Citizens for Safe Technology
Empowering the public to protect children
and nature from unsafe wireless technologies.
Looking for a specific topic or a past article? Search for it below:
October 17, 2014
Most depressing. The following ruling was adopted by FCC on Oct. 17th, 2014. Anyone who questions what Tom Wheeler is capable of at that agency needs to just look at the rah-rah language of this document and the rationales. DAS is as bad as smart meters re: a new layer of ubiquitous RF. Creates significant harmonics on lines, too. This ruling essentially guts any local/state control over DAS systems.
Note in the Executive Summary, p. 15, #31 how they include in the DAS definition transceivers located at hub sites (cell towers). Although this ruling may reduce the number of new macrocells, it is also a backdoor to further preempt local tower siting control if DAS is part of the system. Very clever. This ruling also now excludes colocation of new systems on towers and buildings from further local review. That means wherever towers or roof-mounted antennas already exist, anything can pile on without additional state or local control. Add to this the fact that no one monitors for compliance with FCC standards, and the problem is obvious.
With this ruling, DAS is now categorically excluded by FCC from RF, NEPA, and Historical Preservation review, and Environmental Impact Statements. In hilly terrain where people were finding some RF-free zones, DAS will fill that in, quite cheaply for the telecoms. Note in the beginning how AT&T and Verizon are shifting to DAS. It was because of this pending ruling that AT&T put many cell tower proposals in abeyance. Their macrocells will be more carefully chosen now but the tools to challenge a bad site have just been neutered at the federal level.
This industry has been salivating for these waivers for a long time. They needed Wheeler, more public pressure for coverage, and the tech embrace of DAS by the big players (prior they only liked towers which no longer can handle the traffic) to get it. And with the FCC reviewing its RF standards with a likelihood of making them more lenient, they will have what they want. Macro and mico-cells will be able to put out more RF, less substantive review and/or ability to challenge in court, and no one can stop it without direct legal challenges to the FCC -- not easy to do. And the industry got it with no liability to themselves.
This is what happens when RF is waived off the table.
Swedish Radiation Protection Foundation
In Memory of police officer Roger Carlstrom
"We have received the sad news that Roger Carlstrom from Trelleborg, Sweden has left us. He died on October 3, only 8 days before his 50th birthday, from the brain tumor he was diagnosed with in December 2011.
"Roger worked as a police officer for over 25 years and was at the time of the onset of the brain tumor field officer at Trelleborg Police.
"Roger Carlstrom was our friend. His courage was unique and he cared genuinely for other people. These characteristics prompted him to openly talk about his illness and what caused it. He was convinced that it was caused by the new police radio system Tetra. Roger wanted to warn others so that they would not be injured as he was.
"He told me in 2012: "I am absolutely sure that it isTetra that caused my tumor. I am extremely concerned that other officers or persons in the emergency services will also be affected." . . .
"But it was not enough for him to just warn the police force. Roger realized that other wireless technologies can be equally damaging, especially wireless networks, wifi. He got the same symptoms from wifi as from Tetra. . . .
Comment by midnight Oct. 20th - Peril on the Road: Wireless Mandated Vehicles
N.B. Comment deadline is now past. The following is for your information:
"The US Dept. of Transportation is accepting comments until midnight, Monday, Oct. 20.
"When you think things can't get crazier, things get crazier. If this is approved, all American-made cars will be wireless.
"Aside from health, what are the safety implications of ramping up wireless exposures to millions of electro-intolerant drivers?
Not in our car!
"The Department of Transportation is proposing to require "vehicle-to-vehicle wireless communication" in all light vehicles in the United States . . .
"Please make a comment this weekend even if it is a brief statement. Building a record of opposition is very important.
"It's not going to make our roadways any safer if we're causing heart problems, blurry vision, or headaches in drivers. Submit Your Comments in 3 Places:
Comment here: http://www.regulations.gov/#!submitComment;D=NHTSA-2014-0022-0002
Comment here (Research Report): http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=NHTSA-2014-0022
Comment here: Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards: Vehicle-to-Vehicle (V2V) Communications
NEW Deadline for comment period ends Friday, October 31st - This will go ahead IF Forest Service approves
Please, send your comments, short, long, get them in so you can be involved later.
