When I was reading the hereafter following paper, with a growing astonishment, and an intensifying being shocked about the collection of insane facts, the sentence: “the founding chairman of IRPA was Michael Repacholi” made me stop reading and start to create this post, with the hope that it will be read by stop 5G activists, stop smart meters activists, all who fight against the industry who creates wireless devices, because it is Michael Repacholi who created the guidelines, who is still the creator of the guidelines, because of the laws of the solid empire he founded, in which all stays the same, for ever and ever. If we want to hold 5G, we will have to break down the empire ICNIRP, kill the metaphorical octopus that is crushing all life on earth in a lethal vice, by its continuous splitting, growing and multiplying tentacles, with the sword of Truth.
The Empire ICNIRP
Michael Repacholi is the founding chairman of IRPA [source: PDF, page 3/13], which is the International Radiation Protection Association – source: Wikipedia – See also on the Wikipedia page the list of all 50 Associate Societies (covering 65 countries).
IRPA was founded on 19 June 1965 [Source: Wikipedia] – Website IRPA.
In 1992, IRPA morphed into ICNIRP (the International Commission on Non Ionizing Radiation Protection), with Repacholi still as the chair. And in 1998, ICNIRP brought out the Guidelines document which still enshrines the ANSI [American National Standards Institute] thermal-only dogma as the basis of national standards throughout the English-speaking world. [source: PDF, page 3/13]
ICNIRP website: Michael Repacholi was ICNIRP Chairman from 1992 until 1996. Member Emeritus since 1996. The sentence in the former paragraph “In 1992, IRPA morphed into ICNIRP (the International Commission on Non Ionizing Radiation Protection), with Repacholy still as the chair” indicates that the following table of hierarchy is ICNIRP
Attention: I invite you to study the arrows. Where do they come from, and where they are directing to, where their power goes? National regulations are under full surveillance. The WHO should be on the top of the pyramid, but instead it is somewhere in the lowest parts of the table. The industry is on the same height, but that has reasons: it is strategical and psychological utterly smart (!) to create the place for the industry there. The table has been created under supervision. All insiders know the exact power of the industry. That power if the wealthiest power in the world and the creators of the published table want us to believe that the industry accepts to be somewhere deep down under. This is not a speculation, but a fact. More in the following paper and added links. There is not any arrow going from the WHO into a higher direction. WHO is under surveillance of all above it, and cannot do anything more than to obey all above and forward the messages from above, or which are in one line with all above, to the lowest of all: the national regulations. The term World in “WHO” needs to be replaced with what it is really, because it is all but “world” unless include what is the most powerful in the world, the industry. WHO is the ICNIRP Health Organisation, while it is categorized as a “United Nations specialised agency” on the WHO wikipedia page. The United Nations is also an industry/business group, a trade organisation, so we can guess, and yes, I am speculating now: maybe UN is a secret partner of ICNIRP, or a secret political prostitute, or a secret mistress. Or vice versa. Or all. More about the subject: Evidence based science or prostitution?
Conflicts of Interest and Misleading Statements in Official Reports about the Health Consequences of Radiofrequency Radiation and Some New Measurements of Exposure Levels
By: Dr. Susan Pockett, MSc, PhD, School of Psychology, University of Auckland, Auckland 1142, New Zealand; email@example.com Received: 29 March 2019; Accepted: 25 April 2019; Published: 5 May 2019
Index of the PDF:
Page 1: Abstract
Page 1: 1. Introduction
Page 2: 2. Conflict of Interest: A History
Page 5: 3. Misleading Statements in the New Zealand Government’s Interagency Committee on the Health Effects of Non-Ionizing Fields Report to Ministers 2018
Page 5: 3.1. Misleading Statement One (p. 2)
Page 6: 3.2. Misleading Statement Two (p. 2)
Page 8: 3.3. Misleading Statement Three (p. 53)
Page 8: 3.4. Misleading Statement Four (p.39)
Page 9: 4. Some Hard Numbers: Preliminary Results on Ambient RF Power Densities in Auckland
Page 10: 5. Which is Worse: Sharp Spikes of RF or Continued Low Level Exposure?
