CALLING OUT ETH / FSM'S LIES (& JÜRG LEUTHOLD)
***URGENT*** ETH's misrepresentation of science and lies to Swiss public about safety of RF-EMF exposure MUST STOP
TO: CEO OF ETH ZURICH: DR. J. MESOT -- BY REZA GANJAVI
ETH's misrepresentation of science and lies to Swiss public must stop / Exposing Gregor Dürrenberger & Jürg Leuthold / FSM / ETH & Wireless Industry's Lies
Dear Prof. Dr. Joël Mesot
Shame on ETH for misinforming the Swiss (and world) public about harms of RF-EMF exposure. Let's face the bitter fact that ETH IS ENGAGED IN LYING TO PEOPLE in favor of an industry that funds it. How morally kosher is that?
Here's the link to full article that exposes ETH's lies in detail: https://bit.ly/3hy70jF [see below]
The Article also includes material by respectable real medical doctors (top oncologists) who are ousting ETH associates likes Martin Roosli / BAFU / ICNIRP's conflict of interest and misrepresentation of science. Your cartel has ruined out great country. All Swiss cities, mountain resorts, libraries, post offices, trains, buses, supermarkets, etc., are radiated at hundreds of times safe limit with DNA-damaging, cancerous radiation. And ETH has a responsibility in that. People look up to you for truth. Instead they get lies. This must change immediately. Money should not define your ethos.
Réza Ganjavi, MBA -- A Swiss Citizen who is fed up with the lies that come out of ETH.
Exposing Gregor Dürrenberger / FSM / ETH / Wicked Industry's Lies -- and Jürg Leuthold helping industry push unsafe RF-EMF to Swiss public.
SUNRISE COMMUNICATIONS REFERS CUSTOMERS TO A WEB PAGE WHERE THERE'S A STAGED "INTERVIEW" WITH GREGOR DÜRRENBERGER. NOWHERE ON THE PAGE SAYS ANYTHING ABOUT THE FACT THAT DÜRRENBERGER IS PAID BY FSM (ETH) WHICH IS FUNDED BY THE TELECOM/WIRELESS INDUSTRY. INDUSTRY MONEY TALKS WHAT INDUSTRY WANTS PEOPLE TO HEAR.
All: Your man, Gregor has failed to answer two emails from members of public (see below). Maybe one of you can answer it -- Gregor couldn't. Can any of you? And what do you say to the LIES that FSM is telling Swiss public? How Swiss is that? I thought we were supposed to be an honest nation -- and not lie through our teeth, apparently to support the Money Masters (industry etc. which is funding FSM).
To: Gregor Dürrenberger, Forschungsstiftung Strom und Mobilkommunikation (FSM) c/o ETH Zürich, ETZ, K89, Gloriastrasse 35, CH-8092 Zürich, Switzerland, 044/ 632 28 15, Fax: 044/ 632 11 98
Copy: FSM management
Daniel Süss, Rolf Marti, Michael Moser, Hugo Lehmann, Jürg Leuthold, Brigitta Danuser, Primo Schär, Primo Schär, Jürg Fröhlich, Peter Achermann, Urs Dahinden, Jürg Fröhlich, Anke Huss, Meike Mevissen, David Schürmann, Michael Siegrist
firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org
· Calling out FSM’s lies.
· Call for FSM to shut down and STOP deceiving the public to benefit industry donors, at cost of putting public health at risk.
Hello Gregor Dürrenberger
Calling out FSM’s lies on Sunrise propaganda page: https://www.sunrise.ch/de/spotlight/2019/01/interview-mit-gregor-duerrenberger.html
First off, I also find it somewhat deceptive your "doctor" claim is not transparent about what kind of doctor you are – if you’re a doctor of chiropractic or medical doctor or a PhD or a vet. Turns out you’re none of those, yet you’re touted as DOCTOR by FSM and 9 out of 10 people will think you’re a MD or PhD, and you’re neither one of those, therefore, this lack of transparency seems deceptive, and I don’t believe that’s coincidental. I had to do a lot of digging to find out you're NOT a medical doctor (MD) or philosophy doctor (PhD). Fits the agenda of FSM/ETH & your money masters.
FSM’S FAILURE TO CITE EVEN ONE STUDY
You failed to answer my email of 6 Feb 2018. I gave you 2.5 years to come up with citation for one single study that shows safety from long term exposure to RF-EMF.
You couldn’t even name ONE! Yet you misinform people for Sunrise that such exposure is safe. What the hell is that?! Is FSM a joke? Like Disneyland, set up by your pals, funded by industry and BAFU, to create a circus?
FSM can’t even cite one safety study, yet it boasts that its funders’ (dirty) tech is safe. What does all this deception coming out of ETH say about ETH’s moral foundation? Root of science is philosophy which is love of truth. But in your books truth doesn’t seem to matter. Otherwise you wouldn’t make such incredibly false and deceptive statements as you do on Sunrise’s public-deception web page.
Don't you get tired of misinforming people about RF-EMF risks? It must really suck to work for a place that's funded by the industry -- I would never want to paid by people who expect me to lie for them! That’s the case there, in my opinion. The industry funds you and expects you to say nice things about them / for them. This has NOTHING to do with integrity and dignity of science which ETH should stand for, as a moral foundation. I am scientist too and can tell biased “science” when I see it. Industry funded science at FSM = junk, in my opinion.
FSM NEEDS TO SHUT DOWN
Therefore, I believe, FSM is damaging ETH’s reputation – and misinforming the public with biased, low quality “science” and falsehoods – so it should shut down.
I believe a person with scientific integrity would never misinform the public so much about matters of public health. Most people can't smell your conflict of interest, and of course you don't disclose it candidly on the page where Sunrise sends their customers to (to get manipulated by you into falsely believing biologically harmful radiation is safe).
I’m not going to waste my time educating you about the TRUTH. I’m sure you know all about, yet you go against it. Why? For the sake of money?
What about the numerous studies that show biological harm/effect you do not understand? What about the fact that standards are only thermal you don’t understand. Even your pals at Swisscom admit biological damage happens at sub thermal level.
It is mind boggling how a human can do what you do – to apparently ignore so much real credible science – and to misinform the public with such garbage (see below for examples).
STOP misinforming the public. Walk the path of truth. It will elevate you to a higher level of existence.
FSM’s SIX LIES ++
· “Are electromagnetic fields of mobile phone antennas, as they are presently located in Switzerland and are already in operation with 5G in some cases, a health risk?” – your answer: NO. That’s a lie (assuming you’re not an ignorant layman – but in your professional position you should know these studies for example – and therefore, your saying NO is a lie, in my opinion): https://mdsafetech.org/cell-tower-health-effects/ -- the correct answer is YES.
· “It is still scientifically unclear whether such weak radiation is relevant to health.” That is NOT true. That line is promoted by the industry and its cronies to manipulate people to take undue risk. For large majority of scientists (esp. those not in industry’s pocket) the evidence of risks is VERY CLEAR. The relevance/risks of RF-EMF to health is well established.
· Even if that’s the case, Precautionary Principle calls for caution, which the wicked industry is not interested in. BAFU’s idea of precautionary principle is a joke! Also you calling 6V/m of radiation as “weak” is another manipulative line. Compared to 100V/m, yes, but for us humans, compared to our natural frequency and frequency of earth, 6V/m is extremely strong.
· “Switzerland follows the precautionary principle here.” That’s what it’s called but in reality it’s a total joke. If we in Switzerland followed P.P., we would not be using standards that completely ignore biological effect. We wouldn’t be ignoring thousands of studies that show biological impact (often adverse), and wouldn’t ignore clearly documented health risks, and our industry cartel wouldn’t be actively engaged in lying to people (see https://emfcrisis.yolasite.com/industrylies.php )
· “In contrast, the recommendations of the WHO and ICNIRP are based on proven health risks.” Are you kidding? The recommendations totally ignore biological impact! ICNIRP is a morally challenged organization that’s on record for twisting credible science to industry’s benefit. See:
WHO is a lazy and morally corrupt. If it weren’t, it wouldn’t ignore the EMF Scientist appeal for YEARS! www.emfscientist.org
· “The international limit value thus protects against all scientifically proven health risks.” That a fat lie. What about thousands of studies that show biological effect at sub-thermal levels? If a bunch of physicists are talking who don’t understand biology and medicine, that doesn’t make the limit values protective of health risks.
· “The mobile phone providers say that the limits in Switzerland must be relaxed so that 5G can be introduced at all as a key factor for digitalisation. What do you think about this?” Talk about a circus!! What kind of question is this? Sunrise who is a beneficiary asking you who is a beneficiary of Sunrise! I guess some Swiss people can’t see through this joke of an “interview”!
· “Health is an important, but not the only decisive factor”. For us Swiss people health IS the decisive factor. Our health matters and is top priority for us. If you’re sick what’s the point of having a lot of gold?! But industry doesn’t care about our health AT ALL. Let’s call a spade a spade.
· Here’s another circus question: “With the Internet of Things, many more devices will communicate with each other than they do today. Cars, household appliances, whole houses - that sounds like a lot more radiation around us. Reason for concern?” [Sounds like: “we pay you to have a job Gregor, now we ask you a question, and you know we expect the answer that’s profitable to us Gregor”].
· LIE: “The exposure caused by base stations and other installations is rather small. From a scientific point of view, there is little reason for concern here.” LIE! How can you say that in light of so much research to the contrary. https://mdsafetech.org/cell-tower-health-effects/
· LIE: “science has not yet been able to prove a risk, neither with mobile phones nor with base stations.” Maybe if you live on Gilligan Island your science hasn’t made those clear. Ours has! And you know that Gregor – how could you not?! If you know that and still say this, you’re lying. If you don’t know credible research in your field, you should be fired from your job.
PS -- Jürg Leuthold appeared on a television piece that helped Sunrise push RF-EMF onto unassuming Swiss public by misinforming them about the health risks. Leuthold completely ignored biological impact of RF-EMF, I guess because he's a physicist so what he doesn't understand doesn't exist! So he lied that "We have little evidence in either of which." This is FALSE. We have plenty of evidence that RF-EMF is biologically harmful.
In case you begin to believe the cartel's own lies, here's an exposé of the typical lies around 5G: https://emfcrisis.yolasite.com/big5glies.php
Here's a proof of Swisscom lying to people -- and -- in this patent filing admitting that WLAN can cause DNA damage and cancer at sub-thermal levels (all today's safety standards are thermal and totally ignore biological damage). https://emfcrisis.yolasite.com/swisscomdeception.php
Here are a couple of letters from to scientists, exposing the conflict of interest and misrepresentation of science in Swiss government's approach towards EMF pollution:
6 February 2018
From: Reza Ganjavi
To: Gregor Dürrenberger (email@example.com)
I understand you're in the pocket of Big Wireless. But deceiving the public into believing a proven unsafe radiation is safe, is morally very problematic. I don't understand how you could sleep at night unless you're not aware of the thousands of studies that have proven HF EMR is unsafe.
On that topic: are you able to cite a single study to show the radiation you're promoting as safe has indeed been proven as safe?
I am ready to change my view of you as either a morally-challenged or ignorant-of-the-facts person if you can provide me with a reference for such a study.
If you can't, then you should stop engaging in deception of public into believing something is safe which has not been proven safe.
Thanks and regards
Reza Ganjavi, MBA
Another email by someone, which Gregor FAILED to answer:
28 March 2019