Wireless Industry Brochures Lead The Public To Misinterpret That Wireless is Safe
Wireless Industry Creates “Communication Materials” and Propaganda: When The Public Misinterprets It As Cell Phones and Wireless Being Safe, Industry Does Not Clarify
Just as the Tobacco Industry created a “Playbook” to defend cigarettes and manufacture doubt about the health effects of cigarettes, the Wireless Industry seems to have a fine-tuned “Playbook” of advertising, public relations and industry-funded science to defend wireless products and falsely reassure the public that cell phones and wireless products are safe.
Cell phones and wireless were never adequately tested for human health effects. Wireless devices were not premarket tested for long term safety. Research has accumulated indicating that wireless “radiofrequency” radiation has serious biological effects. Despite this reality, the wireless industry has and is currently heavily funding a public relations effort that propagates the myth that cell phones and wireless “are safe”. This webpage is an educational resource documenting materials used for the wireless industry “Playbook”.
THE WIRELESS INDUSTRY PLAYBOOK
Key to this public relations effort are industry created resources, websites and materials that communicate the myth of no proof of harm from wireless products. These are all part of the Playbook to manufacture doubt that a problem exists. Examples of such propaganda range from glossy brochures, Questions and Answers on Hot Topics such as “children and cell phones”, websites on EMF (Electromagnetic Fields) and Health and research forums.
These materials are paid for, designed and prepared by “non profit” organizations that are created by telecom and wireless companies pooling money together. When citizens raise concerns about a particular product or when research comes out indicating a health risk, companies can simply pull from these materials to respond as if there are no concerns.
MISLEADING THE PUBLIC
Many of these brochures cite industry-designed research studies as “proof” of no health risk. However, a deeper look at the science referred to on these brochures shows no proof of safety. For example, the WLAN and HEALTH” Brochure created by two wireless non profits (the Wi-Fi Alliance, and the Mobile Manufacturers Forum) features a 2007 research study that was funded by the same wireless organizations (the Wi-Fi Alliance, and the Mobile Manufacturers Forum) that created the brochure.
If a reader looks into the industry funded cited research study, it is clearly not about health—it is merely a random survey of various hotel and tourist rooms in various countries (not any scientifically statistically valid sample) where wireless signals were measured at least one meter away from a computer in use. As expected, this study found compliance with international guidelines—guidelines that were created by industry three decades ago. The study did not measure the exposure to the person actually using the computer, or near a computer. Yet in this industry brochure this study is put forth as if it is documentation of safety.
In other words, this industry-created brochure cites industry-created science that bases conclusions on industry-created regulations.
EMFs and health is a complex issue for the general public. These brochures and industry-created factsheets and websites omit the body of research indicating electromagnetic fields have biological effects and omit the fact that adequate premarket testing was never done. This propaganda seems to seek to confuse the public and reassure that cell phones and wireless are safe.
Please see examples of the industry “Playbook” public information materials from the past and present on this page.
WIRELESS PRODUCT DEFENSE “HOW TO” MANUALS
Some Examples of the Industry Playbook
“RF Safety and Risk Communications” PowerPoint Created by the Wi-Fi Alliance
The Wi-Fi Alliance PowerPoint lays out how the Wi-Fi Alliance manages “RF Safety and Risk Communications” with a “two pronged approach.”
One prong is “Outreach and Education,” whereby the Alliance established an RF health and science team with over 50 members Wi-Fi Alliance to “provide member awareness of latest science, standards and news” and to “Promote public awareness.”
This powerpoint presentation was made in 2006 and in 2007. The 2006 shares how the Wi-Fi Alliance developed their PR brochure on Wi-Fi health and safety and was supporting an “independent exposure assessment of Wi-Fi” which is referring to Kenneth Fosters 2007 paper. In the 2007 version the citation to the Foster paper is added. It certainly is notable that in 2006 this powerpoint was referring to the brochure on WLAN and Health and to the study they financed. Yet the 2007 study that ultimately was cited in this brochure as the centerpiece showing “safety” in 2007 was not even published yet in 2006. It seems like the Wi-Fi Alliance already knew how the study would conclude and they developed the brochure in advance, awaiting final publication.
