For other lists of Resolutions and Appeals you can visit Dr. Magda Havas’s site here
EH Trust has a list of Consensus Statements from doctors and scientists here
5G Space Appeal
The 5G Space Appeal was created to address the larger issue of increasing amounts of radiofrequency radiation from 5G space satellites, in addition to other RF ground sources that have not been tested for safety and with the potential to cause widespread injury to our natural world as well as to humans. Thousands of low orbiting 5G space satellites are planned, many of which are going forward with public private partnerships. As of April 2020, SpaceX has already launched about 360 of these satellites which are about the size of a flattened car. Tech giants have spent millions of dollars lobbying for airwaves. Space X will have 12,000 satellites, One Web will have over 2,000. While plans to develop and laugh these satellites and construction of cell towers continues unabated, reports are accumulating of bird disappearances and huge declines in insect populations that cannot be explained by pesticides.
The 5G Space Appeal can be found here and states, “We the undersigned scientists, doctors, environmental organizations and citizens, urgently call for a halt to the deployment of the 5G (fifth generation) wireless network, including 5G from space satellites. 5G will massively increase exposure to radio frequency (RF) radiation on top of the 2G, 3G and 4G networks for telecommunications already in place. RF radiation has been proven harmful for humans and the environment. The deployment of 5G constitutes an experiment on humanity and the environment that is defined as a crime under international law.”
The International Appeal to Stop 5G on Earth and Space has now been translated into 30 languages. It has been signed, thus far, by more than124, 000 individuals and more than 1,100 organizations from 203 countries and territories. Beekeepers were recently added due to the increasing scientific and direct observation that RFR and cell towers are injurious to bees. Those signing include:
- 3381 scientists
- 1,913 medical Doctors
- 5,848 engineers
- 3,525 psychologists,psychotherapists and social workers
- 3,052 nurses
- Environment and Wildlife Effects of Radiofrequency Radiation– Physicians for Safe Technology. https://mdsafetech.org/environmental-and-wildlife-effects/
- Birds Bees and Mankind: Destroying Nature by “electrosmog” by Urlich Warnke. https://www.naturalscience.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/kompetenzinitiative-ev_study_bees-birds-and-mankind_04-08_english.pdf
International Scientists Appeal for 5G Moratorium
Scientists Appeal for Moratorium on 5G Deployment. September 13, 2017. Over 180 scientists and physicians warm of potential health effects of 5G technology. http://www.5gappeal.eu
International EMF Scientist Appeal
International EMF Scientist Appeal is the most prominent initiative to date. (2015) Initiated in 2015 it has over 230 signatures from scientists in the field of EMR who are calling upon the United Nations and its sub-organizations, the WHO and UNEP, and all U.N. Member States, for greater health protection on EMF exposure. The appeal states, “We the undersigned, more than 180 scientists and doctors form 35 countries, recommends moratorium on the rollout of the fifth generation, 5G, for telecommunications until potential hazards for human health and the environment have been fully investigated by scientists independent from industry. 5G will substantially increase exposure to radio frequency electromagnetic fields (RF-EMF) on top of the 2G, 3G, 4G, etc, already in place. RF-EMF has been proven to be harmful to humans and the environment. The Appeal urgently calls upon them to “Address the global public health concerns related to exposure to cell phones, power lines, electrical appliances, wireless devices, wireless utility meters and wireless infrastructure in residential homes, schools, communities and businesses. International EMF Scientist Appeal
Monterey County Resolution Proclaiming September as Electromagnetic Sensitivities Awareness Month. (2017)
Small localities can have influence and spur change as well. Here is one from California. Monterey County BOS September Electrosensitivity Month Resolution, 9-19-17 signed
The Paris Appeal (2015)
In 2015, a group of experts in the field of environmental illness and electrosensitivity met in Brussels, Belgium, at the Royal Academy of Medicine, for the 5th Paris Appeal Congress titled “IDIOPATHIC ENVIRONMENTAL INTOLERANCE: WHAT ROLE FOR ELECTROMAGNETIC FIELDS AND CHEMICALS?” Scientific studies as well as observational research was presented and a robust discussion of a resolution took place. The two main issues were 1) EHS and MCS as functional impairments 2) Creation of WHO ICD diagnosis codes, used by physicians, that allow EHS to be fully considered as a medical issue.
