ARPANSA PLEASE REPLY – OCTOBER 2020

On Tuesday, 14 July 2020 14:12, ARPANSA Info <Info@arpansa.gov.au> wrote:

Dear , Administrators of Northern Rivers for Safe Technology

Thank you for your enquiry. Exposure to higher frequency radio waves above 6 GHz have been the subject of a number of reviews. Reviews take into account the body of available evidence and summarise the scientific and health implications of these holistically. This is very important as no single study can be considered evidence of safety or harm. There are also some studies that specifically assess the exposure from airport scanners, radar systems and medical applications without making health conclusions, however, these are useful in understanding exposure for comparison purposes with other sources of radio waves. Two major reviews include;

· Public Health England’s review by the Independent Advisory Group on Non-ionising Radiation titled “Health effects from radiofrequency electromagnetic fields” https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government
/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/
333080/RCE20_Health_Effects_RF_Electromagnetic
_fields.pdf

· The Scientific Committee on Emerging and Newly Identified Health Risks (SCENIHR)’s opinion “Potential health effects of exposure to electromagnetic fields (EMF)” https://ec.europa.eu/health/scientific_committees
/emerging/docs/scenihr_o_041.pdf

These reviews focus on a multitude of different studies and include assessments of exposure levels, exposure modes (e.g. medical, radar, scanners, etc.) and discuss the quality and weight of evidence in the context of health implications. They assess the individual studies consistent with ARPANSA’s approach to assessing the scientific evidence and include laboratory, animal, human and epidemiological peer reviewed research. A list of the studies assessed can be found in the reference list of the reviews.

ARPANSA and other health authorities such as the WHO and ICNIRP assess all of the available evidence using a health risk assessment approach. The scientific community uses a system to decide which research results should be published in reputable scientific journals called peer review. Peer review subjects scientific research papers to independent scrutiny by other qualified scientific experts (peers) before they are made public. ARPANSA applies the same level of scrutiny when assessing the quality and merit of research within the body of evidence.

In summary, ARPANSA’s messaging is based on an assessment of the body of evidence rather than any specific peer reviewed study. The approach is consistent with the reviews provided and that taken by other health authorities as mentioned. An example of this approach can be found in ARPANSA’s Technical Report 164 – Review of Radiofrequency Health Effects Research – Scientific Literature 2000 – 2012.

https://www.arpansa.gov.au/sites/default/files
/legacy/pubs/technicalreports/tr164.pdf

Despite a publication date of 2014, this is an ongoing process and ARPANSA stays up to date with the peer reviewed literature and evidence on this topic.

We hope this assist with your enquiry.

Regards,

cid:image001.png@01D28901.576FE810

The “Talk to a Scientist” Team

Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency

619 Lower Plenty Road, Yallambie VIC 3085, AUSTRALIA

http://www.arpansa.gov.au

From: nrforsafetech <nrforsafetech@protonmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, 30 June 2020 2:36 PM
To: Carl-Magnus Larsson <Carl-Magnus.Larsson@arpansa.gov.au>; ARPANSA Info <Info@arpansa.gov.au>; ARPANSA Media <media@arpansa.gov.au>
Cc: info@acma.gov.au; shane.mcauliffe@acma.gov.au; paulb@echo.net.au; seannic@protonmail.com; Nick.Kwek@sbs.com.au
Subject: URGENT: Request for list of studies on 5G safety

Dear ARPANSA,

Request for list of studies regarding 5G safety

We are writing to request information from ARPANSA through administrative access.

Our request relates to ARPANSA’s public information sheet titled, Misinformation about Australia’s 5G Network, in which ARPANSA makes the following safety claim:

“Higher frequency radio waves are already used in security screening units at airports, police radar guns to check speed, remote sensors and in medicine and these uses have been thoroughly tested and found to have no negative impacts on human health.”

We request ARPANSA to provide us with the scientific evidence from peer-reviewed literature (i.e. a list of studies) that supports the claim that security screening units at airports, police radar guns and remote sensors used in medicine have been thoroughly tested and found to have no negative impacts on human health.

Yours sincerely

Administrators of Northern Rivers for Safe Technology