Letter written by Eileen O’Connor, Director of EM Radiation Research Trust – www.radiationresearch.org

For the attention of UK and Ireland members representing the European Economic and Social Committee TEN Section on electrosensitivity,

I am contacting you after receiving a copy of the opinion on Electromagnetic hypersensitivity (EHS) report recently adopted by the EESC’s TEN section: https://toad.eesc.europa.eu/ViewDoc.aspx?doc=ces%5cten%5cten559%5cES%5cEESC-2014-05117-00-00-AS-TRA_ES.doc&docid=3045930

The reports main purpose is to protect people suffering with electrosensitivity and your important work will hopefully lead towards suggesting binding EU legislation on EMF. I am grateful to all members for allocating almost five hours towards this important debate on 7th January, 2015 and appreciate the voting has been close in the final text along in the voting on each of the amendments. I understand that the next plenary session is due to take place on 21st January, 2015 to finalise the report and therefore call on all members to review the evidence and information contained within this letter.

I am the founder and Director for the UK EM Radiation Research Trust. I am also founding member and Board member for the International EMF Alliance and member of the EU Commission Stakeholder Dialogue Group on EMF.

I can assure you that EHS is very real. It is a physiological condition, not a psychological one. Some studies have been published by psychologists who are not qualified to establish physiological causality, and funding from the telecommunications industry has also created a literature bias as evidenced in published figures by Henry Lai and Anke Huss.

The number of people suffering from EHS is increasing as the exposure to modern digital wireless technology increases at a fast rate. Wireless technology is currently being widely promoted and will greatly increase the number of pulsing RF sources close to people. Many homes, schools and offices now have DECT RF phone systems and WiFi. We believe that already the economic costs of people working less well due to EHS symptoms outweighs the apparent benefits of having everyone wirelessly connected. In most cases it is better, faster and certainly more secure to have properly Ethernet wired systems in homes and offices. The EESC should ensure that they are able to properly quantify these factors so that you can make a balanced judgement.

I am shocked to hear that UK EESC member Sir Richard Adams argued against the precautionary approach and apparently used denial arguments that are clearly modelled on telecommunications enterprise lobbies…

Please read the entire letter at Open letter to European Economic and Social Committee