The meeting was co-sponsored by the European Cancer and Environment Research institute. Led by Dr. Dominique Belpomme, the experts included Dr. Lennart Hardell from Sweden, Dr. David Carpenter and Cindy Sage of the BioIntiative Report, Dr. Ernesto Burgio from Italy, Dr. Igor Belyaev of the Soviet Union, Dr. Magda Havas from Canada, Dr. Olle Johansson from Sweden, Dr. David Gee from the U.K., Devra Davis, PhD, from the U.S., Dr. Michael Kundi from Austria, and others.
From this conference, the Paris Appeal Declaration was created. The Declaration can be read here International Scientific Declaration on Electromagnetic Hypersensitivity and Multiple Chemical Sensitivity 2015
The Paris Appeal states the following:
“We, physicians, acting in accordance with the Hippocratic Oath, we, scientists, acting in the name of scientific truth, we all, medical doctors and researchers working in different countries worldwide, hereby state in full independence of judgment,
- that a high and growing number of persons are suffering from EHS and MCS worldwide;
- that EHS and MCS affect women, men and children;
- that on the basis of the presently available peer reviewed scientific evidence of adverse health effects of electromagnetic fields(EMFs) and various chemicals, and on the basis of clinical and biological investigations of patients, EHS is associated with exposure to EMFs and MCS with chemical exposure;
- that many frequencies of the electromagnetic spectrum (radiofrequency and microwave frequencies, as well as low and extremely low frequencies) and multiple chemicals are involved in the occurrence of EHS and MCS respectively;
- that the trigger for illness can be acute high intensity exposure or chronic very low intensity exposure and that reversibility can be obtained with a natural environment with limited levels of anthropogenic EMFs and chemicals;
- that current case-control epidemiological studies and provocative studies aiming at reproducing EHS and/or MCS are scientifically difficult to construct and due to the present design flaws are in fact not suitable to prove or disprove causality; in particular because objective inclusion/exclusion criteria and endpoint evaluation criteria need to be more clearly defined; because responses to EMFs/chemicals are highly individual and depend on a variety of exposure parameters; and finally because test conditions are often reducing signal-to-noise ratio thereby obscuring evidence of a possible effect;
- that the nocebo effect is not a relevant nor a valid explanation when considering scientifically valuable blind provocation studies, since objective biological markers are detectable in patients as well as in animals;
- that new approaches are emerging for clinical and biological diagnosis and for monitoring of EHS and MCS including the use of reliable biomarkers;
- that EHS and MCS may be two faces of the same hypersensitivity-associated pathological condition and that this condition is causing serious consequences to health, professional and family life;
- finally that EHS and MCS ought therefore to be fully recognized by international and national institutions with responsibility for human health.
In view of our present scientific knowledge, we thereby stress all national and international bodies and institutions, more particularly the World Health Organization (WHO), to recognize EHS and MCS as true medical conditions which acting as sentinel diseases may create a major public health concern in years to come worldwide i.e. in all the countries implementing unrestricted use of electromagnetic field-based wireless technologies and marketed chemical substances.
Inaction is a cost to society and is not an option any more.
Although our scientific knowledge still remains to be completed, we unanimously acknowledge this serious hazard to public health, urgently requiring the recognition of this condition at all international levels, so that persons can benefit from adapted diagnostic tools, innovative treatments, and above all, that major primary prevention measures are adopted and prioritized, to face this worldwide pan-epidemic in perspective.
According to the present scientific knowledge and taking into account the precautionary principle, we unanimously recommend that true information in the use of chemicals and wireless technologies be made accessible to the public and precautionary regulation measures applying particularly to children and other vulnerable population subgroups be urgently taken as it should be the case regarding chemicals in the application of the European Registration Evaluation Authorization and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH) regulation.
To fulfill these objectives, we unanimously request that institutional committees designed for evaluating the risks of EMFs and chemicals be constituted by scientists acting in clear science- based independency and so exclude any experts with industry affiliation.
