ARCHIVED MATERIAL
Usually material that has since disappeared from the web

He reacted by circulating this memo widely — posing what he believed were imputation to his reputation and dealing with them on a point-by-point basis — followed by SCREAMING rebuttals ALL IN CAPS — some of which were truthful and some even genuine clarifications.

    In March 2008, just a few months after this exchange, he had an acrimonious fall out with the two charlatans who ran the BioPro EMF Shield operation which he had been promoting through his Safe Wireless Initiative — and then had to rebut his promotion of BioPro.

[He has presumably extracted paragraphs of criticsm from some previous email circulating within the EMF Refugee group (Activists who believe they are 'electro-sensitive' and suffer from 'Radio smog').


1. 1979: Defended Arkansas Light & Power nuclear power station against claims of stillbirths from radiation leakage.

   YOUR FOLKS HAVE THIS ONE BACKWARDS. THEY SHOULD SIMPLY READ THE STUDY. WE IDENTIFIED THE LINK BETWEEN STILLBIRTHS AND INFANT DEATHS AND NUCLEAR POWER GENERATION — AND WE PUBLISHED THE FINDINGS. WE RAISED THE ISSUE PUBLICLY AND TOOK ON ARKANSAS POWER AND LIGHT ON BEHALF OF THE ARKANSAS HEALTH DEPARTMENT. I AM VERY PROUD OF THAT WORK, AND ACTUALLY IT WAS THE FIRST SCIENTIFIC STUDY AFTER THREE MILE ISLAND SHOWING HEALTH RISKS FROM NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS.
   [ His critics certainly got this wrong. In these early years he was working for the Arkansas Department of Health and both he and his co-research identified a potential problem with rising rates of still-births related to the operations of a nearby nuclear power generation plant.
   It is, as he says.]
   

2. 1979: helped write the official government report on Three Mile Island

   THE ONLY INPUT I HAD TO THE THREE MILE ISLAND REPORT WAS SUBMITTING THE DATA FROM OUR STUDY SHOWING AN INCREASE IN INFANT MORTALITY AND STILLBIRTHS AROUND THE NUCLEAR PLANT IN RUSSELLVILLE, ARKANSAS. THEY QUOTED OUR DATA IN THE REPORT....BUT THEY DISMISSED IT AS NOT ENOUGH EVIDENCE TO SHOW A PROBLEM. AGAIN, YOUR FOLKS SEEM TO HAVE IT BACKWARDS.
   [This one arises from his attempts to big-note himself: his earlier claims now don't match more recent statements. He often boosted his reputation by laying claim to having an important role in the Three Mile Island incident. However, it now appears that he probably didn't figure any more prominently than his name in a citation in someone else's report.]
   

3. Was a consultant to Land Developers at Love Canal

   HOLY SMOKES. THIS IS AGAIN WRONG — BACKWARDS. I WAS ONE OF THE FIRST CONSULTANTS TO BE APPROACHED BY LOIS GIBBS AND THE OTHER MOTHERS WHO WERE CONCERNED ABOUT THE RISK OF MISCARRIAGES. WE HELPED THEM PUT TOGETHER THE STUDY THAT WAS LATER SUBMITTED TO THE STATE HEALTH DEPARTMENT ABOUT HEALTH RISKS. I HELPED CONGRESSMAN JOHN LAFALCE WITH THE FIRST WRITINGS OF THE SUPERFUND ACT THAT WAS INTENDED TO PREVENT FINANCIAL HARM TO FAMILIES LIVING ON OR NEAR ABANDONED HAZARDOUS WASTE SITES AND THIS A DIRECT CONSEQUENCE OF THE LOVE CANAL WORK.
   [He was not a consultant to the land-developers. However he was to the companies that produced the waste indirectly (and maybe directly) and he certainly worked for dioxin producers who all came under threat from this incident.
         It is possible that he was approached by Lois Gibbs for help. However veteran American science journalist Blake Levitt remembers it differently. At the time of Love Canal he was employed by Dow Chemicals, so it is impossible to know what role he was playing.]                 Levitt email

4. 1980: Authored a study concluding that chemicals at Love Canal were unrelated to human cancer.