Page 10: 6. Discussion
Page 11: 7. Conclusions
Page 11, 12, 13: References: 49
Excerpts, related with the subject ICNIRP
PDF, Chapter 2 – Conflict of Interest: A History – Page 2/13 / ©2019 by the author. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution(CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
The 2018 version of the guidelines document put out by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors  defines conflict of interest as follows:
“A conflict of interest exists when professional judgment concerning a primary interest (such as patients’ welfare or the validity of research) may be influenced by a secondary interest(such as financial gain)…. Financial relationships (such as employment, consultancies, stock ownership or options, honoraria, patents and paid expert testimony) are the most easily identifiable conflicts of interest and the most likely to undermine the credibility of the journal,the authors and science itself…. Purposeful failure to disclose conflicts of interest is a form of misconduct.”
PDF, Chapter 2 – Conflict of Interest: A History – Page 3/13 – 6th line / ©2019 by the author. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution(CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
The founding chairman of IRPA was Michael Repacholi, an Australian also committed to the thermal-only dogma. In 1992, IRPA morphed into ICNIRP (the International Commission on Non Ionizing Radiation Protection), with Repacholi still as the chair. And in 1998, ICNIRP brought out the Guidelines document which still enshrines the ANSI thermal-only dogma as the basis of national standards throughout the English-speaking world. Meanwhile, back in the USA, a second strand of activity in support of the thermal-only dogma was quietly emerging. In the early 1970s, a growing popular environmental movement and the consequent espousal by the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) of a precautionary approach to a great many potential health hazards were seen by corporate interests as a threat to the foundations of industrial society . The challenge for industry was cast as how best to respond to legislative restrictions on the activities of corporations—and in particular to the science that led to those restrictions. One major response to this challenge was the establishment in 1972 of a ‘Business Round table’ consisting of many of America’s CEOs, for the express purpose of promoting “less unwarranted intrusion by government into business affairs” and ensuring that “the business sector in a pluralistic society should play an active and effective role in the formation of public policy” . Lobby offices were established in Washington, and a number of industry-backed think tanks created to come up with strategies applicable to all industries. Measures adopted with respect to the biological effects of microwave emissions mirrored those of the tobacco industry. They included the following:
•Creation of an air of uncertainty about the science: Given that biological organisms are formidably complex and that science by its nature rarely involves complete certainty, this should perhaps not have proved too difficult. But just to make sure, a concerted campaign of disinformation was launched anyway. Basically, whenever a piece of science inimical to industry or Air Force interests appeared, contractors were hired to discredit it by apparently repeating the experiments,but actually changing critical factors to produce more funder-friendly results. Frey  describes one such attempt as follows: “After my colleagues and I published in 1975 , that exposure to very weak microwave radiation opens the regulatory interface known as the blood brain barrier (BBB), a critical protection for the brain, the Brooks AFB group selected a contractor to supposedly replicate our experiment. For 2 years, this contractor presented data at scientific conferences stating that microwave radiation had no effect on the BBB. After much pressure from the scientific community, he finally revealed that he had not, in fact,replicated our work. We had injected dye into the femoral vein of lab rats after exposure to microwaves and observed the dye in the brain within 5 min. The Brooks contractor had stuck a needle into the animals’ bellies and sprayed the dye onto their intestines. Thus it is no surprise that when he looked at the brain 5 min later, he did not see any dye; the dye had yet to make it into the circulatory system.” The continuing nature of such campaigns is suggested by Maisch , who writes: “A survey conducted by the New York based publication Microwave News in 2006 consisted of examining papers on microwave effects on DNA that were published in peer-reviewed journals since 1990. A total of 85 papers on the topic were identified.43 of the papers reported finding a biological effect and 42 did not. Of the 42 no-effect papers, 32 were identified as having been funded by either the U.S. Air Force or industry. With the 43 papers that reported effects, only 3 were identified as being funded by Air Force or industry. This survey thus suggests that the source of funding has a strong influence on the outcome of research”.
