BioInitiative

BioInitiative is the brand name of an international scientific initiative and its flagship publication, the BioInitiative Report, which argues that current public safety limits for electromagnetic fields (ELF and RF) are inadequate and should be replaced by biologically based exposure standards. The initiative's first published contribution appeared in 2007, and it was substantially updated with the BioInitiative 2012 Report. The report is presented as a rationale for biologically based public exposure standards for electromagnetic fields, covering extremely low frequency (ELF) fields and radiofrequency (RF) radiation. The BioInitiative 2012 Report was prepared by 29 authors from ten countries, including ten medical doctors, 21 PhDs, and three holders of MSc, MA or MPH degrees. Among the authors were three former presidents of the Bioelectromagnetics Society and five full members of BEMS. The report reviews peer-reviewed literature documenting biological effects of non-ionizing radiation, including ELF-EMF, static fields and RFR, and concludes that bioeffects occur at very low, non-thermal exposure levels. It argues that exposure at levels allowable under current federal public safety limits poses health risks and that new standards should be protective at levels thousands of times lower than current FCC limits. The initiative also maintains searchable research summaries, including Henry Lai's Research Summaries, which cover peer-reviewed literature on biological effects of non-ionizing radiation. According to the initiative, in the ten years since the 2012 report was posted, hundreds of new peer-reviewed papers have been published, with a clear majority reporting biological effects rather than no effect. BioInitiative's conclusions are contested. The report has been widely publicized and has been cited in some judicial decisions, but it has been criticized by numerous scientific bodies. Analyses by institutions such as the EMF-Net network, the Danish National Board of Health, the German Federal Office for Radiation Protection, the Dutch Health Council and the US Environmental Protection Agency have been cited as refuting its quality. The Bioelectromagnetics Society, whose members include several contributors, did not endorse the study. The French Agency for Food, Environmental and Occupational Health & Safety (AFSSET) concluded in an October 2009 expert report that the chapters varied in quality, that some did not present available scientific data in a balanced way, that the report reflected personal opinions or convictions, that it contained conflicts of interest in several chapters, that it did not correspond to a collective expert assessment, and that it was written in an activist register. Critics have also pointed to the appearance of scientific seriousness and to a conflict of interest involving co-editor Cindy Sage, owner of an eponymous consultancy offering solutions to characterize or mitigate electromagnetic field impacts. BioInitiative operates as an advocacy-oriented scientific report brand rather than a conventional commercial product line. Its website distributes the complete 2012 report and research summaries, and its materials are used by environmental associations as a scientific basis for invoking the precautionary principle and for requesting the dismantling of mobile phone masts.

BioInitiative is an international group of scientists whose first published contribution appeared in 2007 as the BioInitiative Report. The report aims to demonstrate the dangers of electromagnetic fields, including low frequencies, radiofrequencies and Wi-Fi. Environmental associations use it as a scientific basis, notably to justify invoking the precautionary principle and to demand the dismantling of mobile phone masts. However, the report is criticized by numerous scientific bodies. The 2007 BioInitiative Report claims to provide scientific evidence concerning health effects of electromagnetic fields, including cellular stress, genotoxicity, and risks of brain tumors or leukemias. It considers existing standards inadequate and defines threshold values intended to better protect health. The BioInitiative 2012 Report revealed a significant increase in evidence concerning health risks linked to electromagnetic fields and wireless technologies since 2007, based on a review of more than 1,800 scientific studies. On the basis of this report, French deputy Yann Galut requested that the Council of Europe resolution of 27 May 2011, which calls to set a prevention threshold for exposure levels, be followed. However, the Ministry of Health opposed this, relying on a 2009 ANSES report. The report has been highly publicized and has given rise to some judicial decisions, against which the French Academy of Medicine protested. Analyses by various major institutions refute its quality, including the EMF-Net network, the European research and technological development program, the Danish National Board of Health, the German Federal Office for Radiation Protection, the Dutch Health Council, and the US environmental agency. The Bioelectromagnetics Society, which publishes the Bioelectromagnetics Journal and whose members include several contributors, did not approve the study either. According to the Society, research by theoretical physics specialists suggests that exposure to non-thermal radiofrequency fields will produce nothing other than a local temperature rise in living beings if the fields are sufficiently powerful; physicists cannot know everything, so they turn to biologists and discover that the databases contain no scientifically reproducible demonstration of a harmful health effect, even after 50 or 60 years of scientific research. Jean-Paul Krivine, editor of the journal Science et pseudo-sciences, denounced the appearance of scientific seriousness and the conflict of interest of one of the co-editors: Cindy Sage, owner of an eponymous consultancy, offers solutions to characterize or mitigate the impacts of electromagnetic fields. The AFSSET collective expert report of October 2009 analyzed the content as follows: the different chapters of the report are of unequal drafting and quality; some articles do not present the available scientific data in a balanced way, do not analyze the quality of the cited articles, or reflect the personal opinions or convictions of their authors; it has conflicts of interest in several chapters; it does not correspond to a collective expert assessment and is written in an activist register. On its website, BioInitiative states that the 2012 report was prepared by 29 authors from ten countries, ten holding medical degrees (MDs), 21 PhDs, and three MSc, MA or MPHs. Among the authors are three former presidents of the Bioelectromagnetics Society and five full members of BEMS. The site presents conclusions that bioeffects clearly occur at very low exposure levels (non-thermal levels) to electromagnetic fields and radiofrequency radiation. It also hosts Henry Lai's Research Summaries, searchable by keywords, covering peer-reviewed published literature documenting biological effects of non-ionizing radiation (ELF-EMF, static fields and RFR). According to the site, in the ten years since the BioInitiative 2012 Report was posted, hundreds of new peer-reviewed research papers have been published, and a clear majority of studies report biological effects as opposed to no effect. The trend continues to show that exposure to low-intensity ELF-EMF/static fields and RFR at levels allowable under current federal public safety limits poses health risks. This body of literature strongly supports new, biologically based public exposure standards that are protective against exposure levels identified in the report to cause effects at levels thousands of times lower than current FCC limits.

• 2012

  BioInitiative 2012 Report is published, prepared by 29 authors from ten countries and reviewing more than 1,800 scientific studies.

• 2011

  Council of Europe resolution of 27 May 2011 calls to set a prevention threshold for exposure levels; French deputy Yann Galut later cites the BioInitiative 2012 Report in support.

• 2009

  AFSSET publishes an October 2009 collective expert report analyzing the BioInitiative Report and criticizing its quality and conflicts of interest.

• 2007

  First published contribution of BioInitiative, the BioInitiative Report, is released.

Advocacy-oriented scientific report brand arguing for biologically based public exposure standards for electromagnetic fields, used by environmental associations to invoke the precautionary principle.

• BioInitiative Report 2007

  First published contribution of the initiative, claiming scientific evidence on health effects of electromagnetic fields and proposing threshold values.

• BioInitiative 2012 Report

  Updated report prepared by 29 authors from ten countries, reviewing more than 1,800 studies and arguing for biologically based public exposure standards.

• Henry Lai's Research Summaries

  Searchable abstracts of peer-reviewed literature documenting biological effects of non-ionizing radiation (ELF-EMF, static fields and RFR).

1. 1BioInitiative Report: A Rationale for a Biologically-based Public Exposure Standard for Electromagnetic Fields (ELF and RF)bioinitiative.org
2. 2Bioinitiative - Wikidatawikidata.org
3. 3Bioinitiative - Wikipédiafr.wikipedia.org