N.B. Public input to October 10 has been significant, and so requests to have the deadline extended have been granted. The new deadline for comments is now October 31. Examples of Letters
If you are tweeting a message about the US Navy EMF testing as follows, due to the length you may have to do so in a series of 3 tweets. Please post, tweet and retweet this to reach as many people as possible in the short time we have. And please, write, call, visit your MP's and MLA's to demand that they get involved to find out where our governments have been while this has been going on in the U.S.
Beginning next year (2015) the U.S. Navy plans EMF weapons exercises (powerful RF devices) in the Olympic National Forest in Washington State, along the shores of northern Olympic Peninsula. Callum County faces Victoria and B.C. The frequencies are high, 4-8 GHz, and travel great distances. British Columbia will very likely be exposed to high levels of radiation that the military will be testing.
The US Forest Service issued a draft approval finding no significant impact. The U.S. Navy is saying there is no evidence of harm to animals or humans.
We all know this is not true. Significantly, the Forest District Manager Dean Millett cancelled his decision (Environmental Assessment) on September 26 and re-opened the Public Comment period. That Public Comment period ends October .
All the documents are here Northwest Electronic Warfare Range Environmental Assessment (EA)- Electrowarfare
To have standing to make an objection later during the objection period, you must submit a comment now. The objection period will take place after the public comment period closes and District Manager Millett re-issues a decision.
Project name is apparently Pacific Northwest Electronic Warfare Range Environmental Assessment (EA) That must be in the subject line if sending comments by email.
Those wishing to provide input and have standing (eligibility) during the future Objection period for this project must submit their comments to the project lead:
1835 Black Lake Blvd SW,
Olympia, WA 98512.
If you have any questions regarding the details of this proposal or have comments, please contact Greg Wahl at email@example.com [only for questions] or (360) 956-2375. The office business hours for those submitting hand-delivered comments are: 8:00 A.M. to 4:30 P.M. Monday through Friday, excluding holidays.
Those submitting electronic copies [of comments] must put the project name in the subject line, and must either submit comments as part of the e-mail message or as an attachment only in one of the following three formats: Microsoft Word, rich text format (rtf) or Adobe Portable Document Format (pdf), and can do so to the following e-mail address: firstname.lastname@example.org
In cases where no identifiable name is attached to a comment, a verification of identity will be required for objection eligibility. If using an electronic message, a scanned signature is one way to provide verification. E-mails submitted to e-mail addresses other than the one listed above, in other formats than those listed, or containing viruses, will be rejected.
For more information and documents on this project, including the Draft Decision Notice (under "Decision"), the Final EA, and EA Public Notice Extension, Sept.26 (under "Supporting"): http://tinyurl.com/PDN-Electrowarfare Information on the extended comment period are under "Supporting". Here are two informative articles on this from the Peninsula Daily News. Post comments on the most recent one below:
Excerpts from the first link:
The Pacific Northwest Electronic Warfare Range project would entail the first use of electromagnetic radiation for the Navy training that pilots now simulate by internal aircraft controls.
Dean Millett, district ranger for the Pacific District of the Olympic National Forest, had issued a draft notice of a decision earlier this month in which he had agreed with the Navy's finding of no significant impact, clearing the way for a Forest Service special permit.
He canceled the decision Thursday and reopened public comment because of "renewed interest . . . from members of the public who were unaware of the proposal," notice of which was not published in North Olympic Peninsula newspapers.
Comment is being accepted through Oct.  on the environmental assessment, which is at http://tinyurl.com/PDN-Electrowarfare.
The purpose is to train to deny the enemy "all possible frequencies of electromagnetic radiation (i.e. electromagnetic energy) for use in such applications as communication systems, navigation systems and defense related systems and components," according to the environmental assessment.
Extended exposure to electromagnetic radiation could cause a health hazard, the Navy said in the environmental assessment, available at http://tinyurl.com/PDN-Electrowarfare.
The emitters would operate on a radio frequency band from 4 to 8 gigahertz (GHz).
Navy officials did not know the impact of the emissions on small animals, saying "There are no conclusive direct hazards to human tissue as a result of electromagnetic radiation.