This powerpoint reveals how the Industry can manufacture doubt by creating “science” that suits the message they want communicated. This 2006 presentation was featured in a Seminar on Risk Evaluation, Issues in Mobile Communications: Health Environment and Society, A GSM, MMF and European Commision sponsored conference in Ghent Belgium. Read the summary that is illustrative of the way industry develops risk communication strategy.
CTIA Wireless Industry Manual “Procedures And Resource Manual For Public Health And Safety Issues” from the 1990’s
This document is an important historical document as it is an example of the wireless industry’s playbook on how to respond to health concerns. EHT imagines that this CTIA manual was developed in the 1990’s when reports of people with brain tumors from cell phones first surfaced. Advice, prepared by the wireless industry, is given on “recommended responses” to “anticipated questions” which backs the industry dogma that “there is no evidence.”
Page 4 explains the strategy for responding to media stories that focus on the danger of cell phone radiation. Please read some excerpts:
“The key to effective crisis management and media relations is to remain calm. Take time to determine the nature, scope, and intensity of the situation, however worrisome on the surface. …If the genesis of the crisis is a media inquiry or story, gather information about the reporter or news organization to establish motive, credibility, and/or likely impact. Knowing when and where a story in progress is to be printed or aired can be an important guide in formulating a response.”
“Containment is a key goal of crisis response. Tactically, that can take many forms – ranging from a full-blown counter-offensive to limited or no media outreach. Before that decision is made, the containment strategy must be thoroughly discussed, properly evaluated (when warranted) by outside specialists, and agreed upon by all who are part of the crisis working group.
In the heat of crisis, it is crucial to exercise control. While there may be intense pressure – from internal and/or external sources – to go public, take time to understand the issues, analyze the facts, anticipate the questions, and prepare responses that incorporate basic industry talking and message points.”
“Risk Communication Guide for Mobile Phones and Base Stations” Manual Created by MMF and GSMA (2009)
This guide was produced for the GSM Association (GSMA) on how to communicate about the health risks of wireless products.
“The Message: the message should always be simple and concise. It could comprise a statement backed up with supporting evidence or third party authorities.”
“Use leaflets, hand outs, diagrams or posters with good visual detail as much as possible. Heightened public concerns are best addressed in smaller scale interactions supported by a toolkit of accessible information materials rather than large open public meetings.”
“Remember that you are not a health expert. People will ask you for a guarantee that there is no risk from exposure to radio signals. There is no such thing as ‘zero risk’ and absolute safety cannot be proven. So it is unreasonable for people to ask you for a health guarantee.”
“Empathise: Express yourself as caring about people’s concerns. Remember that people won’t care what you know and what you want to tell them until they know that you care. So demonstrate that you care by telling people that you do. For example: ‘I understand that you could be worried by some of the reports about living near antenna sites.’”
Key Communication Points
- Typical exposures from antenna sites are less than 1% of international safety recommendations. These levels are broadly comparable to radio and television broadcast services that people already accept.
- The WHO states that considering the very low exposure levels and research results collected to date, there is no convincing scientific evidence that the weak radio signals from base stations cause adverse health effects.
- Radio signals have been in use for more than 100 years and studies of high powered broadcast transmitters have uncovered no increased health risk for nearby communities.”
“If applied carefully and consistently, the techniques presented in this guide should assist you to address concerns and deliver network deployments with less community opposition and delay.”
INDUSTRY CREATED COLORFUL BROCHURES
These pretty brochures are intended to be shared with the public to reassure them that cell phones and wireless products are safe.
These brochures all share the industry messaging:
- “Research studies and reports show safety.” The research studies cited in these brochures are studies often designed and funded by wireless industry companies themselves. Similarly, the research reports rest conclusions based on industry funded science and/or known industry consultants.