   THIS IS ABSOLUTLEY UNTRUE. MY WORK WAS USED BY CONGRESS BECAUSE IT SUPPORTED THE THEORY THAT THE CHEMICALS SUCH AS MIREX OR KEPONE WERE RELATED TO CANCER. AGAIN, YOUR FOLKS HAVE IT BACKWARDS.
   [A straw-man charge. We've never seen any such suggestion. However he did do research to prove that herbicides which carried dioxins could be safely used on lawns when there was a suggestion that dogs might be poisoned.
         There is no record of his "mirex and kepone" pesticide research being used by Congress.]

5. Defended Dow Corning over Agent Orange

   MAKES NO SENSE. DOW CORNING HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH AGENT ORANGE.
   [He is playing word games with an silly error in the claim.
         Dow Corning had nothing to do with Agent Orange but Dow Chemicals did — and Carlo worked for them, specifically on trying to discount the dioxin-danger problems as part of their "flying circus" — and in other ways.
         Dow Chemicals manufactured the stuff (an unwanted by-product of herbicide manufacture) along with Monsanto and a couple of other chemical companies — and he also worked for the American Chemical Manufacturer's association and the Chlorine Institute trying to discount dioxin's public health dangers.]

   {cont.]... BUT, FROM 1984 THORUGH 1992, I SAT ON THE U.S. CONGRESS'S OFFICE OF TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT'S AGENT ORANGE ADVISORY PANEL. WE WERE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE CHANGES AT THE VETERANS ADMINISTRATION THAT RESULTED IN COMPENSATION BEING GIVEN TO VIET NAM VETERANS FOR CHLORACNE, NON-HODGKINS LYMPHOMA, HODGKINS DISEASE AND LEUKEMIA. I WORKED CLOSELY WITH REPRESENTATIVES FROM THE VETERANS OF FOREIGN WARS AND THE VIETNAM VETERANS OF AMERICA TO GET THAT DONE. I WAS ONE OF THEIR MOST VOCIFEROUS SUPPORTERS ON THE PANEL. AGAIN, YOUR FOLKS HAVE IT BACKWARD.
   [He was actually a minor representative of the chemical manufacturers who sat on the panel which provided oversight on the protocols which were to be used for research. He makes this sound as if he was a key hands-on researcher, but this is not what the record shows.]

6. 1985: authored research concluding employees of Dow Chemical and Union Carbide were in better health than the general population

   NOT SURE WHERE THIS IS COMING FROM. PAPERS THAT I HAVE PUBLISHED IN PEER-REVIEWED MEDICAL JOURNALS SPEAK FOR THEMSELVES. I DON'T BELIEVE I HAVE ANY PUBLISHED PAPERS ON UNION CARBIDE.
   [We don't know where the Union Carbide reference came from either. However he published a couple of papers on the health of Dow Chemical employees for the Chemical Manufacturer's Association and for Dow itself.]

7. 1989: hired by Philip Morris to declare tobacco smoke safe.

   THIS IS ONE OF THE MORE OUTRAGEOUS RUMORS THAT SEEMS TO PERSIST ON THE INTERNET ABOUT MY PREVIOUS WORK. I HAVE BEEN A VERY VOCAL AND OUTSPOKEN OPPONENT OF CIGARETTE SMOKING AND TOBACCO IN GENERAL FOR OVER THIRTY YEARS — IN BOTH MY PROFESSIONAL PRESENTATIONS AND MY PUBLICATIONS. THIS IS AGAIN WRONG.
   [This is an outright lie. While he doesn't appear to have "declared tobacco smoke safe" in any public statement (in fact he refuse to have his name released at Philip Morris press briefings), he was commissioned by Philip Morris to help the tobacco industry fool the people and delay the legislation banning and/or restricting passive smoke in the workplace and in restaurants, etc.
         He was also hired as a consultant and trainer of other 'consultants' enlisted by the Tobacco Institute. He helped them select and train favourable witnesses, and he was treated by the tobacco industry as a trusted insider willing to do almost anything asked of him.]

