Select Page

Wireless Industry Spokesperson David Grimes Pens Article on Wireless Health Effects for Top Academic Journal 

Jan 18, 2022

Wireless Industry Spokesperson Pens Article on Wireless Health Effects for Top Academic Journal 

JAMA Oncology recently published a paper, “Radiofrequency Radiation and Cancer: A Review,” that provides a biased, highly selective “review” of the scientific literature written by David Grimes, a pro-industry science writer and physicist.  Despite the inaccuracies (see articles and letters below),  Mary L. “Nora” Disis, MD, Editor-in-Chief, JAMA Oncology has refused to retract the article. 

In addition to the inaccuracies in the article, Microwave News has now learned that David Grimes is not currently affiliated with Oxford University, even though he states it as his affiliation on the paper.

“David Grimes has no formal affiliation with the Department of Oncology in Oxford. Whilst it is not clear exactly when the articles in question were conceived it seems unlikely that a formal affiliation existed at that time,” according to Professor Mark Middleton, head of the Department of Oncology as quoted in Microwave News. 

David Robert Grimes did a paid advertisement for Vodafone in 2020,  downplaying health effects from 5G.

Investigative reporter Paul Thacker published an expose on Grimes featuring Environmental Health Trust scientists and our lengthy response to Grimes inaccurate “review.” He and found Grimes also argued against the scientific evidence of harm caused by the pesticide glyphosate.

 

Read Thackers article on Grimes’ review on wireless radiation in both the Journal of Scientific Practice and Integrity and the Disinformation Chronicle “Experts Blast David Robert Grimes for His Failure to Understand Science and Love of Self-Citation.”

Watch Grimes’ Vodaphone advertisement below.

 

“If you have a medical problem, would you ask a medical doctor or a physicist for help?” said Devra Davis, Founder and President of Environmental Health Trust. Davis’ organization is collecting signatures from scientific experts on a letter they plan to send to JAMA Oncology asking them to retract Grimes’ essay. “This so-called review is not a review at all because it ignores thousands of studies clearly demonstrating that current legal levels of wireless radiation are damaging to human health and the environment.” – Paul Thacker’s article “Experts Blast David Robert Grimes for His Failure to Understand Science and Love of Self-Citation” 

“Any positive evidence is treated as coming from a failed experiment, any positive [epidemiological] finding is recall bias, any flaws in negative studies are ignored,” Portier said. “And he loves to cite himself.”

Indeed, in 5 of his 36 citations for the essay, Grimes cites Grimes. On examination, none of these 5 references is scientific research that Grimes conducted; they’re just another Grimes’ opinion.

– “Experts Blast David Robert Grimes for His Failure to Understand Science and Love of Self-Citation 

 

“The journal should change the paper’s title to accurately reflect its contents (e.g., “Radiofrequency radiation and cancer: Telecom industry talking points.”

-Dr. Joel Moskowitz, University of California Berkeley 

 

“I believe that Grimes’s review is so one-sided that it qualifies as both falsification and fabrication. It might as well have been plagiarized from a telecom industry position paper.”

-Louis Slesin, Editor of Microwave News