- “Research has not shown conclusive evidence of adverse health effects.” The hundreds of studies showing adverse effects are not mentioned.
- “Research shows RF exposures are likely to be well within internationally accepted (ICNIRP) guidelines.” ICNIRP guidelines do not cover long-term exposure & low-intensity effects. The fact that hundreds of studies show effects at levels well below ICNIRP limits, clearly indicating ICNIRP limits do not protect the public, are not mentioned.
- “Respected institutions and organizations agree that safety is assured.” The organizations cited are industry connected often industry created, and the fact that many medical and public health organizations believe safety is not assured is not mentioned.
“WiFi and Health Safety” Brochure created by the Wi-Fi Alliance, the Mobile Manufacturers Forum (MMF) and GSMA
This brochure states it is “designed to answer questions about the health and safety aspects of Wi-Fi technology, and to share the opinions of respected, public health institutions on this topic.”
The two research studies referred to in this brochure Foster 2007, Foster and Moulder 2013 are studies financed by the same industry organizations who created this brochure- the Wi-Fi Alliance, the Mobile Manufacturers Forum. These references seem to be showing safety but in fact, do not. For example the 2007 paper does not use a statistically valid sample and does not even look at radiation exposures to a person using a laptop.
The brochure “research” section then goes on to reference the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP), which has not shown “conclusive evidence of adverse health effects.” ICNIRP is a private organization suspected of having close ties to the Telecom Industry (Explanatory Memorandum by Mr. Huss, Council of Europe, 2011).
“WLAN and HEALTH” Brochure Created by Wi-Fi Alliance and Mobile Manufacturers Forum
“Although questions have been raised there is no scientific evidence that these low power wireless communications devices pose any health threat to the user or the general public. This brochure has been designed to answer questions you may have about the health and safety aspects of WLAN.”
In 2007, the Wi-Fi Alliance created this brochure on WiFi and Health. This brochure came out directly after known industry consultant Kenneth Foster published a paper – financed by the Wi-Fi Alliance.
As we explained in reference to the 2015 brochure above, the scientific research cited in this 2007 brochure did not actually test whether this radiation was harmful and did not even measure Wi-Fi signals that a person using a laptop would be exposed to. Yet all three images on the brochure show a person using a wireless computer and a member of the public would easily infer that this brochure is about the health and safety issues of the Wi-Fi from their computer.
“WiGig and Health/Safety” Brochure Created by Wi-Fi Alliance (2015)
In 2015, the Wi-Fi Alliance published a brochure on “the health and safety of their WiGig products”.
This brochure reassure public by referring to electromagnetic radiofrequency radiation as “Electromagnetic Energy” which they call EME= “ best be described as waves of electric and magnetic energy moving together through space.” The industry’s use of the word “energy” rather than radiation” is a way to soften concerns.
Furthermore this brochure makes significant reference to the “World Health Organization” (WHO) but does not clarify that the references are to the WHO International EMF Project- which originated from industry consultants and funds and is still closely tied to ICNIRP and industry. This brochure conveniently does not mention that the World Health Organizations’ non industry affiliated expert group- The WHO International Agency for Research on Cancer has recommended people take precautions to reduce exposure and has classified Radiofrequency Radiation as a Class 2B Carcinogen based on scientific evidence showing increased brain cancers in long term cell phone users.
Statements such as “The exposure limits contained in the RF standards also include a built-in substantial margin of safety; the World Health Organization affirms that the safety margin takes into account all members of the population, including elderly and ill people, pregnant women, and young children.” are simply not based on best available evidence which indicate non thermal adverse biological effects.
“Smart meters: Compliance with radio frequency exposure standards” Brochure created by GSMA (2015)
In 2015, GSMA produced a booklet on smart meters and a member of the public may read it and assume that it is proof that smart meters are safe. However, what this report has in it is documentation are many industry financed studies which are simply showing that various wireless devices do not exceed regulatory limits.
