CST News Feed

Letters/Initiatives - Health


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. 

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 19

Doctor's Information Package

Addressed to Medical Professionals. Useful to all. Updated July 19, 2014

The following package is for those who wish to approach their doctors with information regarding the possible health risks from non-thermal microwave radiation.  It contains links organized into specific health effect categories.  These links can be printed out according to personal areas of need or concern, and used to start a dialogue with doctors who may not as yet have associated certain health conditions with EMF or RF exposure.  

The introductory letter on pages 1 and 2 contains a link to the entire list, and may be useful to your doctor as a reference tool. 

"Dear Medical Professional:

"Your patient has asked us for support in providing you with information regarding the possible health risks from non-thermal microwave radiofrequency electromagnetic radiation, recently reclassified by the WHO/IARC as a Class 2B, possible human carcinogen.

"This WHO risk category also includes lead, DDT, chloroform, and dioxane, and is relevant to all wireless devices emitting radiofrequency electromagnetic fields, including cordless phones, cell phones, IPads, Wi-Fi routers, wireless games, baby monitors, and smart meters . . .

"Many doctors have already given medical advice to their patients by way of a medical letter or note on a prescription form stating that the patient should avoid, for medical reasons, living in a residence or residential complex at which a wireless meter is operating in order to maintain their health or avoid aggravating a medical condition. This medical advice stating the health condition and advising the patient that they should avoid ongoing exposure to wireless radiofrequency and smart meter emissions will allow your patient to participate in the Human Rights Action currently underway. We are hopeful that the individual's right to protect their health as advised by their medical doctor will be upheld by the Human Rights Tribunal, and this forced exposure within their own home to undesirable microwave radiofrequency emissions will be replaced with reasonable and respectful accommodation by BC Hydro . . . "

Information categories contained in this package: 

  1. Microwave Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Radiation - General 
  2. Smart Meters
  3. Interference with medical devices / Smart Meter Risk
  4. Children
  5. EHS/ES - Electrosensitivity
  6. Diabetes
  7. Heart
  8. Tinnitus / Microwave Hearing / Dental Effects
  9. Sleep and Insomnia
  10. Infertility / Sperm Damage
  11. Cell Towers - Applicable to constant low-level exposures
  12. Cell Phones
  13. Published Articles
  14. BEES - This section included due to potential impacts on human health from loss of bees and pollination
  15. Lawsuits, Scientific Statements and Letters
  16. Cancer
  17. Brain Function / Epilepsy / Alzheimer's / ALS
Also available:

Open Letter to GP and Other Medical Colleagues  January, 2012
Guidelines for Doctors
AAEM calls for Caution (American Academy of Environmental Medicine)

Jul 17

Prevent Cancer Now Submission to Health Canada

Submission to Health Canada regarding Safety Code 6 Draft

"Prevent Cancer Now is a Canadian National group with over 5000 followers, working to eliminate preventable causes of cancer.

"Prevent Cancer Now sees that today's science indicates a high level of certainty that radiofrequency radiation from communication devices contributes to tumours. Sufficient evidence exists linking radiation from wireless communications devices to cancer, to justify Health Canada reducing the exposure standards under Safety Code 6, and taking steps to minimize exposures of the young and most vulnerable. Based on our analysis of missing information and shortcomings of the human epidemiology information relied upon by Health Canada, we make the following recommendations, addressing both Safety Code 6 and ancillary actions for the consideration of Health Canada: . . .

  • Scientific Review
  • Precaution
  • Recent cancer research
  • Comments on the evidence regarding carcinogenicity presented in support of draft Safety Code 6 "status quo"
  • The Interphone Study
  • The IARC 2011 review
  • The Danish Cohort study
  • Incidence of brain tumours 
  • References
  • Minimize Exposure to Radiation from wireless communications
  • Background
  • References
  • Internal resources, and groups working for safer technologies
CHART Safer Use of Wireless Communications

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

May 4


May 2014 - Electromagnetic Radiation Awareness Month


  • Awareness Month May 2014 
  • How to Promote Awareness 
  • Governor Proclamations 
  • Awareness in Schools 
  • Health Provider Education 
  • Awareness in the Library 
  • At the State Capitol 
  • Issuing a Press Release 
  • Media Coverage 
  • Fact Sheet
MCS International Coalition of Allied Groups and Organizations (MICAGO)

Apr 27

BioInitiative Working Group's Final Letter to SCENIHR (April 2014)

Suggested revisions to SCENIHR re their "Preliminary Opinion on Potential Health Effects of Exposure to Electromagnetic Fields (EMF)" 2013

SCENIHR = Scientific Committee on Emerging and Newly Identified Health Risks 

The Royal Society of Canada's (RSC) Safety Code 6 (SC6) report to Health Canada failed to recommend significant changes to SC6 guidelines of exposure of the public to radiofrequency/microwave radiation.