"Links to DNA fragmentation, leukemia, and cancer due to intermittent exposure to extremely high levels of electromagnetic radiation are speculative; study data are inconsistent and insufficient at this time," according to the assessment.
Crew members staffing the trucks would be protected by being under the tower, which is pointing the electromagnetic radiation upward, Sodano said.
The draft decision has been made by one person, Dean Millett, District Ranger for the Park. He decided to let the Navy proceed with their Alternative 2 is because "it meets the purpose and need of the project most effectively". This park ranger is deciding what is best for the Navy instead of what is best for the park.
Please comment and distribute this information widely. According to the press report, if the Forest Service says "No", the Navy can't use the Forest.
Questions? Contact Greg Wahl, Forest Environmental Coordinator
Excellent Letters written re US Navy testing of in Pacific Northwest
Below are just some of the excellent letters written today that some of you might find useful in writing your own. Please, take a few minutes and write by the new deadline of Friday, October 31. If you do so, then there will be the opportunity to have further input in the future.
Subject: Pacific Northwest Electronic Warfare Range Environmental Assessment (EA)
We are a family of six living in Saanich, British Columbia. We write to express our extreme disagreement with the US Navy's intention to test RF devices along the shores of the northern Olympic Peninsula.
Both U.S. residents and residents of Canada, not to mention wildlife in an ecologically sensitive area, will be exposed to high frequencies and high levels of radiation. There is absolutely no evidence that such testing is safe for humans, wildlife, or important plant ecosystems. This is an an enormous and foolhardy risk. It brings to mind the nuclear testing conducted in the southwest United States that contaminated much of the United States with radioactive fallout for many years.
The dangers of EMF radiation are many and real. The prestigious and respected American Academy of Environmental Medicine has made this an area of concern, and recently gave their highest award to Dr. Martin Pall of Washington State University for his research in this area. Dr. Pall has explored how EMFs act via activation of voltage-gated calcium channels, and how EMF exposures can cause physiological effects including cancer, oxidative stress and EHS. In addition many physicians are discovering that their patients are experiencing difficulties because of EMF exposure, and Women's College Hospital in Toronto has recently established a program to educate doctors about this threat, which some public health professionals call the greatest challenge to human health in the twenty-first century.
Our family does not give our permission for the US Navy to subject our children to this serious health threat. Both the United States and Canada should look to other countries whose standards regarding EMF exposures are much more demanding, and whose forward thinking should lead the way on this issue. We insist that the residents of this area be considered, and that the US Navy be prevented from such testing.
Forwarded to : Popham.MLA, Lana ; email@example.com; firstname.lastname@example.org; email@example.com; firstname.lastname@example.org; Randall.Garrison@parl.gc.ca; email@example.com; Edward Hill ; firstname.lastname@example.org
To each BC MP:
Dear Members of the Canadian Parliament,
The US Navy plans to do testing of powerful RF devices along the shores of northern Olympic Peninsula (Clallum county faces Victoria and BC). The frequencies are high, 4-8 GHz, and signals using these frequencies travel great distances. We very likely will be exposed to high levels of radiation that the military will be testing.
Comments are being accepted from the public at email@example.com until Oct. 10. Pacific Northwest Electronic Warfare Range Environmental Assessment (EA) must be on the subject line.
The Navy is saying there is no evidence of harm to animals or humans. Independent scientific evidence proves this statement to be incorrect. Inadvertently, but without doubt, the US Navy will be experimenting on Canadians, on our families and on our wildlife.
Has the Canadian government been informed about this exercise? If so, what was the reaction? If not, there should be a strong objection to such an exercise from taking place in an area where Canadians will be exposed. There is no way to limit exposure to such emissions which have been shown to have dangerous effects, especially on children and fetuses, those with compromised immune systems, and the elderly.
This must be stopped. This trespass into our environment must not be allowed. I implore you to ask your leaders to contact the US government and demand that our sovereignty and safety be respected.
I am writing in utmost concern for your intention to permit the Olympic National Forest to be used as an electronic warfare testing ground by the US Navy. If passed, this decision will undoubtedly cause irreversible harm to the plants, birds, animals, ecosystems, and humans directly in, and in areas within a several hundred-mile radius of this site.
