For distribution
July 1, 2011. Health Canada seems to be confused about the recent WHO/IARC classification of radio frequency electromagnetic fields as a “possible human carcinogen.”
Ms Beth Pieterson (Director General, Environment and Radiation Health Services Directorate, Health Canada) stated, “We don’t know the long-term effects of Wi-Fi . . . From all evidence we have today, there is no evidence based on international experts telling us that there is a cause for concern from exposure to Wi-Fi.”
But didn’t we just hear from the World Health Organization that radio frequency radiation is a “possible human carcinogen”?
“Health Canada says the classification doesn’t include wireless.” But the Chair of the Committee that reviewed the research disagrees with Ms Pieterson.
Dr. Johnathan Samet stated in an email to reporter Kristy Kirkup, “The classification covers radio frequency electromagnetic radiation, which would include wireless.”
This classification includes not only mobile phones but Wi-Fi, wireless baby monitors, wireless smart meters, cell phone antennas, broadcast antennas, radar antennas, weather antennas, satellite communications, and other wireless devices that use radio frequency radiation to transmit information.
Saying that, “radio frequency radiation is possibly harmful but Wi-Fi is safe,” is like saying, “lead in paint is harmful but lead in gasoline is safe,” or that, “mercury in fish is harmful but mercury in dental amalgam is safe!”
http://www.magdahavas.com/2011/07/02/health-canada-confused-about-who-classification/
To read more:
http://www.magdahavas.com/2011/07/02/health-canada-confused-about-who-classification/
Wi-Fi dispute continues to raise concerns
By Kristy Kirkup, Parliamentary Bureau
OTTAWA – A top American researcher has sharply criticized Health Canada for ruling out the potential human health risks linked to radiation from wireless Internet signals.
Dr. David Carpenter, a renowned scientist who studies the impact of environmental contaminants, says Health Canada is acting irresponsibly as a government agency.
“It is disgusting,” said Carpenter. “We have absolutely no evidence it is safe.”
Canada’s federal health agency maintains Wi-Fi is safe.
“We don’t know the long-term effects of Wi-Fi,” said Health Canada’s top radiation researcher Beth Pieterson. “From all evidence we have today, there is no evidence based on international experts telling us that there is a cause for concern from exposure to Wi-Fi.”
Some members of the world’s scientific community say there is no way to know wireless Internet will not have an impact down the road.
Health Canada and the World Health Organization also seem to have a different understanding of a new radio frequency classification.
Wireless Internet — Wi-Fi — may be carcinogenic according to the World Health Organization but Health Canada says the specialized United Nations agency didn’t make this finding.
The WHO’s International Agency for Research on Cancer reclassified radio frequency emitted by “wireless devices” as a possible carcinogenic to humans in May. The study was based on a cell phone use but the IARC committee chair confirms the research can be applied to wireless Internet.
“The classification covers radio frequency electromagnetic radiation, which would include wireless,” said Dr. Johnathan Samet said in an e-mail.
Health Canada says the classification doesn’t include wireless.
“The studies that made the conclusion to go to the 2B possible classification were all with heavy cell phone users that use cell phones against their head and the strength of radio frequency in that situation is many, many times higher than anybody is exposed to from Wi-Fi or any of the other wireless technologies,” said Pieterson. “You cannot make that direct link at all. Certainly in IARC’s announcements, they didn’t make that link at all either.
Canada’s federal health agency claims it supports decisions made by the committee.
“Canada certainly supports WHO recommendations and the findings of IARC,” Pieterson said.
Twitter: @kkirkup
http://www.thepeterboroughexaminer.com/ArticleDisplay.aspx?e=3191901
Health Canada disputes claims that wireless Internet may cause cancer
Peterborough Wi-Fi critic Magda Havas disagrees with Health Canada’s assurances
By KRISTY KIRKUP, QMI Agency
OTTAWA – Health Canada disputes claims by the World Health Organization that wireless Internet – Wi-Fi – may cause cancer.
The WHO’s International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) reclassified radio frequency emitted by wireless devices as possibly carcinogenic to humans in May, but Canada’s national public health department insists Wi-Fi is “safe”.
“While there is limited evidence that RF energy may cause cancer in humans, it is not conclusive and more research is required,” the department said in a statement. “Health Canada does not plan to update its exposure guidelines based on the IARC classification.”
But a vocal critic of Wi-Fi from Peterborough doesn’t believe Health Canada and says Canadians should be concerned about health risks linked to wireless internet.
“While there is limited evidence that RF energy may cause cancer in humans, it is not conclusive and more research is required. Health Canada does not plan to update its exposure guidelines based on the IARC classification.”
Health Canada
“I don’t see how Health Canada can make that assurance,” said Magda Havas, who researches the biological effects of environmental contaminants at Trent University in Peterborough.
“Our current (radio frequency) guidelines in Canada are 100 times higher than the guidelines in Switzerland, in China, in Russia (and) in quite a few other countries. I just don’t understand how they can make that statement with any confidence.”
The possible health risks posed by wireless internet were reignited Monday night after parents opposed to Wi-Fi in schools called again on the Kawartha Pine Ridge District School Board to stop a program that is extending wireless Internet to all its schools this year.
Some parents and educators across Canada believe wireless Internet is making their children sick and have been calling for it to be removed from schools for more than a year.
Researchers such as Havas say toxicology studies indicate children are more affected by radiation than adults but studies have not been done on the short or long-term impacts of Wi-Fi on kids.
Dozens of students at a number of school boards complain about dizziness, headaches, nausea and even heart issues that occur at school and believe wireless internet could be responsible for the symptoms.
Wi-Fi signals in schools are much stronger than what someone would experience at home.
Opposing parents such as Rodney Palmer, of Collingwood, Ont., who spoke to Wi-Fi opponents at a meeting in Peterborough last month, say it is difficult to argue the WHO classification.
“What the hell are we thinking that we are going to experiment on a generation of children in order to figure out whether this is safe or not?” asked Palmer. “We know there are warning signs. Morally, we must turn it off in classrooms and plug the computers in in order to get an Internet connection. It can’t be that important to connect to Facebook from the cafeteria that we risk an entire generation of Canadians’ health.”
