CST News Feed



To streamline your search, anywhere on the website, for a specific topic, word or phrase, please use the white search bar located under the Action Kits below. 

Sep 26

"The next scheduled hearing by Health Canada is in 2019. If you go back to their previous findings in 2014, 2009, etc they still base their evidence on pre Wi-Fi and pre cell phone findings. No one is funding any research.

"Health Canada is cherry picking the studies they include for the Safety Code 6 decisions. They include ONLY studies that support their own conclusions. This is NOT how science is conducted. Obviously, Dr. McNamee and his fellow scientists at Health Canada are unfamiliar with the work of Dr. Karl Popper on falsification.

"February 20, 2013. I just returned from a hearing in Montreal in front of the Superior Court of Quebec where Health Canada scientist, James McNamee, admitted that the Safety Code 6 guideline for microwave radiation (which includes radiation from most of the devices we are concerned about like mobile phones, cell phone antennas, Wi-Fi, wireless toys and baby monitors, smart meters etc.) is based ONLY on preventing a heating effect!

"Let me state that again. Health Canada admits that Safety Code 6 for frequencies between 100 kHz and 300 GHz are based ONLY on heating. Why is this so important?  

"For years Health Canada has stated that Safety Code 6 takes into consideration and protects the public from both thermal and non-thermal effects. They made this statement to groups concerned about Wi-Fi in schools and to those concerned about smart meters and cell towers coming into their neighborhoods. While they are technically correct in their statement, they mislead the public by what they failed to mention. What Health Canada failed to mention is that the "non-thermal" effects are considered ONLY for frequencies between 3 and 100 kHz. For frequencies between 100 kHz and 300 GHz ONLY thermal effects are considered and cell towers fall within this "thermal range."  

"That is not the only thing that was novel and refreshing at this hearing.  

"This is the first time a provincial court (Superior Court of Quebec) has challenged the right of municipal governments to address health concerns expressed by citizens regarding federally regulated radio frequency radiation. . . .

Jul 30

[Note: This includes-but is not limited to-radiofrequency radiation-emitting devices, such as cell phones and cordless phones and their base stations, Wi-Fi, broadcast antennas, smart meters and baby monitors.]

We are scientists engaged in the study of electromagnetic fields (EMF) radiofrequency radiation (RFR) health and safety. We have serious concerns regarding Health Canada's Safety Code 6 Guideline. . . .

Also: Declaration: DOCTORS Call for Protection from Radiofrequency Radiation

Jul 30

Declaration: Doctors call for Protection from Radiofrequency Radiation Exposure

letter signed by renowned scientists and physicians urging Health Canada to stop denying that evidence exists that shows harm.

Also Declaration: SCIENTISTS call for Protection from Radiofrequency Radiation Exposure

Canada's Safety Code 6 Guideline is fundamentally flawed.

Health Canada's Safety Code 6 is based on an obsolete account and analysis of RFR research and has disregarded or minimized certain recent studies, such as cancer, DNA damage, protein synthesis, stress response, and detrimental biological and health effects in humans that occur at RFR intensities below the existing Code 6 Guideline. . . .

Our urgent call for public health protection.

The public's health and the health of the environment are threatened by ever-evolving RF emitting technologies, without due consideration for what the potential cumulative impacts on biological systems are likely to be in the future.  

We urgently call upon Health Canada . . .

i) to intervene in what we view as an emerging public health crisis;

ii) to establish guidelines based on the best available scientific data including studies on cancer and DNA damage, stress response, cognitive and neurological disorders, impaired reproduction, developmental effects, learning and behavioural problems among children and youth, and the broad range of symptoms classified as EHS; and

iii) To advise Canadians to limit their exposure and especially the exposure of children. . . .

Jul 14

Scientists and Physicians Call On Health Canada To Protect the Public . . .

From Radiofrequency Radiation Exposure - Magda Havas editorial

After reading the editorial at the link, click through at "Physicians" and at "Research Scientists" to land on the click-throughs where you can read the actual declarations and see the names of the MDs (Canadian) and Scientists (Canadian and others) who submitted them.

The declarations are not too lengthy and they are easy to read.

Jul 12

Prof. of Medicine PAUL HEROUX's PhD Safety Code 6 Testimony

Video submission to Health Canada, explaining RF mechanisms and standards

Paul Heroux, director of the Occupation Health program at McGill University's Faculty of Medicine recently submitted this video to Health Canada which is reviewing its Safety Code 6 guideline on radiofrequency exposure.

Click on the link below to read an article from Microwave News, a well-respected journal on EMR and EMF research, about new research showing extremely low magnetic fields can have health effects.  

NB:  Of real interest are comments about the people at McGill University who call themselves "skeptics", funded by multi-millionaire Lorne Trottier who spends millions trying to discredit any scientist who shows that RF radiation from wireless devices is dangerous. Any evidence of harm would endanger Trottier's investments.  He has bought scientists at McGill - a discredit to this university. 

McGill University Professor Proposes Radical New Outlook

Jul 1

OECTA - A position regarding Non-Ionizing Electromagnetic Radiation (2012)

includes Wi-Fi in the Workplace: Ontario English Catholic Teachers Association (OECTA) Provincial Health and Safety Committee

A position regarding the use of Non-Ionizing Electromagnetic Radiation, including WiFi, in the Workplace Researched and presented by the OECTA Provincial Health and Safety Committee January 2012

There are growing health and safety concerns regarding the widespread use of technology, such as cellular phones and wireless computer networking (Wi-Fi), which produce non-ionizing electromagnetic radiation. It is estimated that at least 3 per cent of the population has an environmental sensitivity to the radiation that is emitted by these devices and, as a result, experience serious immediate physical/biological effects when exposed.

As has been the case with other known societal health and safety issues, such as exposure to cigarette smoke or asbestos, the health effects of unprecedented long term exposure to this radiation may not be known for some time. Widespread use of, or exposure to, wireless communication devices and WiFi technology in Ontario schools, can be positioned as a potential workplace hazard.

This paper examines what is currently known about the impact of non-ionizing electromagnetic radiation, reviews the implications it can have for Ontario schools, including OECTA members, and makes recommendations to the Ontario English Catholic Teachers' Association on the issue.

Table of Contents 

  • Introduction
  • What is Non-Ionizing Electromagnetic Radiation?
  • Health Canada's Position
  • The World Health Organization and Other Jurisdictions
  • Exposure Increases with Use
  • Effects From Exposure
  • Electromagnetic Hypersensitivity
  • Environmental Sensitivity is a Disability
  • Role of the Joint Health and Safety Committee
  • Hazard Control and Prudent Avoidance
  • Summary
  • Recommendations
  • Appendix - Occupational Health and Safety Act

Jun 1

Wi-Fi in Schools FAQ

Frequently Asked Questions (updated September, 2012)

  • 1. What are the official warnings? 
  • 2. What are other countries doing? 
  • 3. What does a Precautionary Approach look like? 
  • 4. Is Wi-Fi safer than cell phone use? 
  • 5. Wi-Fi has been around for a few years - why haven't we seen a problem? 
  • 6. What do insurance companies say? 
  • 7. Should there be an Informed Consent procedure? 
  • 8. Do we need Wi-Fi to prepare children for the 21st century? 
  • 9. What can we do?

Print some up and keep them with you as you go about your day - Drop them off in health stores, schools, medical offices - everywhere you can. They are handy and easy to give to people on a regular basis.


May 6

City brings in promised opt-out from RF Hydro Meters - Westmount, Quebec

Residents to be notified of meter replacement - Westmount Independent Newspaper report

Westmount residents will soon be able to opt out of the city's ongoing installation of radiofrequency (RF) hydro meters under a new by-law adopted April 8. An alternative non-RF meter is expected to be available in about two months.

Providing a choice for residents has been publicly requested by various groups and citizens for some two years so that people may make personal choices regarding controversial health-impact issues related to RF equipment.