“The possible health hazards of radiofrequency energy have been studied for many years. The consensus of expert groups and health agencies is that there are no established health effects below recommended exposure limits. Numerous national public health agencies have concluded that the radio signals used by smart meters do not pose a health risk and that there is no scientific basis to decline having a smart meter installed.”
The brochure does reference the WHO IARC 2011 classification but then misleadingly quotes the industry supported WHO EMF Project “Factsheet”. The WHO EMF Project Factsheet states, “Studies to date provide no indication that environmental exposure to RF fields, such as from base stations, increases the risk of cancer or any other disease.” This is – in fact- not a statement by the IARC expert group itself.
In fact, the authors of this “factsheet” are unknown and the documentary “Microwave, Science and Lies” follows a journalist as she tries to find out who wrote the words of the WHO EMF Project Factsheets that have statements obscuring health risks (Documentary clip of WHO IARC Dr. Bann speaking about the Factsheets are available here, Microwave, Science and Lies documentary here).
Read the GSMA “Smart meters: Compliance with radio frequency exposure standards” Brochure Here
“Small Cells and Health” Brochure Created by Mobile Manufacturers Forum, GSMA and Small Cell Forum
This 2015 brochure was designed to answer questions you may have about small cells. Small cells are the “mini cell towers” that are being built in neighborhoods in front of homes. They are often mounted in the right of ways in neighborhood and on utility poles and street lights in cities. The 5G Internet of Everything will require thousands of new small cells across the United States.
This brochure refers to Radiofrequency radiation as “radio waves” and “fields” and refers to the WHO EMF Project Factsheets. “Small cells transmit very low levels of radio waves (also known as electromagnetic fields.) The safety of radio waves has been extensively studied for more than 60 years and the research is subject to constant review by government health agencies and standards setting bodies.”
The brochure omits the organizations which have concluded wireless is a health risk and instead state that numerous “organizations have all reached the same general scientific conclusion: that there are no established health hazards from exposure to radio waves below the limits applicable to wireless communications systems.”
Read the “Small Cells and Health” Brochure Here
“Mobile Communications and Health” Brochure Created by GSMA (2014)
This 2014 brochure addresses the possible health effects of using a mobile device.
It concludes, “Much of the public concern relates to the possibility of health hazards from long term exposures at levels too low to produce measurable heating. There have been studies reporting biological effects but not health hazards at low levels. In many cases, the studies have not been subject to scientific peer review or the results have not been independently confirmed. The international consensus is that current limits are based on all the available scientific evidence, incorporate large safety factors and are highly protective of health.”
LTE: Technology and Health Brochure Created by GSMA (2014)
“Mobile Broadband typically refers to providing customers with high speed data while on the move. There are several technologies capable of delivering commercial Mobile Broadband services. The GSM Association (GSMA) has produced this brief to describe key features of the technology and address some of the questions related to exposure to radio signals from LTE antennas and devices.”
In the brief, GSMA states, “Q: Are new safe exposure limits needed for the LTE system? A: No, because current international safety guidelines for radio technologies are valid for the whole frequency range planned for LTE deployments. These guidelines are recognised by the World Health Organization (WHO) as providing protection for all persons against all established health effects.
“Mobile Phones EMF: Health Fact Pack” Brochure Created by MMF and GSMA (2006)
“This document provides background information on the operation of mobile phones and their supporting infrastructure. It also provides answers to some of the most commonly asked questions with respect to health and safety.”
The document states, “So-called ‘non-thermal’ effects – those that might occur at exposure levels too low to cause heating – have been explored at length. The consensus of health experts is that the results of these studies have been inconsistent and have failed to establish the existence of repeatable non-thermal effects.”
“Mobile Phone Base Stations: EMF/Health Fact Pack Created by GSMA and MMF (2005)
“This document seeks to address such concerns by providing background information on the operation of mobile communication systems as well as providing answers to some of the most commonly asked questions with respect to health and safety.”