Studies conducted by world-class, non-industry-funded scientists show there is NO SAFE level of radiation, and that radiation from all sources is cumulative. Furthermore, a peer-reviewed study published May 7, 2014 in Nature, International Weekly Journal of Science proves the negative effect of EMF on migratory birds. " So far, no putative effect of anthropogenic electromagnetic noise at intensities below the guidelines adopted by the World Health Organization 1, 2 has withstood the test of independent replication under truly blinded experimental conditions. No effect has therefore been widely accepted as scientifically proven. Here we show that migratory birds are unable to use their magnetic compass in the presence of urban electromagnetic noise. These fully double-blinded tests document a reproducible effect of anthropogenic electromagnetic noise on the behaviour of an intact vertebrate."
In regards to your comment that "There are no conclusive direct hazards to human tissue as a result of electromagnetic radiation, last August the Journal of Cellular and Molecular Medicine published a paper by Washington State University Professor Emeritus of biochemistry Martin Pall, which documents how EMF affects the flow of voltage-gated calcium channels in our cells. Pall links this change in cellular activity to a plethora of physical ailments. Basing his conclusions on 24 studies, he has this to say about short high-intensity pulses of microwave radiation: " We know from the nanosecond pulse studies[that these pulses] can be very damaging and act via VGCC activation, with activation continuing long after the pulse has ceased (7). It has been known for over 30 years that short microwave pulses can cause massive cellular damage (57)." EMF has been recognized as a potential carcinogen by the WHO in 2011 (alongside lead and DDT), and scientifically linked to autism (which is up by 33%), skyrocketing ADHD, the disappearing honeybee, and more. Read the literature, and it becomes clear that the potentially harmful effects of EMF exposure are much greater than the thermal (heating) risks current exposure standards attribute to it. In 2011, the Council of Europe (47 countries, 800-million people) urged all of its member nations to "reconsider" their relationship with ICNIRP (International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection) whose radiation Exposure Limits are almost universally adopted and, instead, observe the limits recommended in the BioInitiative 2007 Report. This report, if adopted, would require Canada and the USA to reduce their radiation Exposure Limits 10,000 times. In section 7 (Technological progress and economic growth at the expense of environment and health protection ) subsection 29 of their 2011 parliamentary report on the potential danger of EMF, the Council of Europe states:
"...it is most curious, to say the least, that the applicable official threshold values for limiting the health impact of extremely low frequency electromagnetic fields and high frequency waves were drawn up and proposed to international political institutions (WHO, European Commission, governments) by the ICNIRP, an NGO whose origin and structure are none too clear and which is furthermore suspected of having rather close links with the industries whose expansion is shaped by recommendations for maximum threshold values for the different frequencies of electromagnetic fields."
Lastly, neither Lloyds of London nor Swiss Re Insurance will insure against health-related claims attributed to devices emitting non-thermal microwave radiation.
In light of all of the above, I sincerely hope that reason and prudence will prevail, that you do not permit the testing of these weapons to proceed, but keep the Olympic National Forest as a pristine refuge, a haven for wildlife and for future generations, a place that promotes not destruction and illness, but health, balance, and well being, _______________________________________________________________________
Dear Mr. Greg Wahl,
See below my concerns with the future testing of weapons and RF exposure. Please keep me informed of any and all decisions made in this regard and please ensure that my concerns are included in the decision making, as it impacts my life directly. I appreciate your time and effort in ensuring that people's quality life is protected at all times, never at the expansion of technology or security.
Sent: October 8, 2014 9:02 PM
Subject: Pacific Northwest Electronic Warfare Range Environmental Assessment (EA)
My name is XXX , I live in Victoria and suffer the daily effect of RF radiation emanating from cell phone, WIFI, cell tower and every devices like microwave etc... and computer in my work place. No one can convince those suffering from these effects that they don't exist, cause we know the facts and we know they exist. RF radiation is a challenge on our health as we experience them daily. I've acquired an RF device to help protect me by making adequate adjustment to my home as to prevent further damage while resting at home. There is a time when as a customer we need to out-way, speed/efficiency against our quality of health and life.