8. 1990-1993: Consultant to Chlorine Institute; authored studies showing dioxin safe

   THIS AGAIN IS WRONG. IN FACT, IN THE EARLY NINETIES, THERE WAS AN ARTICLE IN SCIENCE MAGAZINE THAT APPLAUDED ME FOR TAKING ON THE CHLORINE INDUSTRY AS THEY USED MY NAME ON A REPORT THAT I DID NOT WRITE AND I CALLED THEM ON IT VERY PUBLICLY. THERE IS AN EXTENSIVE PUBLIC RECORD OF THAT ISSUE. A MAJOR IRONY HERE IS THAT MY WILLINGNESS TO STAND UP TO THE CHLORINE INDUSTRY WAS THE MAIN RESERVATION THE CELL PHONE INDUSTRY HAD IN PUTTING ME IN CHARGE OF THE $28 MILLION WTR PROJECT. THEY FELT THAT I MIGHT BE TOO INDEPENDENT THINKING.
   [He did substantially write the article being refered to here — but he didn't want his name put on it. (Edelman Medical Communication's press release for the Chlorine Institute). There is no sign of the Science article 'applauding' him — and he was certainly a paid consultant to the Chlorine Institute. His claim to have stood up to the Chlorine Industry doesn't stand up for one second.
         See Banbury Conference material in Carlo Part 2. and 'Flap Erupts Over Dioxin Meeting" In Science, 22 Feb 1991]

9. Became technical director for Immunex and Pharma Group, which made immune suppression drugs and vaccines, and were a subsidiary of a pesticide/herbicide manufacturer

   A COMPANY CALLED PHARMA PACIFIC ASKED ME TO HELP THEM WITH STUDIES OF ORAL INTERFERON AS A REMEDY FOR AIDS PATIENTS. I WAS THEIR ACTING TECHNICAL DIRECTOR FOR THE SOLE PURPOSE OF REPRESENTING THEM ON A MULTI-CENTER CLINICAL TRIAL CONDUCTED BY THE NATIONAL INSTITUTES OF HEALTH. I PARTICIPATED IN THAT STUDY AT THE NIH FOR TWO YEARS, THEN STEPPED ASIDE. THERE IS NOTHING IN THAT RELATIONSHIP THAT IS A PROBLEM, ESPECIALLY SINCE IT WAS WORK SPONSORED BY AND PAID FOR THE NATIONAL INSTITUTES OF HEALTH. THE WORK WAS DONE TO HELP SAVE THE LIVES OF PATIENTS WITH AIDS. I AM NOT SURE WHY YOUR FOLKS WOULD FIND THAT OFFENSIVE.
   [Pharma Pacific was a subsidiary of Dow Chemicals. When Carlo was working for Fernz and NuFarm (also Dow Chemical subsidiaries) on dioxin problems, he was listed by Fernz as "Technical Director", and he became embroiled in a public fight with Louis Farrakhan and the Nation of Islam over who had the rights to Immunex for the treatment of AIDS.
         Despite long-term associations with Dow and its subsidiaries, when he published a report exonerating Nufarm dioxin spills of having contaminated the Melbourne metropolitan water supply, he did not admit to this relationship — nor did this arise in any of his subsequent press conferences or media appearances where he was parading his dioxin (1990) and AIDS (1995) credentials.]