We therefore ask all national and international bodies and institutions to be aware of this critical environmental health issue and to take urgently their responsibility, more specifically WHO, updating its 2005 and 2014 consideration on EHS and recognizing EHS and MCS as part of the WHO International Classification of Diseases (ICD) as it is already particularly the case in Germany and Japan which classified MCS under a specific code. EHS and MCS should be represented by separate codes under the WHO ICD in order to increase awareness by the medical community, governments, politicians and the general public; to foster research on the population that acquires these pathological syndromes; and, to train medical doctors on effective medical prevention measures and treatments.”
EHS-MSC 5th Paris Appeal Congress Video: A video of part of the conference can be found here.
EHS-MSC 5th Paris Appeal Congress Power Point Presentations can be found here.
International Doctors Appeal 2012
The Freiburger Appeal: European physicians began to warn of the dangers of wireless radiation in 2002 with their first Freiburger Appeal signed by over 1,000 physicians who abide by the professional Code of Ethics that requires a physician to participate in maintaining the natural basis of life regarding human health. The appeal notes, “As physicians, we observe a clear increase in health symptoms when radio-frequency exposure levels increase with regard to distance and time—especially in the case of heavy cell phone use, and in the vicinity of DECT cordless phones, Wi-Fi, and cell towers—including problems falling asleep and staying asleep, chronic fatigue, headaches, migraine, vertigo, tinnitus, unhealthy blood pressure levels and arrhythmias, concentration and memory problems, learning and behavioral disorders, a more frequent incidence of ADHD among children. And numerous studies of independent scientists have now confirmed many of these observations made by physicians.” 10 years later physicians reaffirm there commitment to their patients and the planet with The International Doctors Appeal on Radiofrequency Radiation 2012
Parliamentary Assembly of Europe Resolution 1815 (2011)
Parliamentary Assembly of Europe Resolution 1815 (2011) The potential dangers of electromagnetic fields and their effect on the environment.
The mission of the Parliamentary Assembly of Europe is to preserve the environment, environmental health and prevent environmentally related health hazards. They have drafted a protocol concerning the rights of humans to a healthy environment.
In 2011 they drafted a resolution 1815 to address the potential dangers of electromagnetic fields including radiofrequency radiation. They note”Waiting for high levels of scientific and clinical proof before taking action to prevent well-known risks can lead to very high health and economic costs, as was the case with asbestos, leaded petrol and tobacco.”
The Parliamentary Assembly recommends the following:
- respect of the precautionary principle
- that the ALARA (as low as reasonably achievable) principle is applied,
- ake all reasonable measures to reduce exposure to electromagnetic fields, especially to radio frequencies from mobile phones, and particularly the exposure to children and young people who seem to be most at risk from head tumours;
- reconsider the scientific basis for the present standards on exposure to electromagnetic fields set by the International Commission on Non-Ionising Radiation Protection, which have serious limitations,
- put in place information and awareness-raising campaigns on the risks of potentially harmful long-term biological effects on the environment and on human health, especially targeting children, teenagers and young people of reproductive age
- pay particular attention to “electrosensitive” people who suffer from a syndrome of intolerance to electromagnetic fields and introduce special measures to protect them, including the creation of wave-free areas not covered by the wireless network;
- encourage research to develop telecommunication based on other technologies which are just as efficient but whose effects are less negative on the environment and health;
- introduce clear labelling indicating the presence of microwaves or electromagnetic fields, the transmitting power or the specific absorption rate (SAR) of the device and any health risks connected with its use;
- recommend the use of wired, fixed telephones at home or, failing that, models which do not permanently emit pulse waves;
- pay heed to and protect “early warning” scientists;
- formulate a human-rights-oriented definition of the precautionary and ALARA principles;
- increase public funding of independent research,
- create independent commissions for the allocation of public funds;
- make the transparency of lobby groups mandatory;
Seltun Scientific Statement 2009 (Norway)
Scientific Panel on Electromagnetic Field Health Risks: Consensus Points, Recommendations, and Rationales. (2010) Fragopolou A et al. Reviews on Environmental Health. Oct-Dec 2010;25(4):307-17. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21268443/
“In November, 2009, a scientific panel met in Seletun, Norway, for three days of intensive discussion on existing scientific evidence and public health implications of the unprecedented global exposures to artificial electromagnetic fields (EMF). EMF exposures (static to 300 GHz) result from the use of electric power and from wireless telecommunications technologies for voice and data transmission, energy, security, military and radar use in weather and transportation. The Scientific Panel recognizes that the body of evidence on EMF requires a new approach to protection of public health; the growth and development of the fetus, and of children; and argues for strong preventative actions. New, biologically-based public exposure standards are urgently needed to protect public health worldwide.”
