It looks like Ferdinando has not read and/or understood the WHO document he has asked me to read. I would ask interested people to read it and find out for yourself. It thoroughly vindicates my contention regarding lack of evidence about harmful effects of radio frequency electromagnetic waves. It also advises concerned citizens to do exactly what I am doing in respect of the subject of this thread.
Here are the pertinent quotes that should make both of these facts clear: QUOTE 5 Be honest about the reputable scientific studies that initially gave rise to public concern. On the other hand, mention other equally reputable studies that have failed to demonstrate any adverse consequences. 6 Stress the importance of replicating any important study that has shown possible effects. In general, the public appreciates the fact that standards and guidelines can not be changed every time a single study suggests some ill effect. 7 Regarding concerns about cancer: emphasise that health advisory authorities and governments across the world are funding research, assembling expert groups and issuing statements on their assessment of the latest scientific information. 8 Explain that none of these statements, or any government, national or international health advisory body, is suggesting that EMF from power lines, phone towers, mobile phones, or broadcasting antennas, causes cancer. 9 Stress that to prove a negative (i. e. that "EMF does not cause cancer") is a logical impossibility. The best that can be done is to show that after a great deal of exhaustive research, no evidence can be found which implicates EMF in the induction or progression of cancer in humans. While much research has been completed, more is underway and will continue until health advisory groups are finally reassured and can advise the public of this. 10 In dealing with the public, it is useful to provide a summary of the information above, together with copies of relevant statements by various national and international health advisory authorities. UNQUOTE Regarding ethics, most concerned citizens I know believe that it is unethical for a physician to publicly offer solicited or unsolicited medical diagnosis to participants in an internet forum, to use medical conditions to publicly deride people with whom he/she disagrees, and to misinform people regarding medical conditions and public health issues. Cheers, Santosh --- On Sun, 2/6/11, Dr. Ferdinando dos Reis Falcão <drferdina...@hotmail.com> wrote: > > RESPONSE: I would advise Santosh that he himself learn and > understand ethics in the first place. Then review his > postings on public media > if they conform to WHO or ICMR > guidelines on ethics. In respect to his posts on just this > thread, WHO has > opined thus in similar situations: > > www.eurelectric.org/Download/Download.aspx?DocumentID=5915 > > Page7, > para 2.2 QUOTE: In the EMF debate it has often been > difficult to distinguish > whether the precautionary principle or prudent avoidance > was being discussed. > According to the WHO booklet: “prudent avoidance means > taking simple easily > achievable, low cost measures to minimise exposures even in > the absence of a > demonstrable risk. The precautionary principle requires > society to take prudent > action when there is sufficient scientific evidence (but > not necessarily > absolute proof) that inaction could lead to harm and where > action can be > justified on reasonable judgements of cost > effectiveness.” UNQUOTE. I suggest > Santosh read it in full. > > Secondly, it is > advisable to first read and understand any matter before > rushing in with > refutations. It only exposes one’s immaturity and > inability to listen and comprehend. > > I have the site of medical ethics here below. Could Santosh > point > out what was it that he found unethical in my previous > post? > > http://www.mciindia.org/RulesandRegulations/CodeofMedicalEthicsRegulations2002.aspx > . > > And by the way, my post was directed at Bosco; I threw the > cap at > him. Maybe I made a mistake of throwing a small size cap. > > Dr. Ferdinando dos Reis Falcão. >