10. 1992: authored a study downplaynig public perception of dioxin, radon and tobacco smoke as hazards

    THIS STUDY WAS DONE SPECIFICALLY TO LOOK AT HOW THE PUBLIC PERCEIVED THE RELATIVE RISKS OF DIOXIN, RADON AND SECOND HAND TOBACCO SMOKE. THE CONCLUSION WAS THAT THE PUBLIC PERCEPTION WAS THAT ALL THREE RISKS WERE OF COMPARABLE CONCERN. SHORTLY THEREAFTER, THE EPA CLASSIFIED SECOND HAND SMOKE AS A PROBABLE HUMAN CARCINOGEN — WHICH I PUBLICLY SUPPORTED.
    This refers to his infamous "Bias Study" done for Philip Morris to 'prove' (via wide media circulation) that scientists were biased against certain polluting substances, such as second-hand smoke. The claim then made to Congress then was that bias meant that scientists couldn't be trusted to conduct independent scientific research on these matters.
          In the second part of this so-called research protocol, Carlo was also paid to promote this line through a front "Institute of Regulatory Policy" (run by his partner). However, when Philip Morris wanted him to front the news conference, he backed out; he didn't want to have his name on the study. This is all well documented in the tobacco archives.

11. 1993: Authored research concluding that employees at a rubber plant were in better health than the general population

    THIS STUDY WAS PUBLISHED IN A PEER-REVIEWED MEDICAL JOURNAL AND THE DATA INDEED INDICATED THAT THE RISK OF DEATH AMONG THESE WORKERS WAS NO HIGHER THAN THE GENERAL POPULATION. RESEARCH RESULTS ARE WHAT THEY ARE. WHEN SCIENTISTS ALWAYS HAVE FINDINGS THAT GO IN ONE DIRECTION OR ANOTHER, THEIR INTEGRITY MUST BE QUESTIONED BECAUSE GOOD SCIENCE IS NOT ALWAYS THAT EASILY PREDICTED. IT STRIKES ME THAT YOUR FOLKS WOULD HAVE PREFERRED THAT I WAS NOT A SCIENTIST BUT A POLITICAL ACTIVIST WHO FOUND DATA TO SUPPORT A PRE-ORDAINED POSITION. THAT IS NOT WHERE MY CAREER PATH HAS TAKEN ME.
    The article, published in the June 1993 Journal of Occupational Medicine, doesn't really give information as to the source of the study funding (which is a predicter of the findings). And since it was done by the same team at Health & Environmental Sciences as those who were working on pseudo-research for Philip Morris, it doesn't give you great confidence in the findings.
          The HES study is almost alone in finding a reduction in mortality rates among rubber workers. Others had found an increase.
          A much larger and longer-term study of rubber workers done by Delzell and Monson reported:

    "There were excess deaths from bladder cancer and leukemia among white male union members during both follow-up periods. During recent follow-up of white male union members employed for at least five years, there were excesses in deaths from three additional cancers: esophageal, biliary and liver cancer and lymphoma and multiple myeloma. Evidence from other studies of rubber workers suggests that observed excesses in deaths from bladder cancer and leukemia are related to work-place exposures."
    
    
12. 1993: Carlo heads WTR for the cellphone industry. Only took pro consumer position when he learned the funding for his work would cease.

    THAT IS SIMPLY NOT ACCURATE. WHEN I TOOK ON THE PROJECT IN 1993, I COMMITTED TO RUN IT FOR FIVE YEARS. WHEN WE PUBLISHED IN THE NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE DATA SHOWING THAT DIGITAL PHONES INTERFERED WITH IMPLANTED CARDIAC PACEMAKERS, THE INDUSTRY SUSPENDED FUNDING OF THE PROGRAM FOR NINE MONTHS. BECAUSE OF THE CONTROVERSY, I OFFERED TO STEP DOWN AS THE CHIEF SCIENTIST IN THE PROGRAM. BOTH THE FDA AND THE INDUSTRY REFUSED MY OFFER TO STEP DOWN, AND INSTEAD ASKED THAT I STAY TO THE END OF THE PROJECT — ONE MORE YEAR BEYOND THE ORIGINAL FIVE.
    The knowledge that TDMA (time division) cellphones interfered with pacemakers was known since 1990 and of concern to the UK government deparments during the GSM development phase. Carlo's WTR research contributed nothing of significance at all — but if did give him something to boast about in the desert of genuine biomedical research.
          The 9 month delay in funding the WTR came from a dispute between Carlo (and his staff) and the CTIA over the need for them to be covered against being named as defendants in cellphone litigation (following the Debbra Wright action). It had nothing to do with the pacemaker research.

    [cont].... THE PROJECT WAS COMPLETED AT THE END OF 1999 AS WAS ALWAYS INTENDED. IT IS A FABRICATION THAT FUNDING WAS CUT, OR THAT I CHANGED MY POSITION ON THE DATA BECAUSE FUNDING WAS CUT. THIS IS A FABRICATION THAT WAS PROPAGATED BY EMR ACTIVISTS WHO DID NOT HAVE THE COURAGE THEMSELVES TO ADMIT THEY WERE WRONG ABOUT THE INTEGRITY OF THE WORK WE CONDUCTED UNDER THE WTR. YOUR FOLKS SHOULD READ: CELL PHONES, INVISIBILE HAZARDS IN THE WIRELESS AGE TO SEE THE FULL STORY.
    No one says the funding was cut. But apart from his strawman, the overall charge is true in its entirety Carlo was an active participant in the CTIA and Motorola's attempts to reduce any likely impact by delaying essential research. He regularly defamed genuine research scientists, tried to sue some and have them dismissed from their university posts, and he helped imislead the public on the results of genuine research. He only changed his tune when he fell out with the WTR in the last two years when they made it obvious that his funding would not be renewed further — beyond $28.5 million.

13. 1993: tobacco industry sent Carlo to Europe to convince European parliaments that tobacco smoke wasn't harmful

    THIS IS NOW GETTING TO BE FUNNY. I HAVE NO CLUE WHAT THIS MIGHT BE REFERRING TO. AND, THIS WOULD BE ABSOLUTELY INCONSISTENT WITH VIRTUALLY EVERY PUBLIC COMMENT OR PUBLISHED PAPER I HAD REGARDING TOBACCO SMOKE.
    The charge is a garbled version of the work Carlo and his associates/partners Thorne Auchter and Jim Tozzi did for Philip Morris via their non-profit 'policy institute' Federal Focus Inc. The idea was to have a conference of scientist design new rules for "sound science" — as part of the industry's "junk-science" projects.
          If the standard hurdles for epidemiological proof could be set very high, the regulators would never be able to jump over them. So not all the participants at these conferences needed to be in the pay of tobacco or the chemical industry, (but the majority were — some notoriously).
          The project had four stages;
    1) the preliminary Landsdowne Conference in October 1994 (Carlo is not on the list),
    2) the London Principles conference in October 1995 (Carlo was at the top of the list).
    3) Federal Focus then prepared the 'consensus' document.
    4) The document was passed over to the tobacco industry lawyers to preparing draft legislation, known as "Good Epidemiological Practices (GEP).
    5) Tobacco's political lobbyists then worked to push this GEP standard through European and other parliaments (with little success).

14. 1995: headed Breast Implant Public Health Project, LLC funded by Dow Corning

    THIS PROJECT WAS VERY IMPORTANT WORK DONE IN COOPERATION OF THE FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION AND AT THE REQUEST OF THE FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION HEAD AT THE TIME, Dr DAVID KESSLER. WE IDENTIFIED WHICH TYPES OF PROBLEMS FROM SILICONE BREAST IMPLANTS WARRANTED DIFFERENT TYPES OF CORRECTIVE INTERVENTION — RANGING FROM LOCALIZED CORRECTIVE SURGERY TO IMPLANT REPLACEMENT. DOW CORNING FUNDED THE WORK, BUT IT WAS OVERSEEN BY THE FDA. THE SAME MODEL WAS LATER USED IN THE WTR WHERE INDUSTRY MONEY WAS USED TO SUPPORT PUBLIC HEALTH WORK REGARDING EMR BUT WITH GOVERNMENT OVERSIGHT.
    Veteran american science journalist Blake Levitt has a different view on the BIPHP. She says in an email to Carlo that

