Italian Court: Mobile Phone and Brain Tumor – Again, vs. U.S. Historical Denial
As noted recently, international legal decisions in France (harm to cows), and Germany (property owners can be held liable for health damages) have been incrementally moving the needle further forward towards recognition that radio frequencies are a bio-active agent that can cause harm to human health and the environment.
Italy is in the news again, but it depends on the news source.
Countries Recognizing Health and Enviromental Issues vs. Countries Ignoring Both
On the other side of the equation, the historical record demonstrates clearly that many countries including the U.S. are not seeking to address unsafe technology decisions.
Italy appears to be taking a different approach. As reported in 2020 by the Children’s Health Defense,”Six Italian Courts Have Ruled Cell Phones Cause Brain Tumors.”
Now it is seven.
Rather than covering international developments that challenge narratives about the safety of radio frequencies and wireless devices, in the U.S, the mainstream media has been complicit in obscuring the truth from the public.
It’s been going on for a long time.
U.S. Historical Record, 1976: Emphasize Military and Industrial Output
Dating back to 1976, the United States signed an agreement that dismissed extensive research conducted by the Russians regarding harm caused by radio frequencies. “If the more advanced nations of the West are strict in the enforcement of stringent exposure standards, there could be unfavorable effects on industrial output and military functions.”
A perpetual emergency warfare mindset continues to override reason and precaution, as noted in 2012 by Allan Frey: Security concerns during the Cold War may have led to the generation of misinformation on the physiological effects of microwave radiation from mobile phones, 2012 Working for the U.S. military, he identified both microwave hearing, which is NOT tinnitus from an unknown source, and damage to the Blood Brain Barrier.
“Protecting the Health of the Cell phone Industry“
The U.S.’s decades-long emphasis on prioritizing military and economic agendas over health was sustained in a recent court case regarding labeling of cell phones at the point of sale.
As Tech Wellness reported,” The Court said that the argument all comes down to dealing with the fact the FCC has to consider both the health and safety of people buying cellphones and the health and safety of the cellphone industry and that the 2019 RF Order specifically talked about the danger of over-warning people about a particular danger.” “The court nixed cellphone warning labels based on preemption.”
- the court said the warning was true and accurate
- the court agreed the warning was not misleading
- the court said the safety warning was same one the FCC already requires in user manuals
Natural Blaze is Google Free!
Support Independent Media for as Little as $5 Per Month
So, the warning that’s allowed to hide in the fine print of our cellphone and smartphone manuals has to stay there. Buried at the end of the pdf, where most of us rarely bother to open.” – Tech Wellness
Testing and Test Dummies
Historical evidence indicates that when consumers were accurately informed about the health risks associated with cigarettes, they changed their behavior.
The industry and its partners have been at war with the warnings about wireless (including war-gaming scientists.)
The Environmental Health Trust compiled Read The Fine Print, All cell phones and wireless devices instruct that they should be held away from your body.
(The media and entertainment industry routinely portray phones being held directly against the head.)
Italy’s 2020 Decision: Turin Court of Appeals
In 2020, news aggregator Mondaq reported “On 13 January 2020 the Turin Court of Appeals dismissed the appeal filed by the National Insurance Provider (“INAIL”) and upheld the first instance decision issued by the Court of Ivrea in 2017, which had established causation between extensive work-related use of mobile phone and brain tumour, ordering INAIL to compensate the claimant with a lifelong payment.”
“A 57-year-old employee of the Italian telecommunication company Telecom sued INAIL before the Court of Ivrea alleging that he developed an acoustic neurinoma as a result of the allegedly extensive work-related use of mobile phone.
”In the appeal proceedings, the Turin Court of Appeals directed a new court expertise in order to re-investigate over causation. Based on the findings of the new court appointed experts, the Court fully confirmed the first instance decision thus rejecting the appeal brought by INAIL.”
“The recent decision of the Turin Court of Appeals follows in the footstep of various Italian courts’ decisions that have in some way acknowledged the link between cancer and the intense and extensive use of mobile phones.”
“ [ ] Mobile phone manufacturers operating in Italy might need to reconsider the warnings included in the users’ instructions manual, so as to include a specific and more detailed warning on the potential health risks.” – Hogan Lovells Publications analysis distributed by Mondaq
An analysis of the 2020 Turin decision by the Environmental Health Trust is here.
The November 2022 Decision; The 2020 Turin Decision Has Been Upheld
On November 5, 2022, newsrnd.com reported. “ A tumor due to prolonged cellular use, is entitled to an annuity’ “ This was established by the Court of Appeal of Turin (ANSA) There is a “high probability” that the cell phone was the cause of the cancer. This was established by a sentence of the Court of Appeal of Turin, which confirmed the decision of the Court of Aosta which had sentenced Inail to pay the pension for occupational disease to a worker, now retired, specialized technician of the Cogne Acciai Speciali.
The 63-year-old man, between 1995 and 2008, used his mobile phone for more than ten thousand hours for work purposes, with an average of 2.5 hours a day.
A use that has caused a benign intracranial tumor and a consequent “left deafness, paresis of the facial nerve, balance disorder and depressive syndrome”.
