Wireless technology: WHO’s role in corporate genocide

Background:This submission is pursuant to the call for action by Olga Sheean and the more than 2,000 signatories to her petition to have microwave engineer Dr Emilie van Deventer removed immediately from her position in charge of the WHO International EMF Project.(World Health Organization:
setting the standard for a wireless world of harm)

Wireless technology: WHO’s role in corporate genocide

Attention: Mr António Guterres, Secretary-General, United Nations

Attention: Dr Margaret Chan, Director-General, World Health Organization

Attention: Dr Emilie van Deventer, Team Leader, Radiation Programme, International EMF Project, World Health Organization

February 13 2017

Dear Mr Guterres, Drs Chan and van Deventer:

Wireless technology: WHO’s role in corporate genocide

I am writing as a journalist, scientific editor, and researcher covering the call for action by Olga Sheean [1] and the more than 2,000 signatories to her petition to have microwave engineer Dr Emilie van Deventer removed immediately from her position in charge of the WHO International EMF Project, which sets the global research agenda and standards for exposure to radiation from wireless technologies; and for her to be replaced by someone with a medical or health background who is sensitive to the issues involved and takes immediate action to alert the public to the proven dangers of radiofrequency and microwave radiation.

I understand that you were all couriered hard copies of this submission; in the first place, I need to confirm that your offices have received this document and are aware of its contents. Please note that obtaining acknowledgement of receipt of submissions on this matter from the UN and WHO has proved virtually impossible in the past, as will be described in detail later.

Having confirmed receipt, please will you indicate whether and when we can expect a considered response from your respective offices. We cannot allow this matter yet again to pass without any comment from the relevant authorities and must insist on establishing an agreed channel to obtain such comment. If obtaining comment requires direct lobbying of UN and WHO representatives in my home country of Swaziland, this will be done.

Please also note that in order to separate my journalistic role from my personal interests in this matter, I may write under the nom de plume Fred Malherbe (@fred_malherbe). This is in no way an attempt to be anonymous, merely a convenience I adopted in 1999 to separate my editing work from my writing.

This is the third major petition addressed to the United Nations on this issue. In the year 2000, a Swiss appeal signed by thousands of people [2] begged the UN not to take advice from the chairman of the self-appointed International Commission on Non-Ionising Radiation Protection (ICNIRP), Dr Michael Repacholi, who set up WHO’s International EMF Project in May 1996. Part of this appeal (translated from the German) reads:

Dr. Michael Repacholi is to be dismissed from his post. He has revoked his own research results, which have proved the harmfulness of electromagnetic radiation, when this seemed to him to be appropriate for reasons of opportunity. We no longer accept his false statements, which he disseminated as the honorary chairman of ICNIRP on behalf of WHO worldwide. He is no longer credible and is no longer viable to preside over such an important body.

The only response of the United Nations (according to a personal communication from the petitioners some years ago) was to say that they did not employ Dr Repacholi and therefore could not fire him. However, Repacholi states that he personally established the WHO International EMF Project in 1996. In 2000 he appeared before an Australian Senate inquiry claiming to speak as a WHO representative [3], and he ran the International EMF Project until 2006, which clearly contradicts the UN’s assertion that Repacholi was not one of their officials at that time.

All the scientific evidence presented in this 2000 appeal to the United Nations was flatly ignored.

In 2015, a distinguished group of over 200 scientists led by Dr Martin Blank of Columbia University made an appeal to the UN Secretary-General [4] and to WHO to address the growing international health crisis caused by wireless technology. This appeal pointed to a clear contradiction in WHO policy, in that its International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) in 2011 classified wireless radiation in all its forms to be a Class 2B possible human carcinogen and issued a clear precautionary warning to minimise exposures; yet the EMF Project flatly refuses, despite all the scientific evidence, to issue one word of precaution to the world.

These eminent scientists were not even afforded the courtesy of an acknowledgement of receipt from the United Nations Secretary-General, the Director-General of WHO, or the International EMF Project. This stunning display of contempt for top scientists, all of whom had published peer-reviewed journal articles on the issue at hand, proves that WHO cannot be regarded as having any credibility whatsoever as an agency promoting public health in this field. A mandate for public health requires sensitivity and openness to the public; in this respect especially, Dr Emilie van Deventer has completely failed to demonstrate even a semblance of public accountability.

Now in 2017, another major appeal, from a former international civil servant familiar with the UN, Ms Olga Sheean, has been submitted to you. This time, we are determined to get a proper, considered response from the United Nations and the World Health Organization.