•Adoption of an algebraic model of evidence assessment: Once approximately equal numbers of papers had been installed in the scientific literature concluding that sub-thermal levels of microwaves on the one hand do, but on the other hand do not, have harmful biological effects, the narrative was promulgated in official circles that “weight of evidence” is the important thing to consider in such matters. The implicit model behind this narrative involves an unstated presumption that each negative study (i.e., each study that does not find any effect of low intensity microwaves) cancels out one positive study (i.e., one study that does find an effect of low intensity microwaves); with an algebraic sum of zero indicating no effect . Any inconvenient remainder is then dealt with by impugning the validity and/or the significance of particularly convincing positive studies: as,for example, in Section 4.2 and Appendix A of the NZ Government Interagency Report 2018 .
•Population of regulatory bodies by industry insiders: The above strategies certainly served to convince time-strapped politicians that all is fine, but to an unbiased scientist, they appear decidedly dicey.Thus, the most vital of all the strategies implemented by Big Wireless has been the appointment to regulatory roles of people who are, or used to be, members of the industries they are now charged with regulating. Arguably the most important regulatory body in the world is ICNIRP, whose 1998Guidelines document is still the basis of the national standards adopted by the governments of most English-speaking nations. ICNIRP is a self-selected, private (non-governmental) organization,populated exclusively by members invited by existing members. The organization is very concerned to project the image that it is composed of disinterested scientists—indeed all ICNIRP members are required to post on the organization’s website detailed declarations of interest (DOIs). However, a closer inspection of these DOIs reveals that a good many of the sections of a good many of the forms remain unfilled, and a detailed list of undeclared conflicts of interest among ICNIRP members has been published by a group of concerned citizens . The relevant section of WHO is essentially identical to ICNIRP : Michael Repacholi, the founder of ICNIRP, established the WHO International EMF Project (IEMFP) in 1996 and remained in charge of it until 2006 ,when he reportedly resigned after allegations of corruption  to officially become an industry consultant . In 2004, Repacholi stated in a conference presentation that the IEMFP was able to “receive funding from any source through Royal Adelaide Hospital; an agency established through WHO Legal Department agreement to collect funds for the project”—an arrangement that reportedly enabled receipt of annual payments of $150,000 from the cellphone industry [3,14]. Thus, in spite of their stated rules and protestations to the contrary, there have been persistent allegations that both ICNIRP and the relevant section of WHO are riddled with undeclared conflicts of interest. In the USA, the Federal Communications Commission, whose function it is to regulate the wireless industry in that country, has been openly characterized by the Edmond J. Safra Center for Ethics at Harvard University as “a captured agency” .
©2019 by the author. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution(CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
[ line 38, page 4/13; …] [The last sentence in the quoted part has been made bold. A.J.]
Back to the PDF.
- The Relationship between Cell Phones and Cancer? The Health Impacts of RF Radiation. WHO Report
Non-Thermal Effects Hang in the Balance Repacholi’s Legacy of Industry Cronyism, Published 4 November 2019
- Scrutinizing ICNIRP – files, articles, papers, collected from June 2019, till the present, archived in 15 chapters. Continues updates.
Published: June 2, 2019
- “New” ICNIRP commission: 2020 – 2024
Published: March 6, 2020
- Jeremy Vine presents ‘WiFi Warning Signal’, a 2007 BBC Panorama Documentary, highlighting the dangers of Wi-Fi radiation in schools. With investigative journalist Paul Kenyon. Michael Repacholi is also speaking. Go to: 22:57
Multerland conclusion: I am not a disciplined scientist, so, I do have emotions. I wonder if it is possible to be without emotions when witnessing the abyss right in front of us, and where we are pushed into by Repacholi. The process is progressing slowly but surely, already for many decades, noticed by scientists, warned about by scientists, but nobody wants to listen. So, here some strong words. If there is a Creator of Life, who also created Earth, then Repacholi is the anti-creator, the creator of the tree of death, the one who is named the anti-Christ in the Bible, the man with the number, we all know, the man who is the cause of an unstoppable and constantly expanding amount of EMF that even God, or the Creator, is dying of it.
If there was not any God or Creator, who created Life, Earth, and all life beings, and all is there without any beginning, then Repacholi is anyhow the one who works at the ending of it, at the extinction of all Life, Earth, Birds, Bees, Insects, Amphibians, Reptiles, Bats, Mammals, Fishes, …. and you, me, us. He is utterly successful in fulfilling his plans. He is almost finished. Earth IS dying.
List with links to scientific papers, science based articles, which prove that I am not exaggerating: EMF links
Or share this post in the media: