2020年3月,ICNIRP(国际非电离辐射防护委员会)发布了一套限制暴露于电磁场(100kHz至300GHz)的指南。ICNIRP声称本出版物对EMF和健康的看法,通常被称为“仅热范式”的视图,符合当前的科学理解。我们调查了ICNIRP2020中引用的文献,以评估其背后的作者和研究小组的差异是否符合构成广泛科学基础的基本要求,从而符合当前科学理解的观点。这样一套重要的指导方针有望满足的要求。要评估是否满足此要求,我们调查了ICNIRP2020指南和附件参考文献的作者和研究组的跨度.我们的分析表明,ICNIRP2020本身,实际上,所有引用的支持文献都来自一个只有17名研究人员的共同作者网络,他们中的大多数隶属于ICNIRP和/或IEEE,其中一些是ICNIRP2020的作者。此外,ICNIRP2020提交的文献综述来自独立委员会,实际上是这个非正式合作作者网络的产物,所有以ICNIRP2020作者为成员的委员会。这表明ICNIRP2020指南未能满足基本的科学质量要求,因此不适合作为设定RFEMF暴露限值以保护人类健康的基础。凭借其仅热视图,ICNIRP与大多数研究结果形成对比,因此需要一个特别坚实的科学基础。我们的分析表明情况恰恰相反。因此,ICNIRP2020指南不能提供良好治理的基础。
In March 2020, ICNIRP (the International Commission for Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection) published a set of
guidelines for limiting exposure to electromagnetic fields (100 kHz to 300 GHz). ICNIRP claims this publication\'s view on EMF and health, a view usually termed \"the thermal-only paradigm\", is consistent with current scientific understanding. We investigated the literature referenced in ICNIRP 2020 to assess if the variation in authors and research groups behind it meets the fundamental requirement of constituting a broad scientific base and thus a view consistent with current scientific understanding, a requirement that such an important set of
guidelines is expected to satisfy. To assess if this requirement has been met, we investigated the span of authors and research groups of the referenced literature of the ICNIRP 2020
Guidelines and annexes. Our analysis shows that ICNIRP 2020 itself, and in practice all its referenced supporting literature stem from a network of co-authors with just 17 researchers at its core, most of them affiliated with ICNIRP and/or the IEEE, and some of them being ICNIRP 2020 authors themselves. Moreover, literature reviews presented by ICNIRP 2020 as being from independent committees, are in fact products of this same informal network of collaborating authors, all committees having ICNIRP 2020 authors as members. This shows that the ICNIRP 2020
Guidelines fail to meet fundamental scientific quality requirements and are therefore not suited as the basis on which to set RF EMF exposure limits for the protection of human health. With its thermal-only view, ICNIRP contrasts with the majority of research findings, and would therefore need a particularly solid scientific foundation. Our analysis demonstrates the contrary to be the case. Hence, the ICNIRP 2020
Guidelines cannot offer a basis for good governance.