In 2020 the Court of Aosta had recognized the causal link between the use of mobile phones and the onset of neuroma of the acoustic nerve, but Inail had appealed for new advice.”- newsrnd.com
An analysis of the court decision (roughly translated) noted;
“Two important issues were debated during the CTU: the conflict of interest, and the quality of the studies [ ] to underestimate, or affirm, the causal link”
“This RF hypothesis must be considered even if “the exact mechanism of action of radio frequencies” is still unknown (whether it is heat, or [ ] a genetic mutation).”
A press release about the court case noted that after conducting a risk assessment, the Italian mobile phone services company Wind-Tre required that their 7000 employees use wired headsets and/or corded landline phones, which indicates that the company is aware of the health risks.
“It is known that Swiss reinsurers do not insure risks from RF.”
“The American researchers of the NTP (National Toxicology Program) stated: “We believe that the link between radiofrequency (RF) radiation and tumors in male rats is real”. NTP experienced schwannomas and gliomas, malignant tumors of the brain.”
How will the New York Times and other U.S. media outlets cover the story?
A translated analysis of the Italian decision noted, “IARC (International Agency for Research on Cancer) after the publication of the animal studies by NTP and Ramazzini has included radio frequencies among the agents for which a re-evaluation of carcinogenicity in the 2020-2024 period is considered a priority because ”new biological tests and mechanistic action of the RF) justify a reassessment of the classification”.
“A change towards; “probable” or “certain” is expected. “
This prediction applies to the classifications used by IARC.
In 2011, the WHO/IARC classified RF-EMF (radiofrequency electromagnetic fields, otherwise known as “wireless radiation”) as a Class 2B Possible Human Carcinogen based on credible evidence that linked long term wireless exposure to brain cancer.
The IARC cancer classification has been routinely dismissed and/or misinterpreted. for example here and here. “When I realized that the reports suggested that RF-energy from cell phones was not considered any more carcinogenic than coffee, as both are now in the company of other class 2B carcinogens, I gave up the idea” “Looking at the pictures on TV of the brain that was impacted by the wicked RF energy coming from the cell phones, I was remorseful to have ever used the cell phone. I was especially saddened to hear that the brain of a child was more vulnerable to the harmful effects of the RF-EMF. Little did I know then that these conclusions were based on the ‘anatomical models of humans’!”
The author didn’t note that ‘safety guidelines’ themselves are based on inanimate anatomical models, including recent research concluding that 5G waves “vanish” before they reach “the brain layer.”
Additionally, the myopic focus on cancer is a play out of the tobacco industry playbook, and denies the emerging tsunami of other adverse impacts, including neurological damage, especially for older American women,
“Invasion” by Industry and ICNIRP, Courtesy of the Media
An analysis of the decision this week in Italy noted, “For anyone who deals with these cases it is important to remind the experts and judges that the literature over the years has been literally invaded by articles, which distract the interpreters and confuse, written by those who are financed by the industry who have opposite interests.”
The Court of Turin ruled in February 2020 that ICNIRP (international Commission on Non-ionizing Radiation Protection) should not be relied upon for meaningful guidelines due to bias.
“ICNIRP refuses to acknowledge the robust body of peer reviewed research demonstrating harmful bio-effects from manmade radio frequency electromagnetic radiation. ICNIRP produces ‘guidelines’ which are based largely on theory and do not take into account independent experimental evidence.”
As noted by the Environmental Health Trust, FCC and ICNIRP do not protect people or the environment.
Around the country and in many nations worldwide, planning departments and decision makers are being told that new infrastructure is safe “because it meets FCC or ICNIRP guidelines”
Some nations, like India, (which issued new EMF guidelines and new exposure limits lowered to 1/10 of the ICNIRP level) are not buying it.
EHT notes, “More than 20 countries and other government jurisdictions have official government advice on cell phones with recommended steps to minimize cell phone radiation to the brain, especially for children, Including Australia, Austria, Belgium, Canada, Croatia, Cyprus, Denmark, Finland, France, French Polynesia, Germany, Greece, India, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Korea, Russia, Singapore, Sri Lanka, Switzerland, Turkey, United Kingdom Krakow, Poland; European Parliament (Resolution 1815).”
Decisions in other countries are listed here.
Because the U.S. continues to build its tech growth economy on the basis of hiding the truth from the public, eventually the house of cards will collapse.
The cigarette century was never only a question about lung cancer and smokers, (in part because it caused so many other adverse health effects, and because second-hand smoke also causes harm.)
As infrastructure is being installed outside bedroom windows, wireless ‘safety” was never only a question about cellphone users and brain cancer… although that evidence is mounting.
This concerns the entire eco-system.
Every wireless transmission requires scrutiny towards safer choices.
Druid teacher Sarah Furho used the metaphor of traveling by kayak and balancing the oars. She wrote about “the pilot who has the skill and courage necessary to bring under control the destructive potential of carelessness. [ ] “must make the paddle into a means of transportation rather than a weapon.” [ ] May this full Moon, this tender moment of balance and imbalance, inspire a new relationship between my culture and the natural world.”
For all our relations.
“They are absolutely guilty of leaving the public in doubt without informing them”