..................................................................................................................................................................................................................
..................................................................................................................................................................................................................

   FRONT PAGE       ABOUT US       EVIDENCE BASED SCIENCE       NEWS & COMMENTARY       ACCUEIL

The Bio-Initiative Report 2007 Edition
The 2007 edition of the Bio-Initiative Report was written by a relatively small group of scientists, lobbyists, and promoters, whose work is not recognized according to established scientific standards. It is the source most widely quoted by alarmists. Cindy Sage, who wrote the Introduction, is not a scientist. She has a web site where she offers services as a consultant on EMF & Health issues. In the Introduction she makes the following unscientific statements: "Scientists do have a role, but it is not exclusive and other opinions matter....Some experts keep saying that all studies have to be consistent (turn out the same way every time) before they are comfortable saying an effect exists." The results of most of the studies showing harmful health effects cited in the Bio-Initiative Report are not supported by follow up studies - which are usually far more comprehensive. Repeatability of results is a critical hallmark of science.

The work of a number of the contributors has been heavily criticized by other scientists. For example Lennart Hardell, is one of the co-authors of Chapter 10 on cell phones and brain cancer. Some Hardell et al.'s studies have been criticized in the scientific community for suffering from "recall bias". Patients who have been diagnosed with brain cancer are asked to fill in a questionnaire in which they are asked to remember how much they used their cell phones. See more about some of the Hardell et al. papers here.

Ollie Johansson, another author of the Bio-Initiative Report, suggested in a paper (see P 255) that lung cancer is not caused by smoking alone. He actually suggested that lung cancer only started to increase after the introduction of FM radio broadcasting in the 1950's. In 2004, Ollie Johansson was awarded the "Misleader of the Year" award by the Swedish Skeptics Society. Here is a quote from the award citation: "Olle Johansson receives the award as one of the most prominent representatives of the far too many scientists who, to draw attention to themselves and funding for their own activities, disseminate worry among the public in mass media by presenting unsubstantiated hypotheses as established facts. According to VoF, Johansson's own research pertaining to electromagnetic fields is of low quality."

Some of the studies cited in the Bio-Inititiative Report have been accused of scientific fraud. Fraudulent studies by Robert Liburdy and allegedly fraudulent studies by Hugo Rudiger et al. are cited in the Report. The "studies" performed at Rudiger's lab are particularly noteworthy. A news article in the prestigious journal Science states that they are "the only two peer-reviewed scientific papers showing that electromagnetic fields (EMFs) from cell phones can cause DNA breakage". Proof of DNA breakage would be cause for concern for possible health effects. The Rudiger et al. papers on DNA breakage have been withdrawn by the authors.

The EMF-NET, a scientific advisory group for the European Commission, says that the Bio-Initiative Report. "is written in an alarmist and emotive language and whose arguments have no scientific support from well-conducted EMF research....There is a lack of balance in the report; no mention is made in fact of reports that do not concur with authors' statements and conclusions. The results and conclusions are very different from those of recent national and international reviews on this topic"

1.        The COMAR committee of the the IEEE has written an excellent Review Paper published in the Oct. 2009 issue of Health Physics on many of the studies cited by alarmists, and in particular the Bio-Initiative Report. From the COMAR paper:
"A major weakness of the BIR is a selective, rather than a comprehensive, review of the literature in various topical areas. Two examples discussed here are a) animal tumor studies and b) genotoxicity (DNA damage)."
"As mentioned, the BIR discussed only two animal studies investigating tumor development in RF-exposed animals. For comparison, the ICES review, which was published before the BIR was written, included 35 studies on this topic and the weight of evidence of these studies showed no association between RF exposure and tumor development."
"Follow-on research to the Lai and Singh reports at another university included an extensive study comparing different DNA damage methods and included an attempt at exact replication of the original studies; the results failed to demonstrate an increase in DNA damage due to RF exposure (Lagroye et al. 2004). Other research (Malyapa et al. 1997) also failed to confirm DNA damage. The Stewart Report concluded that the evidence of Lai and Singh for DNA damage "is contradicted by a number of other studies in vivo and is not supported by in vitro work"

2.        EMF-NET is a scientific consortium of 41 participants funded by the European Commission to investigate the issue of EMF and health. They have published a number of reports, which are available on their web site. None of their studies has found any significant link between EMF and health. Their analysis of the Bio-Initiative Report essentially dismisses it's validity. The document contains an extensive list of links to statements on EMF and health from a number of government and expert panels.
Report http://www.izmf.de/download/archiv/EMF-Net-Bioinitiative-608.pdf

3.        The Health Council of the Netherlands is an independent scientific advisory body set up to advise the government on issues of public health. Their analysis of the Bio-Initiative Report essentially dismisses its validity. 
Report: Health Council Netherland Bio-Initiative Analysis 

4.        ACRBR is the Australian Centre for Radiofrequency Bio-effects Research. It is funded by a grant from the National Health and Medical Research Council, Australia to support research on EMF & health. Their analysis of the Bio-Initiative Report essentially dismisses its validity.
Report  http://www.acrbr.org.au/FAQ/ACRBR%20Bioinitiative%20Report%2018%20Dec%202008.pdf

5.        EPRI The Electric Power Research Institute is an independent non-profit organization that conducts research on electricity generation, distribution, and use. Their analysis of the Bio-Initiative Report essentially dismisses it's validity.
Report http://emf.epri.com/EPRI_Comment_BioInitiative_Working_Group_Report_10_07.p

6.         MMF Mobile Manufacturers Forum is an international association of telecommunications equipment manufacturers with an interest in mobile or wireless communications. Their analysis of the Bio-Initiative Report essentially dismisses it's validity. Their report contains links to expert panels at the national level from a number of countries.
Report http://www.mmfai.org/public/docs/eng/090105_MMF_Viewpoint_BioInitiativeReport_final.pdf
    Except where noted all images on this web site are taken from the Wikipedia commons
    All trademarks are the property of their respective owners                                                                    Copyright 2009 EMF & Health