, technical and socio-economic and recommend action and control measures conducive to the achievement of the objectives of this law.The Council shall be composed of scientists, experts and renowned researchers on electromagnetic fields and their effects on health.
The law establishes a series of strong penalties for companies and individuals offenders.It will be the enforcement authority of this Act the agency’s Office, the provinces and the city of Buenos Aires determined to act in the area of each jurisdiction.
►Mercedinos in the backroom
Some mercedinos participated in the backroom of the project.
Environmental lawyer Germán Sosena was in the consultative meeting of the project in the Lower House, on March 16, and his work was recognized.The survey on the health of neighbors around the masts, by Evangelina vicoli and Claudio Guevara in 2012, was required by the promoters of the law as a precedent.
NGOs, neighborhood organizations and unions, promoting the initiative
Initially presented in the years 2011, 2012 and 2014 by deputies Veronica Benas and Antonio Riestra, the project is now represented by Deputy Gabriela Troiano and accompanied so far by Mr Carlos Rubin, Diana Conti and Gailalrd Carolina.It was revised and reinvigorated by Aletheia NGOs for Life, New Environment, Responsible Consumers, Network Neighborhood Irradiated Neighbors Substation Sobral Ezpeleta, Rigolleau Assembly, CTA Autonomous Province of Buenos Aires, ATE Province of Buenos Aires, Neighbors Autoconvocados Campo Quijano ( Salta), autoconvocados Neighborhood Gral. Guemes (Salta), AVDA Association Vecinal in Defense of General Environment. Cerri (Bahia Blanca), Development Society and Culture Villa Amaducci (Bahia Blanca), Sociedad de Fomento Ing. Pedro Pico, Help ‘I “Help the leukemic” (Bahia Blanca), Self-Organized Neighbors of Gral. Roca, Children’s Forum Bahia Blanca, FUNAM, Dr. Enrique Finochietto Neighborhood Association Autonomous City, District Environment NGO (Tornquist), UETTEL (Union of employees and telecommunications technicians) and Environmental Health in Action Bahia Blanca, with the invaluable support of SERPAJ Service Peace and Justice headed by Dr. Adolfo Perez Esquivel.
5 April 2016 – “www.camexpo.co.uk”, by Dr Erica Mallery Blythe
We are currently witnessing the largest change to the Earth’s electromagnetic environment that has ever taken place in human history. Given that basic household electricity, which was the first anthropogenic (man-made) electromagnetic field (EMF), only became prolific during the twentieth century, artificial EMF has barely seen one generation from cradle to grave. The use of higher frequency microwave devices such as mobile telephony, Wi-Fi and smart meters, have suddenly become commonplace, despite serious health concerns. Could this be the greatest public health disaster in human history?
Devices that emit RF radiation
Common devices that emit RF radiation include (but not exclusively) DECT phones , Wi-Fi routers, wireless computers, E-readers and VDUs, Bluetooth, security systems, fluorescent lighting, Smart meters, RFID tags and systems and a range of novel gadgets including wearables that appear in shops on a daily basis .
The International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP) guidelines devised in 1998 are currently used in the UK as a ‘safe limit’ for exposure, even thought they were not designed for this purpose. They protect against thermally induced (tissue heating) damage but not the ‘non-thermal’ effects which occur at much lower intensities. Many thousands of papers now demonstrate serious biological effects at non-thermal levels, orders of magnitude below current ICNIRP guidelines, but despite this, appropriate ‘biologically based’ protective safety limits have not been provided in the UK. In addition to neglecting non-thermal effects, these guidelines also fail to take into account cumulative effects, modulation effects, interference effects, reflection/conduction effects, frequency and intensity windows, chemical synergy and other important characteristics now known to enhance biological disruption. Many other countries have chosen to adopt more biologically protective safety limits far below that of the UK.
In 2011, the World Health Organisation (WHO) and the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) classified radio/microwave frequency radiation as Group 2B ‘Possibly carcinogenic to humans’. Worryingly, some of those on the IARC panel and other scientists have since publicly voiced their belief that the category should have been Group 2A “Probably carcinogenic to humans”, or Group 1 ‘Carcinogenic to humans’. Acoustic neuroma and glioma (a rapidly progressive fatal brain cancer) satisfy the Hill criteria for causality from radiofrequency (RF) exposure.