The brochure states, “Exposure guidelines have been developed by ICNIRP and are based on a careful analysis of the scientific literature (taking into account both thermal and non-thermal effects) and provide protection against all identified hazards of RF exposure with large safety margins. The views of the industry concerning the health effects of RF exposure from mobile phones and base stations are based upon the conclusions of many expert review panels established by official national and international entities. These panels have reviewed the scientific literature over the past 10 years and have consistently concluded that there is no credible or convincing evidence that RF exposure from mobile phones or base stations operating within ICNIRP exposure limits causes any adverse human health effects.”
“Is smart meter RF exposure safe? Yes.” FactSheet Created by Central Maine Power and Dr. Yakov P. Shkolnikov
“Wireless Charging and Health” Brochure Created by Mobile Manufacturers Forum & AirFuel Alliance
“While wireless charging isn’t new, questions have arisen about the electromagnetic fields generated by the charging units. While there is no scientific evidence that these low power fields pose any health risk to individuals, the industry takes such concerns seriously, and has developed this brochure to help answer some common questions.”
“The safety of electromagnetic fields has been studied since the 1950’s resulting in a large and growing body of research that covers many frequencies, modulations and power levels.”
“The consistent conclusion of health agencies around the world in reviewing the science has been that there is no established evidence of any adverse health effects at or below the exposure limits set by the standards.”
Read the “Wireless Charging and Health” Brochure Here
Electrical Power Research Institute (EPRI) Brochure on RF Exposure Levels from Smart Meters
The brochure highlights a research study funded by industry friendly consultants EPRI and published by industry consultant Richard Tell.
“The exposure limits specified by the FCC afford the public a margin of safety 50-fold lower than the adverse effect threshold identified in the behavioral studies. Since the FCC rule was promulgated, other organizations concerned with RF health and safety have developed exposure guidelines very similar to the FCC’s. These include the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP) guideline (Health Physics 74:494, 1998) and IEEE Std C95.1™ published in 2005. These have again been based on thorough reviews of the literature, concluding that in the absence of heating, there have been no consistently demonstrated “non-thermal” mechanisms that could lead to adverse biological or health effects.”
EMF and Childhood Leukemia 2006 Brochure Created by Robert Syfers and EPRI
“Working together with all of its advisors, EPRI’s EMF health assessment program is committed to unraveling the critical uncertainties to ensure that electric and magnetic field environments are compatible with public health and safety.”
Electric and Magnetic Fields 2012 Brochure Created by the Energy Networks Association
“This guide, produced by the UK electricity industry, summarises the background to the EMF issue, explains the research undertaken with regard to health and discusses the conclusion reached.”
Within this 2012 brochure, the ENA states, “There have been many hundreds of these studies reported, and scientists examine them for robust results, which can be successfully repeated in different laboratories. In over 30 years of research there have been no such reproducible results. The evidence from the laboratory is that low level EMFs of the type experienced by the public do not cause the diseases that have been claimed.”
ADDITIONAL FACTSHEETS BY INDUSTRY
WEBSITE PAGES CREATED BY WIRELESS COMPANIES THAT ADDRESS HEALTH
The Mobile Manufacturers Forum Website on EMF and Health.
Mobile Manufacturers Forum has created a website solely focused on “health and safety.” The EMF & Health website, provides “information” on EMF & Health research programs, third-party research, expert opinions and health reviews.
The home page quotes the Industry created WHO International EMF Project which states, “A large number of studies have been performed over the last two decades to assess whether mobile phones pose a potential health risk. To date, no adverse health effects have been established for mobile phone use.”
This webpage notable has several sections, including “Health Reviews”– that quotes industry selected reviews and a large section that host “Viewpoints” which detail the are industry response to the National Toxicology Program findings of increased cancers, Children and Wireless and Some sleep studies have found biological responses but they do not impact human health say international health authorities. ” These “Viewpoints” all omit research showing effects and directly quote a long list of experts groups choosing specific statements that downplay health concerns.