The Seltun Scientific Statement 2009 https://electromagnetichealth.org/electromagnetic-health-blog/the-seletun-statement/
Porto Alegre 2009 (Brazil)
The Porto Alegre Resolution 2009: Co sponsored by the Brazilian Health Ministry and the International Commission for Electromagnetic Safety, May 18, 2009.
“ We agreed that the protection of health, well-being and the environment requires immediate adoption of the Precautionary Principle… for the establishment or modification of non-ionizing radiation exposure standards.
We recognize that, in Brazil as well as all over the world, where there has been an unprecedented explosion in the availability and use of non-ionizing electromagnetic fields for electrical and wireless communications technologies (mobile and cordless phones, WiFi and WIMAX networks, RFID, etc,), as well as major electrical grid and wireless broadband infrastructure changes, this assessment should inform risk management to take proper steps to protect the public from long- term, low-level exposure to extremely-low frequency as well as radiofrequency electromagnetic fields that have substantially increased in the ambient environment in recent years.
The exposure levels at which these effects have been observed are many times lower than the standards promulgated by the International Commission for Non-Ionizing radiation Protection (ICNIRP) and the IEEE’s International Committee on Electromagnetic Safety (ICES). These standards are obsolete and were derived from biological effects of short-term high intensity exposures that cause health effects by temperature elevation and nerve excitation discovered decades ago.
We are deeply concerned that current uses of non-ionizing radiation for mobile phones, wireless computers and other technologies place at risk the health of children and teens, pregnant women, seniors and others who are most vulnerable due to age or disability, including a health condition known as electromagnetic hypersensitivity.
We strongly recommend these precautionary practices:
- Children under the age of 16 should not use mobile phones and cordless phones, except for emergency calls;
- The licensing and/or use of Wi-Fi, WIMAX, or any other forms of wireless communications technology, indoors or outdoor, shall preferably not include siting or signal transmission in residences, schools, day-care centers, senior centers, hospitals or any other buildings where people spend considerable time;
- The licensing for siting and installation of infrastructure related to electrical power and wireless broadband telecommunications, particularly, cellular telephony, Wi-Fi and WIMAX, should only be approved after open public hearings are held and approval granted with full consideration given to the need to apply the Precautionary Principle. Sensitive areas should be avoided to protect vulnerable populations;
- Mankind shall be encouraged to continue to discover new means of harnessing non-ionizing electromagnetic energy, aiming at bringing benefits to society, through definition of new standards of human exposure, which are based on the biological realities of nature and not solely on the consideration of economic and technological needs.” Porto Alegre Resolution
International Association of Firefighters (IAAF) 2004 Resolution on Radiofrequency Radiation and Cell Towers
Position on the Health Effects from Radio Frequency/Microwave (RF/MW) Radiation in Fire Department Facilities from Base Stations for Antennas and Towers for the Conduction of Cell Phone Transmissions
After many fireman experienced health effects within a week of installation of first responder cell towers on or adjacent to their fire stations a study was conducted to determine if there was brain injury not related to toxic exposures. The resolution states, “neurological symptoms of six fire fighters who had been working for up to five years in stations with cell towers. Those symptoms included slowed reaction time, lack of focus, lack of impulse control, severe headaches, anesthesia-like sleep, sleep deprivation, depression, and tremors. Dr. Heuser used functional brain scans – SPECT scans – to assess any changes in the brains of the six fire fighters as compared to healthy brains of men of the same age.”