The new by-law also requires Hydro Westmount to notify customers in writing at least 30 days before replacing their meters.

The opt-out program to be offered by Hydro Westmount is conditional on the non-RF meter being positioned outside the house - at the resident's expense if re- location is required - and at an installation cost of $99 and a monthly charge of $5.

The installation fee is to be waived, however, in cases where an existing traditional electromechanical meter - now no longer on the market - is expiring and due for required replacement, typically after 10 years. . . .  Download doc below

Additional Information in the Westmount Independent Archives:
http://www.westmountindependent.com/WIv6.5a.pdf  May 1, 2012, p. 11 and 13    
http://www.westmountindependent.com/WIv6.10d.pdf  October 23, 2012, p. 4


May 1

The call of the Wild could soon be interrupted by another form of technology. Parks Canada's intent to bring WiFi to 15 to 20 of its parks and sites by this summer has ignited a wave of criticism from some of the country's best known nature lovers. We've got the debate. . . 


CTV - PARKS CANADA DEFENDS WI-FI HOTSPOTS, says they won't be in "back country". 


Apr 14

Scientists Speak Out

C4ST - RSC Conflicted Review of Safety Code 6 Released

Two Scientists Break Silence on "Major Flaws" in Royal Society's Recent Report on Safety of Cell Phones and Towers, Smart Meters and Wi-Fi -

C4ST - CNW - April 14, 2014:

OTTAWA, April 14, 2014 /CNW/ - Two peer reviewers involved in this month's Royal Society report on wireless safety say the results cannot be trusted, because the Panel ignored evidence that wireless radiation is harmful to humans.


The scientific reviewers also said key panelists were in conflict of interest as they regularly accept funding from wireless and energy companies.


One of the reviewers, Dr. Martin Blank, holds two PhD's and has published more than 200 papers at Columbia University on the health effects of wireless radiation. The other reviewer, Dr. Anthony Miller MD, is Professor Emeritus at the Dalla Lana School of Public Health at the University of Toronto.


Both say the Royal Society panel ignored scientific evidence published over the past five years. As peer reviewers, they noted some panelists were conflicted and others lacked sufficient expertise.


"The Royal Society panel has failed in its obligation to the public," said Dr. Miller. "It ignored recent evidence that wireless radiation is a probable carcinogen." 


Dr. Miller said he is most concerned about involuntary exposure, such as children exposed to Wi-Fi in schools.


Dr. Blank said the Royal Society dismissed definitive studies that prove wireless radiation causes harm to human cells, including sperm cells when men carry phones in their pockets.


"We don't need further study to lower safety limits," said Dr. Blank.  "There is already enough evidence to recommend lower limits for wireless radiation in Canada."


The Royal Society's panel has been mired in controversy. Last summer, the original Chair resigned after a conflict of interest was exposed in the media. The Royal Society promised to publish the remaining scientists' conflicts in its final report, but did not.


SOURCE Canadians for Safe Technology (C4ST)


For further information: Background: www.C4ST.org/break-silence, Interviews: media@c4st.org, PH: 705-444-9662

From: "Canadians For Safe Technology" <info@c4st.org>
Monday, April 14, 2014 6:29:28 AM
Subject: RSC Peer Reviewers Break Their Silence

Loading content ...
Show More Content

One time donation: Click the donate button below and follow the instructions on the screen.

Monthly donation: If you wish to contribute every month, please select the amount from the Donation Options list below and click Subscribe. Your contribution will be sent for you every month for the amount you selected.

Donation Options

Citizens for Safe Technology (CST) is funded and supported solely by those who wish to help us. Thank-you for learning, sharing and helping if you can.

Meetings and events on the issue of wireless technologies in homes and communities throughout North America.

Click the button above to sign our online petition to return to hardwired computers in schools.

Click the button above to sign our online petition against Smart Meters in British Columbia.

Smart Meter Petition (Hard Copy)

Download and print this petition form -- Refuse Smart Meter Installation.

Send completed petitions 15 signatures per page to:
Una St. Clair


e-mail: una@citizensforsafetechnology.org