Attached is a page numbered copy of the BioInitative Working Group Comments (April 16, 2014 - 365 pages) 

Apr 25

"New Studies Show Health Risks from Wireless Tech: Warnings from the BioInitiative Working Group/ University at Albany, Rensselaer, New York /April 16, 2014 . . .

"The BioInitiative Working Group says evidence for health risk from wireless tech is growing stronger and warrants immediate action. The Group released a mid-year update covering new science studies from 2012 to 2014. . .

"Federal programs like ConnectED and E-Rate are calling for wireless classrooms while ignoring the health evidence. Hyperactivity, concentration problems, anxiety, irritability, disorientation, distracted behavior, sleep disorders, and headaches are reported in clinical studies. . . .

Apr 19

Electromagnetic Hypersensitivity (EHS) A Personal Case Study by Steven Weller

A briefing on EHS for Health Professionals, Research Scientists, Government Officials and concerned members of the Public - November 27, 2013

"My name is Steven Weller and I wrote this Electromagnetic Hypersensitivity (EHS) case study that is included with this covering statement with the hope it may be of benefit to those who either find themselves in a similar position to me, or, maybe just interested in a getting a better understanding of what EHS is and the likely cause.

"The study documents my personal journey towards self-diagnosis as being EHS, the ensuing questions it raised, along with information which might assist fellow sufferers to better cope with a condition which, until relatively recently, was unknown on our planet.

"Initially, I wasn't even aware that there was such a condition as EHS. It was purely by accident that I discovered that I was sensitive to certain radiofrequencies (RF). I have 25 years' experience working in Information Technology. Radiofrequencies have been a significant part of the landscape for me for a number of years.

"At the time I first made the connection between my symptoms and exposure to certain technology, it was a simply a matter of making a few minor adjustments, and I was able to manage my condition. Life continued as normal. The mandatory rollout of wireless smart meters in my neighbourhood unfortunately changed all this.

"I was torpedoed onto a path which has involved me in spending countless fruitless hours seeking answers from the medical establishment and government agencies, innumerable amounts of time conducting my own research, followed by a quest to seek answers from the authorities who pronounce upon the safety of our RF standards. A high level of protection is offered I am told.

"I have been sorely disappointed by their response. Unfortunately, Governments and the Industry appear to be focused only on the perceived benefits of these technologies (and money) without considering any potential long term health implications that they may bring.

"We are bio-electrical systems. Our bodies do not incorporate elaborate shielding and we are not impervious or hardened against this form of radiation, which today can be billions or more times higher than what occurs naturally. Representatives of the industry and RF Standard bodies often assert that there is "no clear or conclusive" scientific evidence regarding the biological effects of low level or "non-thermal" RF exposures, a statement that has also been continually recycled for many years. But in actuality, a large body of scientific research documentation exists that shows RF exposures at low (non thermal) levels can produce adverse effects that have serious health implications.

Many countries around the world including Australia have adopted ICNIRP 1998 RF Guidelines. In an ICNIRP Statement released in 2002 which is obfuscated with a document title of "philosophy" http://www.icnirp.de/documents/philosophy.pdf clearly says on p 546
"Some guidelines may still not provide adequate protection for certain sensitive individuals nor for normal individuals exposed concomitantly to other agents...." that "Different groups in a population may have differences in their ability to tolerate a particular NIR exposure. For example, children, the elderly, and some chronically ill people might have a lower tolerance for one or more forms of NIR exposure than the rest of the population." (NIR - Non Ionising Radiation)  
The World Health Organisation also has the following to say about current ICNIRP RF "Guidelines"

"What guidelines cannot account for...

"...Guidelines are set for the average population and cannot directly address the requirements of a minority of potentially more sensitive people...."
Source: http://www.who.int/peh- emf/about/WhatisEMF/en/index4.html

It is obvious in my eyes that there is no desire to uncover the truth because of the legal implications to governments and the industry around the world. It seems that we who are EHS are collateral damage in the name of progress.

It's been a lonely and frustrating journey. Hopefully, this study might make the road a little easier for those that follow. Sadly, with rapidly escalating levels of electro-smog around the globe, I believe these numbers will undoubtedly be increasing.

In closing I would like to quote Dr Julian Hollis:

"Science is all about free investigation in order to discover facts, regardless of popular 'consensus'. Theories are always open to and under review and data are re-examined; no matter how much 'truth' is valued; even ideologically protected. There is also a vital role to be played through constructive imagination...what would happen if? There is always a need to remain fearlessly open to new, unexpected, even unwelcome discoveries. Past history records over and over again unwelcome discoveries that have forced change: thus those scientists brave enough to challenge vested interests or systems of mass belief have usually been dismissed, sidelined; even brutalized" ('Geology of Change' class notes 10th February 2012 provided to me by an associate).

"Whilst the above statements are in the context of the Earth Sciences, I would suggest the comments are perhaps even more relevant to the debate currently raging within the scientific community over evidence of adverse effects in the non-ionizing area of the electromagnetic spectrum. . . .

Mar 30

W.E.E.P. News

The Canadian Initiative to Stop Wireless Electric and Electromagnetic Pollution

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