In this context, I would like to mention my own experience. In 2009, I wrote an appeal titled An SOS from South Africa [5] to Dr van Deventer, whom I had met at a conference in Johannesburg in 2007, begging her to take seriously a series of apparent epidemics of radiation-induced illnesses that I investigated in South Africa, evidenced by scores of doctors’ letters and affidavits from people who fell ill immediately after a microwave tower started operating in their neighbourhood.

After a month of intensive lobbying, during which I contacted hundreds of doctors working for WHO in Africa asking them to help me secure acknowledgement of receipt from the International EMF Project, I finally received an email from Dr Emilie van Deventer, saying she was aware of my submission, which had been couriered, faxed, and emailed to her offices in Geneva. That was the very last word I ever heard from Dr van Deventer, who otherwise totally ignored my appeal, just as she has totally ignored every appeal from outside her own carefully vetted channels.

In 2016, I wrote an updated appeal to Dr van Deventer [6], showing her that over 95% of all studies on base stations worldwide showed a clear pattern of adverse health effects, including significantly raised cancer rates. Again, there was no acknowledgement or response to this appeal. In 2006, flying directly in the face of the scientific evidence, the EMF Project specifically directed researchers NOT to look into cancer around masts.

However, I have detected one – and only one – indirect response by Dr van Deventer to my 2009 appeal. I had noted that WHO stated the following in a fact sheet:

“Siting base stations near kindergartens, schools and playgrounds may need special consideration. Open communication and discussion between the mobile phone operator, local council and the public during the planning stages for a new antenna can help create public understanding and greater acceptance of a new facility.”

http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs193/en/

My query to Dr van Deventer at the time was the following:

…If WHO’s statement is analysed carefully, it will be seen to be clearly biased towards helping “create greater acceptance of a new facility”.

I have to ask you, with all respect: why is the World Health Organization, which is dedicated to public health, advocating “greater acceptance” of new base stations, especially in schools, kindergartens and playgrounds? Why does WHO have an interest in actively promoting acceptance of microwave technology? How is this part of WHO’s brief as a public health body? I would most sincerely appreciate an answer to this question, because on the face of it, WHO is openly biased towards the operators in trying to facilitate “greater acceptance” of base stations — even in schools and kindergartens, against best international practice.

As stated, I never received a response from Dr van Deventer. However, if you consult this particular WHO fact sheet, you will see that this wording, promoting the active acceptance of microwave masts in kindergartens and schools by WHO, has since been removed. Obviously, this statement was revealing too much of the true agenda of the World Health Organization in support of the wireless industry donations that keep the International EMF Project going.

Nonetheless, given that ICNIRP and WHO have not changed their guidelines or their advice since 1998, I do regard this editing of their fact sheet to be a possible, actual, considered response (albeit indirect) to a query from the public: a first for the International EMF Project, even if it is to take active steps to cover up its industry-friendly agenda.

In 2010, the Electromagnetic Radiation Research Foundation of South Africa invited Mr Barrie Trower, the British government’s former top scientific expert on microwave warfare, to come to South Africa and Botswana to help in fighting microwave masts that were causing illnesses. Mr Trower is a controversial figure who, I am now certain, is a genuine whistleblower on a par with Edward Snowden. He revealed that the governments of the West have long researched pulsed microwave frequencies and their effects on brain and body; and had weaponised this technology and implemented it in attacks on both military and civilian targets decades ago, specifically mentioning the microwave radiation of women protesting the Greenham Common nuclear airbase in the 1980s and confirming that this was done deliberately to induce all kinds of illnesses in these women. He says this weaponry was also extensively deployed against the IRA in Northern Ireland.

Mr Trower was a highly trained interrogator who successfully extracted most of the frequencies used as weapons from captured Soviet “microwave spies” infiltrated into the United Kingdom. No coercion was used beyond a “chat over tea”. He also debriefed Soviet-bloc dissidents who had been subjected to sustained microwave attack. When he saw the exact same carrier frequencies, pulsed modulations, and intensities being used in mobile phone technology as were used by microwave weapons, and that entire populations including children were being subjected to this extremely dangerous radiation, he broke with the Official Secrets Act he had signed and went public with his concerns.

Having met Mr Trower and seen how his every claim is backed with copious scientific data, I now repeat a warning that he has given many times, and that has been given by many other authorities, which is that a minimum of 3% of the population is highly sensitive to low-level microwaves and will become ill or die as a result of exposure.

This figure received dramatic confirmation with the recent findings of the US National Toxicology Program (NTP) [7]. This government laboratory carried out one of the most rigorous radiation experiments to date on rats, and the findings were clear: 3% of male rats in particular contracted gliomas, or brain cancer, and tumours equivalent to acoustic neuromas. Many studies show that brain cancers and acoustic neuromas in human beings are associated with microwave radiation. The NTP felt that these results were so significant that they released them early.

