Public education



Homepage > Other Resolutions

April, 2021

• International Public call for the WHO for Protection from Non-ionizing Electromagnetic Field (EMF) Exposure

- view English version PDF>

- view Chinese version PDF>

- view Czech version PDF>

- view French version PDF>

- view German version PDF>

- view Greek version PDF>

- view Hebrew version PDF>

- view Italian version PDF>

- view Portuguese version PDF>

- view Russian version PDF>

- view Spanish version PDF>

You can undersign the letter to WHO, by April 6th 2021 at the following links:

December, 2012

• BEWARE OF THAT WHICH IS NOT DISCUSSED, by Olle Johansson and Susan Foster. view PDF>

• Om hotet från mobilstrålningen, by Olle Johansson and Susan Foster. view PDF>

November, 2012

• ICEMS Issued Papers - Position Paper on the Cerebral Tumor Court Case view PDF>

• Letter to the Managing Secretariat from the Chairman of the Steering Committee view PDF>


The Vienna Resolution of 1998 stated:
"The participants agreed that biological effects from low-intensity exposures are scientifically established. However, the current state of scientific consensus is inadequate to derive reliable exposure standards. The existing evidence demands an increase in the research efforts on the possible health impact and on an adequate exposure and dose assessment."

This statement has been repeated consistently in international scientific resolutions up to the present day as the consensus view of many concerned scientists and medical doctors.  On April 2, 2009, the European Parliament EMF Resolution of April 2, 2009 with stronger language than was included in earlier EP resolutions (1994 and 1996) recommending application of the Precautionary Principle.  The new Resolution directs its 26 member states to look "..for particular consideration of biological effects when assessing the potential health impact of electromagnetic radiation, especially given that some studies have found the most harmful effects at lowest levels;  calls for active research to address potential health problems by developing solutions that negate or reduce the puslating and amplitude modulation of the frequencies used for transmission."  

The European Parliament Resolution generated renewed  interest, starting in France where national governments are starting to  investigate the state of EMF  science,  EMF emitting technologies and what public policy or other changes may be  warranted. In addition,  many nations of the world have already issued warnings about cell phone use by children and teens, including the UK. France, Finland, Sweden, Russia, Thailand and India.  Some nations have, since 1998, adopted lower environmental EMF exposure standards, including Italy, Switzerland, Russia, Switzerland, China and Lichtenstein and China; regions, including the State of Salzburg; and, cities, including Toronto, Canada and Porto Alegre, Brazil.

On September 14, 2009, a U.S. Senate Committee Hearing was held on cell phone radiation and  expert witness testimony was heard by  Members of the U.S. Congress. These hearings may lead to new legislation to  fund a federal research program on cell phone radiation and related issues. For details on the Senate hearing and the Expert Conference on Cell Phones and Health: Science and Public Policy Questions, that also took place in Washington DC between September 13-15, 2009, see the Environmental Health Trust website  ICEMS was a  cosponsor of that meeting,  

An international debate is underway on  the adequacy of EMF exposure standards to provide  human health and environmental protection from wireless devices, antennas, power lines, electrical appliances and emerging  electric grid and broadband wireless infrastructure. The ICEMS resolutions and those referred to dating to 1998 send a clear message of concern, that  the   exposure standards set by  nations that conform to the International Commission for Nonionizing Radiation Protection, the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers or the Federal Communications Commission, are inadequate to protect health and environment, and that more safety precautions are needed, while the research continues that could result in the development of  biologically based standards.


3. The Salzburg Resolution, June 7 & 8, 2000 
Note: for more information go to

4. The Vienna Resolution, October 25-28, 1998






Powered by Google