Mobile phone limit values seemingly scientifically legitimized

1. a self-referential system of risk communication has been created. The “independent” evaluation commissions that draw up expert opinions are made up of the same national and international experts who issue the protective regulations in government commissions. So they write their own expert opinions. The ICNIRP (International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection), which has no democratic legitimacy whatsoever, appoints its members according to conformist opinion and is itself intertwined with government commissions, including German ones, in terms of personnel, plays a central role here.

2. the studies that do not fit into the marketing concept are simply omitted from the expert reports or only part of the study results are communicated.

3. all studies that prove health risks are declared to be “poorly done” studies, even if they are published in recognized peer-reviewed journals. Studies that find no harmful effects, on the other hand, are generally emphasized as being well done.

4. language is used that obscures the study situation, casts doubt on results and contrasts them with industry-financed individual results.

Organized irresponsibility

The confusion caused by such expert opinions is countered by S. J. Starkey’s 20-page appendix (see Downloads), the “Supplementary Information”, a documentation of the study situation. Among other things, it lists all the studies that are omitted or interpreted in a distorted way in the AGNIR report.

This raises the question: Where does science stand? Why do scientists give themselves up to write reports for industry? The prevailing science is dominated by the interests of industry. Professor Christian Kreiß reveals in his book “Gekaufte Forschung. Science in the Service of Corporations” (2015), Professor Christian Kreiß reveals the alarming extent of this dominance. Sociologist Ulrich Beck calls this a state of organized irresponsibility. S. J. Starkey demystifies the alleged protective function of limit values. Their investigation removes the legitimization arguments that are intended to secure the marketing of mobile communications.