I do not support anyone bringing danger to my close environment, myself and family, which RF is a danger. WE have a right to protect ourselves. These RF effects are proven scientifically to cause cancer; and I personally don't need anyone to prove or convince me otherwise, since I experience lots of side effect at first hand, such as the effect of headaches, nausea, sleep deprivation, ringing in the ear, racy heart, chest pressure, sneezing/allergies, my vision having drop way too quickly as they increased Wi-Fi service in my workplace and feeling completely helpless to protect myself, as it's costing me a fortune in compensating to protect my health and shielding myself from the RF. Meanwhile no one listens, yet those same individuals bringing this new technology are starting to show the same signs I describe but no one bothers to connect the dots, as to work together in stopping this dreadful expenditure for profit and profit only and full harm to your health and quality of life.
I ask that you reconsider this testing and please do not bring in anymore radiation to our home and environment. All this technology and yet we have less and less freedom and quality of life, the only one seeming to benefit is big business for profits. What's the use of looking after our health if these test are going to continue destroying us. Contradictory in term, and costly to our Healthcare. I work harder than I ever did when I was younger, and no matter how healthy I try to maintain, there isn't a day when I'm not having to fight to protect myself not only against RF but against the ignorance perpetuated in our population by our government agency by not providing the truth to the populace and keeping our world inform and safe. Unless you're planning on killing us, then please take those testing somewhere safe and controlled so that our environment or self aren't affected. We've been working real hard at cultivating bees back at a very slow pace. Everything is linked together. Any damage caused has ripple effect to the masses. Those intelligent enough to understand that, and who are in a role of authority need to protect the planet, and certainly not test to see how far they can go and learn from those testing's. There has been enough research done already and sufficient proofs have been provided and yet ignored by convenience by those in authority and paid to protect those who pay their services. Who decide who has the authority. Scientists are scientists and too many have spoken and been ignored and continue to be ignored. There is no need for more testing. What more do we need in this world to live happy and peaceful. We don't need more scientist to do what has been already done and proven and ignored. You do not do research until it fits your bill, you do research to find what action need be taken as to maintain life and quality of life. Refuse to do military or otherwise testing in regard to RF as the risk is already too much. Time to listen and pay attention and protect the planet and every living cellular being on it. I look forward to hear that this project is canceled and look forward to your confirmation of such in support to life in general.
Thank you for hearing me out and please don't allow the testing to take place, for everyone's best interest.
Subject: FW: Pacific Northwest Electronic Warfare Range Environmental Assessment (EA)
From: edgar murdock (name left at request of author)
Cc: firstname.lastname@example.org ; email@example.com ; firstname.lastname@example.org ; email@example.com ; firstname.lastname@example.org ; email@example.com ; firstname.lastname@example.org ; email@example.com ; firstname.lastname@example.org
Sent: Wednesday, October 08, 2014 8:56 PM
Subject: Pacific Northwest Electronic Warfare Range Environmental Assessment (EA)
Dear Sir or Madam,
As a Canadian, but more importantly as a human being and one of millions of innocent victims of whatever protocol the world's dominant governments & corporations wish to force on the global population, I take great umbrage at the suggestion that this initiative by the US Navy will have no impact on humans. The information offered also points out that the impact to small animals is unknown at this time. There is no mention of the impact on avian or marine wildlife or that of insects, beneficial or otherwise.
The impact on humans is quite well-known. This denial, in the light of a mountain of evidence to the contrary by respected, independent medical personnel and research scientists world-wide with absolutely nothing to gain career-wise or financially, is a downright abrogation of responsibility by the American military and its cohorts.
There is world-wide concern that the biologic effects of non-ionizing electromagnetic low-frequency radiation such as wi-fi and microwave cellular radiation and that emitted by the so-called smart meter and smart grid protocols, is cumulative and considered to be carcinogenic by the WHO and many other health organizations, although not recognized as such by the ridiculously inadequate standards set by Health Canada and the United States FCC, EPA and FDA agencies.
The politicians, military personnel and corporate entities who, for whatever iniquitous reasons, are attempting to apply Guinea pig status to the population of all living creatures in this geographical quadrant and to use the Pacific Northwest habitat as a testing ground for EMF warfare is an unconscionable, egregious and reprehensible act of aggression to the Nth degree. My mind boggles and my entire psyche reels at the thought.