The Mobile & Wireless Forum (MWF)
“The MWF’s communications activity is designed to provide high quality public information and analysis on the safety of wireless technology, accessibility and environmental issues. The MWF supports national trade associations by providing a source of information that is based on the pooled resources and networks of our member companies.”
As a source of information, the MWF website now host new factsheets (in addition to the MMF Factsheets) on health and safety such as this “Viewpoint on Wi-Fi in Schools”
The viewpoint cites ICNIRP, the Industry established EMF Project and other groups which in fact have most of the same “experts” and concludes,
“In summary, parents should be aware that the weight of scientific evidence remains that exposures from Wi-Fi equipment are well below international guidelines and that there is no established evidence of any adverse health effects associated with the use of wireless networks for children or indeed for any members of the community.”
Motorola “Health: Frequently Asked Questions” Webpage
“Mobile Phones and Children:
Studies and polls show that many parents feel more secure knowing their children have mobile phones, but some have questioned whether health risks may exist. The WHO, the Health Council of the Netherlands, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, the Ireland Expert Group on Health Effects of Electromagnetic Fields and others in the scientific community have stated there is no health-related reason or scientific justification to limit the use of mobile phones by children. Our products adhere to internationally recognized, science-based guidelines that take into account the welfare of all members of the population, including children.”
Sprint “Radio Frequency Emissions FAQ” Webpage
This webpage provides Sprint’s answers to frequently asked questions about radio frequency (RF) emissions citing information from the FCC, FDA, WHO EMF Project, IEEE, NCRP, IARC, and others.
“Q: Should children’s use of mobile phones be restricted?
A: Research does not show that children’s use of wireless phones involves added health risks. Current safety recommendations protect all individuals, including children. It is, however, not possible to provide irrefutable evidence that mobile phone use is 100 percent risk free. Even though the research in this field is at an advanced stage, most of the new research is conducted in specialized areas. Until conclusive results are established, national and international health institutions have adopted a precautionary approach to children’s use of mobile phones.
If you are concerned about reducing exposure to radio frequency energy:
- Use a headset or other hands-free equipment.
- Avoid long calls.
- Send an SMS or MMS rather than calling.”
Wi-Fi Alliance “Wi-Fi and Health” Webpage
“Wi-Fi Alliance takes any concern about the alleged health impact of Wi-Fi technology seriously. A range of scientific research undertaken to-date concludes there is no evidence that low-power wireless networks pose health threats to users or to the general public. Wi-Fi technology meets all national and international safety requirements and emits signals that are typically hundreds to thousands of times below international safety limits.”
This page hosts the Wi-Fi Alliance Health and Safety brochures and then lso gives a full paragraph to Fosters 2007 research report which is not a report about Wi-Fi exposures to a Wi-Fi device user.
EMF Explained Series
The EMF Explained Series is an information resource referencing national and international health agencies developed by the Australian Mobile Telecommunications Association (AMTA) in conjunction with the GSM Association (GSMA) and Mobile Manufacturers Forum (MMF).
The website hosts information relating to EMF research and health by topic.
Major Research Studies
Mobile Manufacturers Forum Viewpoints on US National Toxicology Program Animal Study
“The NTP report does not provide reason to move from the current scientific consensus that mobile phone-like exposure does not impact health.” – Rodney Croft, industry-tied psychologist
Mobile & Wireless Forum Viewpoint on “Wireless Devices and Children”
This July 2016 MWF viewpoint states, “In summary, the weight of scientific evidence remains that there is no evidence of any adverse health effects from the use of mobile phones or wireless devices. Consistent with the WHO advice, for parents or individuals who are concerned, there remain a number of options to limit their or their children’s exposure, by limiting the use of the device, the length of calls, or by using “hands-free” devices to keep devices away from the head and body.”
