Hardell Lennart, Nyberg Rainer
Department of Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and Health, Örebro University, SE-701 82 Örebro, Sweden.
Faculty of Education and Welfare Studies, Åbo Akademi University, 65100 Vasa, Finland.
Mol Clin Oncol. 2020 Mar;12(3):247-257. doi: 10.3892/mco.2020.1984. Epub 2020 Jan 22.
Radiofrequency (RF) radiation in the frequency range of 30 kHz-300 GHz is classified as a 'possible' human carcinogen, Group 2B, by the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) since 2011. The evidence has since then been strengthened by further research; thus, RF radiation may now be classified as a human carcinogen, Group 1. In spite of this, microwave radiations are expanding with increasing personal and ambient exposure. One contributing factor is that the majority of countries rely on guidelines formulated by the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP), a private German non-governmental organization. ICNIRP relies on the evaluation only of thermal (heating) effects from RF radiation, thereby excluding a large body of published science demonstrating the detrimental effects caused by non-thermal radiation. The fifth generation, 5G, for microwave radiation is about to be implemented worldwide in spite of no comprehensive investigations of the potential risks to human health and the environment. In an appeal sent to the EU in September, 2017 currently >260 scientists and medical doctors requested for a moratorium on the deployment of 5G until the health risks associated with this new technology have been fully investigated by industry-independent scientists. The appeal and four rebuttals to the EU over a period of >2 years, have not achieved any positive response from the EU to date. Unfortunately, decision makers seem to be uninformed or even misinformed about the risks. EU officials rely on the opinions of individuals within the ICNIRP and the Scientific Committee on Emerging and Newly Identified Health Risks (SCENIHR), most of whom have ties to the industry. They seem to dominate evaluating bodies and refute risks. It is important that these circumstances are described. In this article, the warnings on the health risks associated with RF presented in the 5G appeal and the letters to the EU Health Commissioner since September, 2017 and the authors' rebuttals are summarized. The responses from the EU seem to have thus far prioritized industry profits to the detriment of human health and the environment.
自2011年以来，国际癌症研究机构（IARC）将频率范围在30千赫至300吉赫的射频（RF）辐射归类为2B组“可能”的人类致癌物。此后，进一步的研究强化了这一证据；因此，射频辐射现在可能被归类为1组人类致癌物。尽管如此，随着个人和环境暴露的增加，微波辐射仍在不断扩大。一个促成因素是，大多数国家依赖由德国一家私营非政府组织——国际非电离辐射防护委员会（ICNIRP）制定的指导方针。ICNIRP仅依赖于对射频辐射热（加热）效应的评估，从而排除了大量已发表的表明非热辐射会造成有害影响的科学研究。尽管尚未对第五代（5G）微波辐射对人类健康和环境的潜在风险进行全面调查，但它即将在全球范围内实施。在2017年9月发给欧盟的一份呼吁书中，目前已有超过260名科学家和医生要求暂停5G的部署，直到与这项新技术相关的健康风险得到独立于行业的科学家的充分调查。在两年多的时间里，这份呼吁书以及针对欧盟的四份反驳意见至今未得到欧盟的任何积极回应。不幸的是，决策者似乎对这些风险并不了解，甚至得到了错误的信息。欧盟官员依赖ICNIRP以及新兴和新确定健康风险科学委员会（SCENIHR）内部人员的意见，其中大多数人与该行业有关联。他们似乎主导着评估机构并否认风险。描述这些情况很重要。在本文中，总结了2017年9月以来5G呼吁书中以及给欧盟卫生专员的信件中关于射频相关健康风险的警告以及作者的反驳意见。到目前为止，欧盟的回应似乎将行业利润置于首位，损害了人类健康和环境。