    "The BIPHD received $1.3M from Dow Corning and your [Carlo's] work focused mainly on implant ruptures and scar tissue formation but largely avoided systemic immune system reactions." See Levitt email.
    
    
15. 1995: headed the Public Policy Polio Vaccines Advisory Panel, a pharmaceutical industry lobbying group

    AGAIN, NOT SURE WHAT THIS MEANS. THE SCIENCE AND PUBLIC POLICY INSTITUTE'S POLIO VACCINES ADVISORY PANEL WAS INSTRUMENTAL IN WORKING WITH THE CENTERS FOR DISEASE CONTROL IN ADDRESSING APPROPRIATE REGIMENS FOR ADMINISTRATION OF THE POLIO VACCINE AMONG YOUNG PEOPLE. IT WAS NECESSARY WORK THAT RESULTED IN SAVING COUNTLESS CASES OF POLIO ASSOCIATED WITH THE VACCINE. NOT SURE WHY YOUR PEOPLE WOULD FIND THAT OFFENSIVE.
    At this time he was employed by Pharma Pacific as "Technical Director" and was involved in promoting the views of other pharmacuetical companies (Asprin, etc). We don't see these facts publicised here. In February 1996 he was writing from his own non-profit (Institute for Science and Public Policy) on behalf of ISPP's Polio Vaccines Advisory Panel. The letter went to the American Committee on Immunization Practices (The Advisory Panel for the US government on immunisation) objecting to proposed changes in the immunisation schedule.
          He may have been exressing genuine concerns, or he may have been lobbying. The Advisory Panel may, or may not, have been genuine... or even existed.
    

16. 1996-1997: promotes nocebo effect — Gulf war veterans, women with breast implants, users of cellular telephones and consumers of fat substitutes and artificial sweeteners are only imagining their symptoms

    THIS IS TAKEN FAR OUT OF CONTEXT. THE NOCEBO, OR NEGATIVE PLACEBO, WORK WAS DONE IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE DIVISION OF ALTERNATIVE MEDICINE AT THE NATIONAL INSTITUTES OF HEALTH. IT WAS IMPORTANT WORK BECAUSE MANY ALTERNATIVE MEDICINE INTERVENTIONS ARE ONLY IDENTIFIED AS USEFUL BASED ON SUBJECTIVE SYMPTOM IMPROVEMENT. THIS WAS A PROJECT AIMED AT INCREASING THE PRECISION OF ALTERNATIVE THERAPIES. AGAIN, I AM NOT SURE WHY YOUR PEOPLE WOULD FIND THAT OFFENSIVE.
    Rubbish. This was a scam... pure and simple. It was an idea pushed by the tobacco industry from 1996-on through a pseudoscientific organisations known as ARISE. A Philip Morris strategy document from this time includes an entry:

    • Special topic leadership and sponsorship, e.g. use of epi data and meta studies, risk assessment, the NOCEBO effect, etc.
    • Good/bad science.
    
    It was an attempt to boost the status of a minor medical concept called 'worry' to the status of hypochondria. Carlo (Dec 1996) wrote:
    Over the past two years, a small group of leading scientists, academicians, and professionals has initiated scientific inquiry into the nocebo phenomenon. Are nocebo effects having an impact on symptoms among Gulf War veterans, women with breast implants, users of cellular telephones, and consumers of fat substitutes and artificial sweeteners that some refer to as junk science?
    
    From the viewpoint of psychology, Nocebo was nothing more than a junk-science name for EMS ("Expectation Mediation Symptoms"), which is another name for fear-generated illnesses, and the idea of Nocebo has since virtually disappeared from the literature.
          He worked on this project with tobacco scientist Dr Ernst Wynder of the American Health Foundation, but it turned out to be a disappointing money-earner.

    See nocebo document

17. 1999: broke with the CTIA, but still continued his breast implant work for Dow Corning into 2000

    SIMPLY WRONG. THE BREAST IMPLANT PUBLIC HEALTH PROJECT WAS ENDED IN AGREEMENT WITH THE FDA IN 1995, WHEN THE PROJECT WAS COMPLETED TO EVERYONE'S SATISFACTION.
    We can see no evidence that he continued with the Breast Implant/Dow project after 1996. By then Dow Corning had paid this operation $1.3 million and shortly after Dow Corning filed for bankruptcy. The FDA then banned silicon breast implants for 15 years.

18. Has he repented for any of this? I heard now about incidents which seem to prove the contrary —Maria Westerman, [6/1/2006.] The same sentiment from Israeli activist Iris Atzmon.

    I DON'T KNOW THE PEOPLE WHO ARE MAKING THESE FALSE STATEMENTS, SO I AM NOT SURE HOW TO RESPOND OTHER THAN TO SAY THEY ARE WRONG. I HAVE HAD SOME E-MAIL CONTACT WITH IRIS ATZMON AND IT SEEMS TO BE NORMAL, BUT I DO NOT REALLY KNOW HER, NOR SHE ME. II AM ALWAYS QUITE AMAZED THAT THE PEOPLE WHO ARE SUPPOSED TO HAVE SO MUCH INSIGHT INTO MY INTEGRITY AND SINCERITY ARE PEOPLE WHO HAVE NEVER MET ME IN PERSON OR ARE PEOPLE WHO I WOULD NOT RECOGNIZE IF I BUMPED INTO THEM ON THE STREET.
    [Most people who attack Carlo are people who go to considerable trouble never to meet him. He apears to believe he has an aura of 'truthfulness' around him.
    
    Some of the statements being made about him were false, and some were a bit garbelled. But the essential foundation of these claims were made by people who can read the scientific literature, and have followed the trail of Carlo's science-for-sale entrepreneurship for decades.]

19. January 2006: entered into a strategic alliance with BioPro, a multilevel marketing company that manufactures chips that are supposed to make cell phone safe.

    THERE IS A STRATEGIC ALLIANCE BETWEEN THE SAFE WIRELESS INITIATIVE AND A NUMBER OF ENTITIES INVOLVED IN THE EMR ISSUE. IT IS IMPORTANT TO UNDERSTAND THAT NEITHER THE SWI NOR I ENDORSE ANY PRODUCTS OR COMPANIES. WE WORK TO ASSESS WHAT WORKS AND WHAT DOES NOT AS PART OF OUR PUBLIC SERVICE, NON-PROFIT ORGANIZATION MISSION.
    [The word 'endorse' must have a different meaning in Carlo's lexicon. He favorably 'assesses' snake-oil products from allied companies which pay him substantially for that endorsement, and he pretends that organisations like the Safe Wireless Initiative (and the other 50 non-profits and corporations he owns) are somehow 'public service' entities separate from himself.

    BioPro is also a franchise operation. See this excellently produced come-on which shows their magic EMF absorption buttons being attached to cellphones, TV sets, hair-driers, play-stations, and disk recorders. Stick one on the cat and it will probably block allergies. But if you believe the stiff they are saying here, you'll believe anything.