If we take this figure of 3%, and consider that a minimum of 5 billion people worldwide are being irradiated at close range with microwaves at these levels, then an absolute rock-bottom minimum of 150 million people are going to be killed or incapacitated by this radiation.

Mr Guterres, as UN Secretary-General, you face many dire challenges around the world. With regard to the health impacts of wireless technology, you and your organisation stand to be held directly, personally, and legally responsible for the death or disability of 150 million or more people. These deaths are occurring right now, all over the world, and I will be happy to provide some of the names and details of people who I am certain have already died from this radiation, including people who developed tumours on their faces exactly where they held their phones – highly malignant cancers of a type that had never been seen by pathologists in South Africa before. Harvard Medical School, which was consulted over one such case in Johannesburg in 2004, said that about a dozen of these strange new cancers had been reported worldwide, while denying that there was any evidence of an environmental cause, despite the records they had been provided of this victim’s extensive mobile phone use.

I therefore urge you, Mr Guterres, to consider very carefully your responsibilities in this matter. You are a trained telecommunications scientist and are therefore in a unique position to assess this situation. You were also UN High Commissioner for Refugees. On behalf of “EMF Refugees” [8] everywhere – who have had to abandon their homes and jobs in order to try find a patch of Earth where they are not being microwaved to death – I appeal to you to consider this issue with the utmost seriousness.

In one interview [9], Mr Barrie Trower described the devastating effects of pulsed microwave radiation on the DNA of all living beings. When the interviewer said that this sounded “worse than nuclear war”, Mr Trower immediately replied: “Oh, much worse than nuclear war, absolutely.” This is the considered opinion of the British government’s top expert on microwave warfare, who was tasked with providing exactly such assessments for the UK military. He also personally went through several full nuclear alerts as an active intelligence agent and knows precisely the devastation that nuclear war can cause.

Mr Trower points to two particular risks of this radiation: one is that of teen suicide, which he says always rises where there are masts. I note in my SOS from South Africa that the arrival of mobile phones coincided with an absolutely unprecedented wave of suicides engulfing black teenagers in that country. I spent 15 years working in black education in South Africa until the end of 1994; in all that time, as an active education researcher, I never came across one single case of even attempted suicide in black teenagers. Since 1995, the first full year of mobile phone use in South Africa, teen suicide in the black population has become pandemic in that country, with 15% of intensive care beds at Soweto’s biggest hospital being taken up with cases of organophosphate poisoning [10], generally teenagers who took rat poison.

Mr Trower also warned of several scientific papers showing genetic damage to the ovarian follicles of mammals from low-level microwaves; this may create permanent genetic damage in the human species that is passed down the female line via mitochondrial DNA, causing genetic illnesses for the remainder of the existence of the human race. With pulsed microwave radiation, we are almost certainly creating the greatest artificial mutation of the human species in its entire existence.

These are just some of the hazards facing our planet; in thousands of scientific studies [11], this radiation has been shown to affect all forms of life, from single-celled organisms to trees, food crops of all kinds, pollinating bees and other insects, birds, reptiles, and mammals.

We are facing a global holocaust of unprecedented proportions; and it is ALL due to the rank failure of the World Health Organization to act even remotely as an agency truly concerned with public health.

British law recognises corporate manslaughter as a crime, where industries knowingly create hazards that lead to death. The wireless industry, with the complete connivance of the World Health Organization, is engaged in what can only be described as corporate genocide: the removal from the planet of scores of millions of people, simply because their physiology is not compatible with even short-term exposure to microwave radiation. This physical incompatibility with technology is a crime in the modern era to be punished with extreme suffering and death, and to be mocked and humiliated by a medical science that regards these illnesses as psychological or “idiopathic”, to quote the World Health Organization’s preferred terminology in this particular instance.

Mr Guterres; Dr Chan; Dr van Deventer: do you wish to be held directly and personally responsible for the extermination or incapacitation of over 150 million human beings? This is your minimal culpability, unless you act very fast indeed and replace Dr van Deventer with someone of proven integrity and sensitivity to human issues in the realm of health.

Having met and interacted personally with Dr Emilie van Deventer, I can testify that she seemed to have no real clue whatsoever about the task she took on in 2006. It fell to me in 2007 to explain to her the EMF Project’s policy on precaution, which is that it should be avoided because it “alarms” people. In this vein, please consider carefully this quote from Dr Paulo Vecchia [12], who succeeded Dr Michael Repacholi as chairman of ICNIRP:

“Precautionary actions to address public concerns may increase rather than mitigate worries and fears of the public. This constitutes a health detriment and should be prevented as other adverse effects of EMF.”