“Mobile Policy Handbook: An insider’s guide to the issues” 2017 Report Created by GSMA
This report discusses Electromagnetic Fields and Device Safety (pg. 168 -172) and Electromagnetic Fields and Health (pg. 172 – 175). It presents issues of “Debate” such as “Do radio signals from mobile phones present a risk to children? Where can people turn to find the latest research and recommendations?” and gives the responses:
“The strong consensus of expert groups and public health agencies, such as the WHO, is that no health risks have been established from exposure to the low-level radio signals used for mobile communications.”
“Parents should have access to accurate information so they can decide when and if their children should use mobile phones. The current WHO position is that international safety guidelines protect everyone in the population with a large safety factor, and that there is no scientific basis to restrict children’s use of phones or the locations of base stations.”
“Implications for Mobile Communications Infrastructure of Arbitrary RF Exposure Limits” Brochure Created by the Mobile Manufacturers Forum and GSMA
2010 Telecom Report about why lower “cautionary” limits are problematic and “threatening”.
“The mobile communications industry believes that the adoption of limits below those established by ICNIRP and recommended by the WHO represents a poor policy choice without evidence of health benefits, and one that actually threatens the proven safety, security and economic benefits that mobile communications provide to the community at large.”
EMF Health and Safety Scientific Research Program Brochure Created by the Mobile Manufacturers Forum
This 2012 document provides a brief overview of the various projects supported by the MMF, including conferences, workshops, research projects and publications.
This document exemplifies how deeply the wireless industry has invested into research on their products.
“EMF* and Health: The Growing Body of Scientific Evidence” Created by MMF and GSMA
This image produced by the Mobile Manufacturers Forum and GSMA provides a timeline with landmark studies published on the effects of EMF and Health, using quotes which they found important to describe the study to prove the absence of any health dangers of EMF.
WIRELESS FUNDED SCIENTIFIC FORUMS
2016 a Mobile Manufacturers Forum Workshop EMF Exposure Limits and Compliance Assessment of Future Wireless Devices Above 6 GHz at the 2016 BioEM Conference- The Joint Annual Meeting of The Bioelectromagnetics Society and the European BioElectromagnetics Association co-organized with the European COST EMF-MED Action BM1309.
Industry consultant Kenneth Foster chaired this Mobile Manufacturers Workshop entitled, “EMF Exposure Limits and Compliance Assessment of Future Wireless Devices Above 6 GHz.” See Foster’s two powerpoint slide presentations: Review of studies of thermal response to skin above 6 GHz and his introduction talk Mobile Manufacturers Forum Workshop EMF Exposure Limits and Compliance Assessment of Future Wireless Devices Above 6.
Slides from all of these presentations are all available the MMF website here. Most of these presentation are industry funded projects. Notable, one presentation was ICNIRP’s draft HF guidelines by Eric van Rongen, Chairman, of ICNIRP. ICNIRP is developing operational thresholds on higher frequencies with consideration of exposure to the head, torso, testes, eyes and extremities (which are allowed higher exposures) .
2013 Mobile Manufacturers Forum Supported Workshop “Comparison of RF absorption in heads of children and adults due to mobile phone exposures” at the BioEM Conference – Joint Meeting of the Bioelectromagnetics Society and the European BioElectromagnetics Association”
The Mobile Manufacturers Forum brought funded industry consultant Kenneth Foster to the Conference to co-chair this session as detailed in a paper co-authored by Foster entitled Are Children More Exposed to Radio Frequency Energy From Mobile Phones Than Adults? published soon after by these two consultants which stated:
(Mobile Manufacturers Forum) supported travel costs of one of the authors (Foster) to the BioEM 2013 meeting (Thessaloniki Greece, June 2013) to co-chair a Workshop session together with the second author on the subject of this paper. C-K. Chou was the Chief EME Scientist of Motorola Solutions at the time of the Workshop, and is presently retired.”
The topic of this session was Children’s Absorption of Microwave Radiation from Cell phones. CK Chou also was Motorola executive while serving on the IEEE Committee that created the exposure limits adopted two decades ago by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC).