Review of the BioInitiative Report

In 2007 a group of interested individuals collated a series of views on the non-ionising radiation health debate. This was entitled the BioInitiative Report, a web document dated August 31, 2007.

The BioInitiative Report presents a series of views that argue for a change in public exposure standards, but which are largely inconsistent with current scientific consensus

Health Council of the Netherlands Review

The Health Council of the Netherlands reviewed the BioInitiative report in September 2008 and concluded it is a selective review of existing research and does not present a balanced analysis considering the relative scientific quality of different studies. Some of the many shortcomings identified included that the report made claims which lacked scientific basis and false claims.

They concluded:

"In view of the way the BioInitiative report was compiled, the selective use of scientific data and the other shortcomings mentioned above, the Committee concludes that the BioInitiative report is not an objective and balanced reflection of the current state of scientific knowledge"

Click here for the Health Council of Netherlands review

Australian Centre for Radiofrequency Bioeffects Research (ACRBR) Review

In December 2008 the Australian Centre for Radiofrequency Bioeffects Research (ACRBR) reviewed the BioInitiative Report and concluded:

"Overall we think that the BioInitiative Report does not progress science, and would agree with the Health Council of the Netherlands that the BioInitiative Report is “not an objective and balanced reflection of the current state of scientific knowledge”. As it stands it merely provides a set of views that are not consistent with the consensus of science, and it does not provide an analysis that is rigorous-enough to raise doubts about the scientific consensus."

The ACRBR also points out there are statements in the report that do not accord with the standard view of science, and the report does not provide a reasonable account of why we should reject the standard view in favour of the views espoused in the report.

The ACRBR also noted that the state of science in this area is continually being debated and updated by a number of expert bodies comprising of the leading experts in this field and strongly urged people to consult these views for a balanced assessment of the research

Click here for the ACRBR review

European Commission EMF-NET Review

The European Commission’s EMF-NET coordination group for investigating the impact of electromagnetic fields on health made the following comments regarding the BioInitiative Report:

"There is a lack of balance in the report; no mention is made in fact of reports that do not concur with authors’ statements and conclusions. The results and conclusions are very different from those of recent national and international reviews on this topic… If this report were to be believed, EMF would be the cause of a variety of diseases and subjective effects…"

Click here for the EMF-NET review

German Federal Office for Radiation Protection (BFS) Review

The German Federal Office for Radiation Protection (BfS) commented on a news magazine TV show on the German network ARD that featured the BioInitiative Report shortly after its release. They commented:

"The BfS conducted a preliminary review of the so-called "BioInitiative Report" immediately after its release and concluded that it had clear scientific shortcomings. In particular, it has undertaken to combine the health effects of low- and high-frequency fields that are not technically possible. The overwhelming majority of studies underpinning the report are not new: they already have been taken into account in the determination of currently applicable standards."

Click here for the German BFS review

Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) Committee on Man and Radiation (COMAR) Review

The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) Committee on Man and Radiation (COMAR) reviewed the BioInitiative Report. They concluded:

"… that the weight of scientific evidence in the RF bioeffects literature does not support the safety limits recommended by the BioInitiative group. For this reason, COMAR recommends that public health officials continue to base their policies on RF safety limits recommended by established and sanctioned international organizations such as the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers International Committee on Electromagnetic Safety and the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection, which is formally related to the World Health Organization."

Click here for the IEEE COMAR Review