In other words, according to the people who advise WHO, precaution is literally bad for your health; the worry of avoiding radiation is as dangerous as exposing yourself to it. This utter insanity proves that ICNIRP and WHO are not here to protect the public. They are here to protect industry, no matter how many people die in the process.

Dr Vecchia has stated that ICNIRP does not respond to epidemiological data, only to evidence of a “fully worked-out mechanism” that can explain deaths. ICNIRP is based on the axiom that “non-ionising” radiation can only affect biological tissue by heating it. Thus, a scientific paper from Brazil [13] showing possibly thousands of excess cancer deaths occurring near mobile phone masts in just one city is ignored by ICNIRP. Dead bodies piling up around masts mean nothing to these self-appointed protectors of public health. They demand a “mechanism” to explain it, before they will look at it.

Therefore, in closing, I draw your attention to one single scientific paper, Friedman et al. (2007) [14], which shows that just two minutes of low-level mobile phone radiation causes living human cells to be flooded with free radicals, a known pathway for promoting cancer. The full mechanism for this biochemical cascade was deduced by this research team: in response to mobile phone radiation, a single identified enzyme (NADH oxidase) triggers the “ERK” reaction, which results in severe oxidative stress. The ERK cascade occurs specifically in the glial or brain cells, and this may well explain why the rats exposed to whole-body radiation in the NTP trial suffered gliomas or brain cancer – not because these rats were holding tiny phones up to their heads, but because the brain is uniquely sensitive to this radiation, whether from masts or handsets.

The ERK (or Extracellular signal-Regulated Kinase) cascade is crucial to the process of long-term potentiation, in which the brain hard-rewires its synapses in response to brainwave signals; this may be why this biochemical reaction is uniquely sensitive to pulsed microwave signals, which are also known to change brainwave patterns at extremely low radiation levels. A 2014 document from WHO [15] lists 26 studies that show brainwave changes with mobile phone radiation at levels below the ICNIRP guidelines. These brainwave changes may also be hard-wired into the structure of the brain through the pathological activation of the ERK cascade, a possibility that is now being investigated by Dr Friedman’s team.

Friedman et al. (2007) has been cited over 200 times in the literature; I have checked with Dr Joseph Friedman in Israel and all of these papers reproduce, confirm, and amplify his team’s findings. Severe oxidative stress is known to cause (1) a wide range of neurological diseases, (2) a wide range of metabolic issues, and (3) a wide range of genetic problems, including interfering with DNA repair and promoting cancer.

Therefore, the entire basis of ICNIRP’s and WHO’s advice – that microwave radiation can only have thermal effects – has been conclusively proven to be false, and a clear and complete mechanism has been elucidated that explains many of the symptoms reported in relation to this radiation. ICNIRP and the International EMF Project are deliberately ignoring the science, in order to propagate their industry-friendly line. This is no longer acceptable. The public is waking up to these dangers, and the United Nations must now take cognisance of the realities and issue a precautionary warning to the world, especially for children, that microwave exposure is dangerous. That is all we have ever asked of the World Health Organization, whose doctors at IARC have urged precaution; however, the microwave engineers in charge of the International EMF Project have refused to take this simple step. These engineers must immediately be removed and replaced with appropriately qualified health professionals who are committed to taking action to protect the people of the world.

I await confirmation of receipt by your respective offices of Olga Sheean’s call for action and your considered comments on the realities she has put to you.

Yours faithfully

Mr Karl M. Muller

BSc Hons, MEd

Licensed amateur radio operator 3DA0KM

Kingdom of Swaziland/eSwatini

Some references,more available on request

1. World Health Organization:
setting the standard for a wireless world of harm

WHO Harm


2. Text an UNO Generalsekretär

Text an UNO Generalsekretär


3. Transcript of Dr Michael Repacholi’s appearance at the Australian Senate Inquiry into cellphone and health standards. http://www.iddd.de/umtsno/odpsejm/electricwords/AustralianSenate1.htm
4. EMFscientist.org https://www.emfscientist.org/
5. https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=Y2VsbHRvd2VyYWN0aW9uY2FtcGFpZ24uY28uemF8Y2VsbHRvd2VyYWN0aW9u
6. Available on request
7. Cell Phones https://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/results/areas/cellphones/
8.Available on request
9.Available on request
10.Available on request
11. ”
12.EMF-Omega-News January 2004 http://omega.twoday.net/20050115/
13.Mortality by neoplasia and cellular telephone base stations in the Belo Horizonte municipality, Minas Gerais state, Brazil http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048969711005754
14.Mechanism of short-term ERK activation by electromagnetic fields at mobile phone frequencies. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17456048
15.Available on request

About the author