In a shocking reversal, the National Toxicology Program (NTP) of the
National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences has quietly
disclosed that it will stop studying the biological or environmental
impacts of cell phone radiofrequency radiation.

This decision comes despite results from the program’s carefully
engineered and reviewed decade-long $30 million animal studies that
found cancer, heart damage and DNA damage associated with exposure to
cell phone radiofrequency radiation at levels comparable to those
experienced by Americans today.

The sudden end of civilian government efforts to study potential health
impacts of wireless radiation constitutes a glaring abdication of
responsibility. In contrast, the U.S. Department of Defense continues
to study this problem.

The European Union is providing multi-million dollar grants for
multidisciplinary studies. The French government regularly monitors
towers and phones and has recalled millions of phones for excessive
radiation or other concerns, reflecting public concerns about both
psychological and physiological impacts. In 2019, French Minsters
passed an order ensuring phones had consumer information that included
that teenagers and pregnant women avoid exposing their abdomens to
wireless radiating devices.

Just last year, the NTP declared on its 2023 fact sheet that it would
perform follow-up studies to better understand the effects found in the
long term animal studies. So what happened? At this juncture, it is
unclear. Have the follow-up studies been completed already? Working
with Swiss national engineering and U.S. government experts, the NTP
had devised small-scale systems for exposing animals experimentally to
controlled levels of wireless radiation. Yet results from these
exposure systems have neither been publicly shared nor published.

In a sudden and inexplicable turnaround of this long-scheduled and
heavily reviewed workplan, the NTP now states that no more research on
wireless radiation is planned due to costs of the studies and technical
challenges. One must ask what is driving this flipflop. What has led to
this sudden change in priorities, so that such an exponentially growing
environmental exposure no longer merits study?

The sole explanation from NTP for this turnaround raises more questions
than it answers: “The research was technically challenging and more
resource-intensive than expected. No additional [wireless radiation]
studies are planned.”

This defies modern medical and even casual public knowledge and
concerns. For example, infertility clinics ask men what their habits
are with respect to cell phones and other wireless devices. They tell
them to take these phones off their bodies and out of their pockets
because there is evidence of a correlation in rodents between wireless
radiation exposure and low sperm count, poorer sperm quality, decreased
testosterone and damage to the testes.

https://thehill.com/opinion/technology/4437988-why-did-nih-abruptly-halt-research-on-the-harms-of-cell-phone-radiation/

On 2024-02-01, badgolferman <REMOVETHISbadgolferman@gmail.com> wrote:
> In a shocking reversal, the National Toxicology Program (NTP) of the
> National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences has quietly
> disclosed that it will stop studying the biological or environmental
> impacts of cell phone radiofrequency radiation.
>
> This decision comes despite results from the program’s carefully
> engineered and reviewed decade-long $30 million animal studies that
> found cancer, heart damage and DNA damage associated with exposure to
> cell phone radiofrequency radiation at levels comparable to those
> experienced by Americans today.

That sentence is about as disingenuous and sensational as it gets.
You're pretty gullible if you blindly fall for that obvious slant.
Here's the nuanced truth:

---
The findings in animals cannot be directly applied to humans for two key
reasons:

* The exposure levels and durations were greater than what people may
receive from cellphones.

* The rats and mice received RFR across their whole bodies, which is
different from the more localized exposures humans may receive, like
from a cellphone in their pocket or next to their head.

However, the studies question the long-held assumption that RFR is of no
concern as long as the energy level is low and does not significantly
heat the tissues.

The lowest exposure level used in the studies was equal to the maximum
exposure to the local tissue (cells) currently allowed for cellphone
users. This power level *rarely* occurs with typical cellphone use.

The highest exposure level in the studies was *four times higher* than
the maximum power level permitted for local tissues.
---

--
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

badgolferman <REMOVETHISbadgolferman@gmail.com> wrote:
> In a shocking reversal, the National Toxicology Program (NTP) of the
> National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences has quietly
> disclosed that it will stop studying the biological or environmental
> impacts of cell phone radiofrequency radiation.
>
> This decision comes despite results from the program’s carefully
> engineered and reviewed decade-long $30 million animal studies that
> found cancer, heart damage and DNA damage associated with exposure to
> cell phone radiofrequency radiation at levels comparable to those
> experienced by Americans today.
>
> The sudden end of civilian government efforts to study potential health
> impacts of wireless radiation constitutes a glaring abdication of
> responsibility. In contrast, the U.S. Department of Defense continues
> to study this problem.
>
> The European Union is providing multi-million dollar grants for
> multidisciplinary studies. The French government regularly monitors
> towers and phones and has recalled millions of phones for excessive
> radiation or other concerns, reflecting public concerns about both
> psychological and physiological impacts. In 2019, French Minsters
> passed an order ensuring phones had consumer information that included
> that teenagers and pregnant women avoid exposing their abdomens to
> wireless radiating devices.
>
> Just last year, the NTP declared on its 2023 fact sheet that it would
> perform follow-up studies to better understand the effects found in the
> long term animal studies. So what happened? At this juncture, it is
> unclear. Have the follow-up studies been completed already? Working
> with Swiss national engineering and U.S. government experts, the NTP
> had devised small-scale systems for exposing animals experimentally to
> controlled levels of wireless radiation. Yet results from these
> exposure systems have neither been publicly shared nor published.
>
> In a sudden and inexplicable turnaround of this long-scheduled and
> heavily reviewed workplan, the NTP now states that no more research on
> wireless radiation is planned due to costs of the studies and technical
> challenges. One must ask what is driving this flipflop. What has led to
> this sudden change in priorities, so that such an exponentially growing
> environmental exposure no longer merits study?
>
> The sole explanation from NTP for this turnaround raises more questions
> than it answers: “The research was technically challenging and more
> resource-intensive than expected. No additional [wireless radiation]
> studies are planned.”
>
> This defies modern medical and even casual public knowledge and
> concerns. For example, infertility clinics ask men what their habits
> are with respect to cell phones and other wireless devices. They tell
> them to take these phones off their bodies and out of their pockets
> because there is evidence of a correlation in rodents between wireless
> radiation exposure and low sperm count, poorer sperm quality, decreased
> testosterone and damage to the testes.
>
>
> https://thehill.com/opinion/technology/4437988-why-did-nih-abruptly-halt-research-on-the-harms-of-cell-phone-radiation/

This article is so full of errors and selective omissions. There's no
evidence this is sudden reversal. The "2023" (sic) fact sheet - published
last month Jan 2024 - states quite clearly that the studies had finished in
2018, were complete and no more work was planned.