Cancer risk, however is just one of many potential health concerns such as infertility, ADHD, insomnia, headaches, palpitations, dementia etc. Some sensitive individuals are experiencing constellations of symptoms that they may develop rapidly on exposure to any of the different devices. These individuals have a condition referred to as Electromagnetic Hypersensitivity or EHS.
Electromagnetic Hypersensitivity (EHS)
What should you know about EHS to help your clients protect themselves?
Electromagnetic hypersensitivity is a multisystemic condition, characterised by an awareness and/or adverse symptomatology in response to even extremely weak (orders of magnitude below current safety levels) electromagnetic fields of multiple types (in terms of frequency, intensity and waveforms). All life is electrosensitive to some degree and thresholds for conscious perception vary depending on age, gender and individual physiology. Testing on both the general population and those with EHS clearly reveals that there is a far broader range of EMF sensitivity than previously assumed and sub groups of extremely hypersensitive subjects exist.
Common symptoms include:
Headaches, dizziness, sleep disturbance, sensory up-regulation, palpitations, unusual pain in multiple sites, visual disturbance, auditory disturbance (especially tinnitus), membrane sensitivity, muscle twitching, dermatological complaints, parasthesias, hyperactivity /fatigue (depends on adrenal status/stage of EHS), restless leg syndrome, memory/concentration disturbance and anxiety. Psychiatric symptoms such as anxiety and depression are likely to be secondary to the physiological effects and socioeconomic sequelae but are also known symptoms of EMF exposure in their own right. Interestingly, with good avoidance, symptoms tend to disappear in the reverse order that they accumulated.
Characterised by multiple sensory up-regulation:
Up-regulation of all senses is commonly noted in persons with EHS, i.e. Photophobia and/or Scotopic sensitivity syndrome (visual sensitivity), Hyperacusis (hearing sensitivity), Hyperosmia (heightened sense of smell), Hypergeusia (heightened taste sensitivity), Hyperesthesia/Photosensitivity (heightened skin sensitivity) and Multiple Chemical Sensitivity (MCS) is associated. Thunderstorm prodrome and moon cycle (especially in women) exacerbation of symptoms is also noted.
Characterised by increasing trigger susceptibility and irreversibility:
If EHS is unmanaged and there is general deterioration, there will be reaction to an increasingly broad range of frequencies at increasingly low intensities, i.e. the number of devices complained of triggering symptoms will increaseand symptomatic distances will decrease. Tendency towards Multiple Chemical Sensitivity will also increase and irreversibility will become more likely.
Diagnosis, management and prognosis of EHS:
Diagnosis should be currently based on history (specifically classical symptom constellations in response to classical triggers and disappearance of those symptoms in ‘clean’ EMF environments. Duration of illness, symptomatic distances and range of trigger frequencies all help to quantify severity and stage of EHS. Gravity of measures taken to avoid triggers is also indicative. Biomarkers have also been published and in 2015 EUROPAEM updated medical guidelines were released. In many cases EHS is self-diagnosed due to lack of appropriate awareness and training of current medical doctors.
Management should rely on avoidance of EMF, chemical and other nitric oxide cycle triggers and general health optimisation. Additional therapies such as immunotherapy, chelation, neural re-programming and many other adjuncts are also offered by some specialists. Medical guidelines have been drawn up for doctors to diagnose and manage the condition physiologically with advice to urgently reduce exposure, and this advice is echoed by many other organizations. Additionally, research has shown avoidance can be the only reliable form of management to improve symptoms. Cognitive Behavioural Therapy (CBT) may be useful in helping to control sympathetic nervous system induced exacerbation of symptoms, but should never be used to encourage EHS persons to continue EMF exposures which provoke their symptoms. To do so is unethical and dangerous to health. If implemented, it must be used in conjunction with avoidance for best health outcome. It is not a substitute.
Exposure reduction strategies:
Here are 3 simple steps to reduce your exposure to RF:
Do not use mobile phones except for emergencies. Store them in flight mode and switched off, which disables the RF emissions. If you must use them, a speaker phone or an air tube headset will allow you to keep the phone at a greater distance from your body, reducing the intensity of radiation that your body is exposed to.
Swap your wireless internet for Ethernet, using wired connections. Remember that because RF is emitted from both the computer and router, you’ll need to disable the RF emissions of your router, which are different for each make and model, as well as your computer. You can reduce the RF from your computer by disabling the wireless card in the device manager, or by using flight mode if available.
Swap your cordless landline for a corded speaker phone. If you must have wireless capability, get an ECO DECT phone. Get one with a good quality speaker phone, so that it can be used away from your brain, and use ECO mode. This will ensure that at least the RF is only emitted when the phone is in use, rather than continuously, as with other models.
Generally avoid EMF where possible, and create the greatest distance you are able to, where avoidance is difficult. Sleeping areas are the most important areas to make EMF healthy by reducing as many artificial EMFs as possible, including the lower frequency fields from simple household wiring. Electromagnetic fields that cannot be deactivated can sometimes be shielded so that the energy does not propagate into living spaces, and meters can be purchased or rented that will allow the user to measure the frequency and intensity of fields in different areas.
Prognosis for EHS is variable, but full reversal of the condition is unlikely. Full remission of all adverse symptoms is possible even in very severe cases if the individual is moved into a very pure environment (both chemically and electromagnetically), but symptoms will return if re-exposed, at a time interval dependent on duration of ‘good health’ and level of environmental hostility. Certain history characteristics indicate poorer prognosis.
How common is EHS?
Estimates for the number of people with EHS vary widely, but several countries report around 4-10%. In the UK this corresponds to approximately 2.5 to 6.3 million (which is more than the number of UK wheelchair users). This is likely to be a gross underestimation given that figures are based on the number of people who have made the connection between their symptoms and EMF exposure. The number of people who have mild EHS symptoms, but have not linked them yet to exposure would be far higher. Given the ubiquity of exposures now in all environments, it can be very difficult for people to notice the association, as the opportunity for an EMF free area is rare.
Extrapolated figures suggest that 50% of the population may be affected by 2017, and it remains possible that EHS could manifest in all members of the population with enough exposure.
Many children are currently affected, but undiagnosed. Children are likely to be more vulnerable to developing EHS since their exposure is higher and outcomes may be worse given their developing systems and greater time for latent effects. Brain tumours have overtaken leukaemia as a leading cause of death in children (both are associated with EMF exposure). There is evidence that genetic damage caused by exposure within current guidelines may not only damage the exposed child, but could also damage their offspring.
In addition to those with EHS and children, other vulnerable groups include the elderly, pregnant women, foetuses and those with co-morbidity (concurrent) illnesses.
Is EHS a recognised condition?
Yes. EHS has been demonstrated in a published, peer-reviewed, double blind research study, as an ‘environmentally inducible bona-fide neurological syndrome’. The WHO states that ‘symptoms are certainly real’ and ‘in some cases can be disabling’. Increasingly, professional bodies are recognising this as a serious, physical condition.
Whilst the nocebo effect (physical symptoms induced by fear) has been suggested, there is a great deal of evidence now to invalidate this theory, including evidence of EHS type symptomatology in studies involving small children, foetuses and animals (where media cultivated perceptions are impossible).
The condition is recognized as a functional impairment under the disability act in Sweden, USA and Canada. Cases are now being won for long term disability pensions or compensation in Australia, France, Spain, UK and United States.
Some EHS individuals are forced to live in extreme isolation, poverty and poor health, unable to access life sustaining public amenities. A duty of care to them exists under the Care Act 2014.
There are clear human rights issues, particularly for vulnerable groups, but in essence for any individual who wishes not to be exposed in their home, place of work or public building and yet is being given no choice.
The application of the Precautionary Principle has been called for by many professional organisations in this case, in order to protect health and right to life first and foremost, but secondly to protect the economy given the already apparent escalating costs to this country of ill health and loss of revenue.
In order to protect vulnerable groups there has been increased call for designated, legally protected white zones (no or low EMF areas). The longer that we take to respond, the greater the health cost, but also the greater the cost to industry (in terms of compensation) will be. This is only moving in one direction, and if human health is protected and industry is redirected towards healthier technology, overall true progress is made for all.
Dr Mallery-Blythe will be talking about Electromagnetic Radiation and its effects on health, at CNM (College of Naturopathic Medicine) in London on 7th June. Details from www.naturopathy-uk.com
About the author
Dr Erica Mallery-Blythe is an experienced medical doctor with an interest in Electromagnetic Radiation. She is the founder of PHIRE (Physicians’ Health Initiative for Radiation and Environment), which provides useful free online resources at www.phiremedical.org. You may wish to join or support PHIRE for:
Medical doctors and associate specialists interested in EMF Health
Supporting vulnerable groups including children and those with EHS
Expanding current British research team
Annually sharing new research
Maintaining global academic connections
Constructing English / UK medical best practice guidelines
Opening constructive dialogue with PHE/DOH
CNM provides Diploma Courses, Postgraduate Courses and Short Courses in a range of natural therapies. There are CNM colleges across the UK, Ireland, and in Finland, South Africa and the USA. www.naturopathy-uk.com
[Quando viene effettuato uno studio di qualità sulla EHS, l’EFFETTO NOCEBO viene SMENTITO.
Da notare quanto segue:
“Overall, symptoms appear before subjects start questioning effects of EMF on their health, which is not consistent with the hypothesis that IEI-EMF originates from nocebo responses to perceived EMF exposure.”
“In generale, i sintomi compaiono prima che soggetti inizino ad interrogarsi sugli effetti dei campi elettromagnetici sulla loro salute, il che non è coerente con l’ipotesi che la Intolleranza Ambientale Idiopatica attribuita ai Campi Elettromagnetici origini da risposte nocebo dovute a percepita esposizione ai campi elettromagnetici.”
Questo è un aspetto fondamentale, che da solo basterebbe a smentire chiunque parli di EFFETTO NOCEBO, facendo venire meno la necessità di produrre studi in merito alla questione.
E dalle storie di Elettrosensibilità che abbiamo raccolto, emerge chiaramente che i malati hanno iniziato ad avere problemi ben prima di scoprire a cosa fossero dovuti.
Non si tratta di sintomi, ma di segni (!), ergo di qualcosa di obiettivo e tangibile: disturbi endocrinologici con manifestazioni cliniche importanti, rash cutanei di varia natura, disturbi urinari gravi con infezioni urinarie ricorrenti, disturbi gastrointestinali, …, che hanno portato a trafile cliniche lunghissime datanti molti anni (in alcuni casi anche 20 o più!), prima che i diretti interessati iniziassero ad avere il sospetto della causa!
La scoperta della causa li ha poi portati ad allontanarsi dalle fonti di CEM che loro avevano individuato come responsabili e, cosa ancora più degna di nota, l’allontanamento ha portato ad una TOTALE regressione delle patologie di cui sopra, le quali immancabilmente si ripresentavano in caso di successive esposizioni.
Francamente, una somatizzazione può anche dissimulare una patologia neurologica, ma non è in grado di causare infezioni urinarie come la cistite emorragica, oppure ileo paralitico, eruzioni cutanee eritemato-papulose su base endocrinologica od allergica, tricodistrofia e caduta dei capelli, ecc.]
Idiopathic Environmental Intolerance attributed to Electromagnetic Fields (IEI-EMF) is a condition in which symptoms are attributed to electromagnetic field (EMF) exposure. As electro-hypersensitive (EHS) people have repeatedly been observed, during provocation trials, to report symptoms following perceived rather than actual exposure, the hypothesis has been put forward that IEI-EMF originates from psychological mechanisms, especially nocebo responses. This paper examines this hypothesis, using data from a qualitative study aimed at understanding how EHS people come to regard themselves as such. Forty self-diagnosed EHS people were interviewed. A typified model of their attribution process was then elaborated, inductively, from their narratives. This model is linear and composed of seven stages: (1) onset of symptoms; (2) failure to find a solution; (3) discovery of EHS; (4) gathering of information about EHS; (5) implicit appearance of conviction; (6) experimentation; (7) conscious acceptance of conviction. Overall, symptoms appear before subjects start questioning effects of EMF on their health, which is not consistent with the hypothesis that IEI-EMF originates from nocebo responses to perceived EMF exposure. However, such responses might occur at the sixth stage of the process, potentially reinforcing the attribution. It remains possible that some cases of IEI-EMF originate from other psychological mechanisms.