English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

While Dieudonné has praised thoroughness of Leszczynski’s review of EHS studies, he was critical of the final conclusions. Leszczynski strongly disagrees with argumentation of Dieudonné that EHS issue is settled and that biomarker research is unnecessary because it is expensive and might produce false positives. Leszczynski’s opinion is that his review has demonstrated how very poor scientifically and inadequate statistically is the to-date executed research on EHS. Dieudonné’s approach of using such poor science to justify claim that EHS issue is settled and there is no causality link between EHS and EMF exposures, is completely unjustified and simply false.

reviews on environmental health

Dariusz Leszczynski responds to comments of Maël Dieudonné on Leszczynski’s review of the scientific evidence on the individual sensitivity to electromagnetic fields (EHS)