MK-ULTRA and the CIA's Project Pandora and other such nefarious programs by virtue of the Freedom of Information Act are well-known efforts of the US Military to control mankind and it seems to me that this Environmental Assessment is another step in the directed energy experiment designed to bring ordinary people to their knees.
Please, please when coming to a decision in this matter consider the humanitarian issues at stake here. Apply the Precautionary Principle diligently and with respect to the unwary citizens of both the United States and Canada and remember that accountability goes with the position and if the results are adverse and pernicious to any degree, those promoting the program must all also bear the guilt of the consequences.
Sent: October 8, 2014 10:17 PM
Subject: Weapons testing off the Olympic Peninsula
I object!! Not only does RF destroy marine life, it destroys all life. I am already electrosensitive and don't need or want any more electromagnetic pollution affecting my body. The USAF have known since WW2 that this stuff is deadly; the Russians proved it by irradiating the US embassy in Moscow, remember? What more do you need to know?
Stop the psychopathic behaviour before you kill the entire planet.
Sent: October 8, 2014 9:21 PM
Cc: Jerry Flynn; email@example.com; weston.J@parl.gc.ca
Subject: Pacific Northwest Electronic Warfare Range Environmental Assessment (EA)
Ladies and gentlemen;
As a resident of West Vancouver, BC, Canada I am alarmed at the proposed RF tests by the US military on the Olympic Peninsula.
I have a medically diagnosed condition of electro hyper sensitivity to all electromagnetic radiation, even at very low frequencies, well within what Canada and the US claim to be harmless.
Today several thousand independent scientific studies call for lowering the allowable levels currently part of standards and emitted by cell towers, and other wireless technologies.
While these tests may be facing away from American cities,you seem to forget that most of BC's population lives precisely along the border. This is, as i understand it, the precise direction in which the radiation will be fired.
Please remember: We are also human, and do not deserve to be showered with military strength radiation!
I strongly object to having my family and myself treated as collateral damage to the US military experiments! Or should that be experimental rats?
I hope the US Navy can find a different location for their tests, or better still abandon them altogether. Surely enough is known about the damaging effects of this technology after decades of testing it. . . .
For your information I am enclosing a powerpoint presentation by Captain (ret.) Jerry Flynn of the Canadian navy, who worked for 22 years in radiological warfare.
From: Dennis and Sharon Noble firstname.lastname@example.org
Sent: October 9, 2014 11:33 AM
Cc: 'email@example.com'; Christy Clark (firstname.lastname@example.org); John Horgan. Leader NDP; 'Elizabeth.May@parl.gc.ca'; email@example.com; Alex - Riding 1 Atamanenko
Subject: Pacific Northwest Electronic Warfare Range Environmental Assessment (EA)
Dear Sir or Madam,
I am writing with regard to the US Navy plan to establish a training facility in Northern Washington dedicated to Electronic Warfare. According to information provided, the environmental assessment says:
"The purpose is to train to deny the enemy "all possible frequencies of electromagnetic radiation (i.e. electromagnetic energy) for use in such applications as communication systems, navigation systems and defense related systems and components," and
"There are no conclusive direct hazards to human tissue as a result of electromagnetic radiation.
"Links to DNA fragmentation, leukemia, and cancer due to intermittent exposure to extremely high levels of electromagnetic radiation are speculative; study data are inconsistent and insufficient at this time". While it might be argued that there is no "conclusive" evidence of direct hazard to human health, there is a multitude of independent peer-reviewed studies and reports by world renowned scientists that show that prolonged exposure to even low levels of electromagnetic radiation (EMR) is extremely harmful, especially to those most vulnerable: fetuses and children, those with impaired immune systems, and the elderly, and wildlife.
Even 60 years ago the US military knew the significant danger associated with EMR, recognizing its potential as a military weapon. It therefore is confusing that the US military today denies this science. Further it is of interest that in their documents they admit this radiation "may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect" living creatures.
The public deserves to have access to information explaining the effects. An effect is either harmful or beneficial. Is the US Navy saying that exposure to manmade, unnatural radiation is beneficial?
With regard to the transmitters which will be on the northern tip of the Olympic Peninsula, these transmitters plus the associated military equipment (satellites, planes, mobile transmitters) are within a few miles of a major Canadian city, Victoria, British Columbia. Were the Federal and Provincial governments advised of the plans to build a permanent training facility with weapons grade transmitters? Did they agree to allow military weapons to be pointed at a friendly country? Why was Northern Washington selected, rather than an inhospitable location like Death Valley?