    ]

20. His Science and Public Policy Institute certifies Electromagnetic Radiation Safety Advisors who are trained to recommend 'noise field technology', 'subtle energy' technologies, 'diodes' and some 'pendants' as protection against EMR'

    THE CERTIFICATION PROGRAMS WE OFFER GO FAR BEYOND WHAT IS DESCRIBED HERE. OUR WORK ON PREVENTIVE AND CORRRECTIVE INTERVENTIONS IS BASED ON HARD SCIENCE AND THE CERTIFICATION PROGRAMS ARE OFFERED TO EDUCATE PROFESSIONALS. OUR EDUCATION PROGRAM IS PRIMARILY FOCUSED ON UNDERSTANDING THE MECHANISM OF HARM ASSOCIATED WITH EMR EXPOSURES SO THAT REMEDIES CAN BE PRESCRIBED. MOST PEOPLE CONSIDER THIS TO BE A GOOD THING, NOT A BAD THING.
    [This is 'away with the fairies stuff'. Before you teach, you need to understand, and Carlo (judging from his videos) is still floundering with some basic concepts that were only part-right thirty years ago.
    
    To put it bluntly, he was flogging fake BioPro products and conducting some training courses until he fell out with the scam-artists who ran the company. Now he does it all on his own... with a couple of new twists... all reliant on scare-mongering and fictitious science.
    
    While there may be still some doubts about cumulative health effects from long-term exposure to cellphone radio waves (mainly those of the old TDMA type), there is no scientifically established relationship between EMFs and adverse health, in any of the published research. There is, however, a numbet of indicative findings that need more research (which isn't being done).
    
    However there is no genuine scientific evidence that cellphones or Wi-Fi have caused any of the conditions that he has targeted for his cures: this is snake-oil salesmanship, pure and simple.]

21. February 16, 2007: Carlo is paid $10,000 to advise Rancho Santa Fe, CA about its proposed citywide wireless system. Carlo recommended doubling the number of antennas,so each antenna would put out less power. Is this a person we want to come to Santa Fe at the exact time we want to mobilize people against citywide Wi-Fi??

    NOT TRUE. WE WERE APPROACHED ABOUT DOING A RISK ASSESSMENT FOR THE PEOPLE OF RANCHO SANTA FE WHO WERE OPPOSED TO A NEW WI-FI SYSTEM. WE AGREED TO ASSIST BUT THE COSTS HAD TO BE SHARED. THE RESIDENTS PUT UP $10,000 — SAFE WIRELESS INITIATIVE CONTRIBUTED THE REMAINING $70,000 FOR THE STUDY. WE ARE NOW WORKING WITH THE COMMUNITY TO STOP THE INSTALLATION OF THE SYSTEM. OUR RECOMMENDATIONS WERE DEPENDENT ON CONVERSION TO A FIBER OPTIC INFRASTRUCTURE WITH POINT OF TRANSMISSION AND POINT OF USE INTERVENTIONS.
    [Carlo brings these problems on himself. When he cries wolf constantly, people stop believing him... and many people hear his pseudo-technio-babble as simply a snake-oil-salesman's pitch. Most activists lack enough knowledge to make sense of his theories anyway.
    
    His report on Santa Fe did call for increasing the number of antenna, which makes sense since it reduces the overall R/F power being transmitted (over shorter distances). He also suggested more use of fiber optic cables rather than Wi-Fi — which also makes sense... to the point that it is bleeding obvious.
    
    In effect he has suggested that Santa Fe should just move with the times, since most homes will be linked by fiber in a few years and the Wi-Fi spectrum then only needs to be used for portable devices.
    
    The Safe Wireless Website documents dealing with this project have disappeared, but one activist report written at the time says:

    On one of the links he presents safer alternatives to the planned deployment of a city-wide Wi-Fi system in Rancho Santa Fe, north of San Diego, California. His proposal includes increasing the number of towers to reduce the emissions from any one given antenna, installing more fiberoptic cables to carry broadband without wireless, and installing noise-field technology that filters and suppresses the harmful effects of the Wi-Fi antennas.
    Noise-field technology, for the uninitiated, refers to the patented BioPro chip 'EMF-protection' technology that he was helping them flog at the time.]