When this study revealed evidence of brain injury that by process of elimination was concluded to be from the radiofrequency radiation from the cell towers, the IAFF passed an IAFF Resolution on Cell Towrrs and Health Effects by over 80% of the firefighters. The resolution is based on both observation, scientific references and the need for firefighters to maintain optimal cognitive ability in their demanding job.
Firefighters oppose cell towers on the grounds of neurologic health effects and with political pressure firefighter stations have been given legal exemptions for cell towers in California AB 57
AB57- Firefighters have gotten an exemption to have cell towers on or adjacent to their facilites.This was codified in California’s 2015 legislation AB57 . CA AB57 (2015) Legiscan Text of Bill. ” Section 65964.1. (f) Due to the unique duties and infrastructure requirements for the swift and effective deployment of firefighters, this section does not apply to a collocation or siting application for a wireless
telecommunications facility where the project is proposed for placement on fire department facilities. “
SB649- They also received an exemption in California’s SB649 (2018), a bill which was vetoed by Governor Brown. SB 649 California (2017) Wireless Telecommunications Facilities – 65964.2. “(a) A small cell shall be a permitted use subject only to a permitting process adopted by a city or county pursuant to subdivision (b) if it satisfies the following requirements: ….(3) The small cell is not located on a fire department facility.”
The International Association of Firefighters (IAFF) Policy includes the following:
WHEREAS, the brain is the first organ to be affected by RF radiation and symptoms manifest in a multitude of neurological conditions including migraine headaches, extreme fatigue, disorientation, slowed reaction time, vertigo, vital memory loss and attention deficit amidst life threatening emergencies; and
WHEREAS, most of the firefighters who are experiencing symptoms can attribute the onset to the first week(s) these towers/antennas were activated; and
WHEREAS, RF radiation is emitted by these cellular antennas and RF radiation can penetrate every living cell, including plants, animals and humans;
For the safety of the citizens whom they are responsible to protect the firefighters are asking for state exemptions from cell tower placement on their facilities. In California, SB649 (2018 ), that was to streamline placement of cell towers on utility poles, the firefighters asked for and received a health exemption. The proposed SB649 Section 65964.2 reads “(3) The small cell is not located on a fire department facility.” https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billCompareClient.xhtml?bill_id=201720180SB649. The bill passed both the California House and the Senate but was vetoed by Governor Brown.
Benevento Resolution 2002 (Italy)
“More evidence has accumulated suggesting that there are adverse health effects from occupational and public exposures to electric, magnetic and electromagnetic fields, or EMF1, at current exposure levels. What is needed, but not yet realized, is a comprehensive, independent and transparent examination of the evidence pointing to this emerging, potential public health issue. Resources for such an assessment are grossly inadequate despite the explosive growth of technologies for wireless communications as well as the huge ongoing investment in power transmission. There is evidence that present sources of funding bias the analysis and interpretation of research findings towards rejection of evidence of possible public health risks.” Benevento Resolution
Salzburg Resolution 2000 (Austria)
Salzburg Resolution(Austria) on Mobile Telecommunications Base Stations: In 2000 the Salzburg, Austria Resolution was passed with recommendations for siting of telecommunications base stations. They stated “Presently the assessment of biological effects of exposures from base stations in the low-dose range is difficult but indispensable for protection of public health. There is at present evidence of no threshold for adverse health effects. It is recommended for existing and new base stations to exploit all technical possibilities to ensure exposure is as low as achievable (ALATA-principle). In addition the protocol should include considerations on existing sources of HF-EMF exposure. Salzburg Resolution 2000
Vienna Resolution (1998)
Vienna Resolution from Workshop on possible biological and health effects of RF electromagnetic fields, 1998: “The currently used national and international practiced strategy to determine limit values is extremely conservative, it urgently demands replacement by the precautionary principle, similar to strategies in many other sciences. The “Salzburg-model” showed, that neighbor involvement and a precautionary limit value of 1 mW/m2 EMF-flux-density can be achieved even for the sum of all GSM frequencies without technically compromising the quality of the GSM net.” Vienna EMF Resolution 1998