EMF Protection Cellphone Radiation Mobile Phone SAR Electromagnetic Prevention EMF Qlink Protect EMF Cell Phone Radiation

cell phone radiation research, hyperelectrosensitivity from cell phone radiation

Home  |  STORE  |  EMF METERS  |  EHS  |  FAQ  |  PRODUCTS  |  Contact UsView Cart

 
   
 

 

FEATURED PRODUCT

cell phone radiation e-book cell towers information cell phone dangers

 In 24 hours time you will learn more about emf's, cell phone radiation, cell towers and how to protect yourself than 98% of the world.  Get your digital ebook now.

Click here to learn more:

 

 

Cell Phone Radiation Industry Belated Background Check Or Mis-information? Part 1

In mid-May 1993 Wheeler opened a meeting of his top policy and public-relations advisers and his science adviser, Carlo, in the CTIA boardroom by announcing that their agenda for the session consisted of two items: One was the credibility of Carlo, and the other was the credibility of the SAG program Carlo had been appointed to run
just a month earlier. Wheeler had a habit of writing meticulous, printed notes in his day-timer calendar, and he was reading from those notes.

"What do you have to say about the flap in Science magazine?" 

Wheeler was looking directly at Carlo, who was clearly caught off guard. He was referring to a magazine article about a controversy that had caused Carlo to end his six-year relationship with the Chlorine Institute—after the industry's public-relations representatives had put Carlo's name on top of a PR paper that he had not only never written but never even seen. Wheeler had never mentioned this issue before—it seemed obvious to Carlo that someone had brought the matter to Wheeler's attention as a way of questioning whether Carlo should be running the industry's science research program.

Carlo explained the dioxin uproar: In February 1991 Science carried a story about a controversy that had erupted after publication of a paper listing Carlo as its author. It characterized the views of a scientific advisory group sponsored by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) official. When one participant wrote an angry letter to Carlo and others protesting these comments Carlo had allegedly written, Carlo was shocked. He had not written the paper, and had not even seen it before. All he had done was write a summary of a conference he had attended which carried the notation that "the meeting reinforced the notion that dioxin is much less toxic to humans than originally believed." That phrase became part of a new chlorine industry position paper The chlorine industry officials told Carlo they had put his name atop the paper as its author to give the document added credibility. The industry and the PR firm each said they thought the other had told Carlo about it—which of course would still have been unacceptable because he simply hadn't written the document.

 

"Revolutionary New Technologies
Protect You from the Harmful Effects of Cell Phone Radiation,

Computers, Bluetooth Headsets, Microwave Ovens,

Cordless Phones, and other Wireless Technologies."

Click on any of the pictures below
to learn more

 
Contact:
Research Center For Wireless Technology

1-888-470-9886

support@emfnews.org
Copyright 2006-2015 All rights reserved
| Privacy | Disclaimer |
 
Try any Q-Link or cell chip for 3 months, absolutely  RISK-FREE If you do not feel Q-Link improves your focus, energy, or well-being, simply return it for a full refund. Airtube headsets have 30  a day refund.

 
 

Home  |  STORE  |  EMF METERS  |  EHS  |   FAQ  |  PRODUCTS  |  Directory |  Contact Us | View Cart



Other Language Tools