I wish to express my deepest concern about this plan, and ask to be granted standing in order to provide additional information during future considerations.
Public Citizen Consumer Law and Policy Blog - Guest Post by Deborah Kopald
" The use of Wi-Fi and other wireless technologies has created problems. "An Open Letter to Phillips Exeter Academy about Wi-Fi", which I wrote to my alma mater, details the public health problem Wi-Fi has created and some legal ramifications of its use.
"Some people who lived too close to TV broadcast and radar towers developed symptoms of Microwave Sickness, a condition observed in military and industrial occupational settings during the Cold War. The next wave of microwave-emitting infrastructure, cell towers, lived up to the billing of their military and industry-owned cousins with subsequent studies (none were commissioned in the United States) showing elevated numbers of people within 1,500 feet experiencing symptoms of Microwave Sickness. . .
" . . . The current proposal by the New York City Department of Information Technology and Telecommunications (DOITT) to turn 7,500 payphones in New York City and 2,500 additional locations into high-powered wireless hotspots would cause the city to engage in systemic violations of its own code. The New York City Human Rights Law offers reasonable accommodation to persons with many medical conditions including pregnant women (as of January, 2014). The American Academy of Environmental Medicine (AAEM) issued recommendations in 2012 stating that people with most medical conditions would benefit from avoiding electromagnetic and radiofrequency radiation exposure, and epidemiologist Devra Davis stated that pregnant women should avoid proximity to wireless routers at a press conference in New York City in June, 2014. Today, pregnant women and people with many medical conditions can assert reasonable accommodation by getting routers turned off indoors; once the hotspots, which are much higher powered than a router, are rolled out, the sidewalks will become inaccessible to some; others will not be able to follow doctors' orders if they must go to the city of New York and simply walk on a street."
[Deborah Kopald (BA, Harvard; MBA, MIT Sloan School of Management) is an environmental health and public policy consultant and author who has developed and overseen the passage of legislative initiatives and has served as a guest expert at various media outlets. In 2013, she organized and moderated The Conference on Corporate Interference with Science and Health in New York City. The conference proceedings were published in Reviews on Environmental Health.]
" . . . According to the NTSA, installing V2V transmitted in automobiles could cost only $350 by 2020, and the system could save thousands of lives by alerting drivers of up-to-the-second actions of other people on the road, like those who may be running red lights or driving at dangerous speeds.
"That type of data collection wouldn't be anything new for some cars, however, with RT having reported previously that 96 percent of the cars mass-produced during the last year were manufactured with small "black box" surveillance devices that log immense details every time an engine is turned on.
"There's not so much privacy concerns as actual threats to privacy," Khaliah Barnes of the Electronic Privacy Information Center told CBS News last year. "These machines collect lots of data, and right now there are no federal laws that safeguard this information. And so what happens is there is an increasing market for this information. Law enforcement wants to see this information. Insurance companies, as well as private citizens involved in litigation."
"Even auto execs have acknowledged as much, with one Ford senior executive having to apologize earlier this year after boasting at an industry trade show: "We have GPS in your car, so we know what you're doing." . . .
Experimental Study: Electromagnetic interference of external pacemakers by walkie-talkies and digital cellular phones
" . . . This experimental study shows a potential risk of interference of external pacemakers by walkie-talkies and cellular digital phones . . .
Our city stopped Neptune smart water meters two years ago, one of the first cities in the country to do so. We did all the normal things (packed city council meetings, emails and phone calls to council members, online blog, large public meetings, online petition, paper petition, cost analysis showing they cost more, etc.). But the two real keys were:
1. Scientifically developing a technically workable alternative system (in our case fiber optic), and
2. Keeping careful track of everything the Muni government did (remarks made, etc.), then 'respectfully' making the mayor and council look bad in the print media by use of that information. They care about getting elected and their public image more than city issues. It is vital to understand this.
So, focus on going after their image, but without going too far. It is very vital to do so in a way that is not too overtly hostile or intense. If you go too far with opposition TONE and LANGUAGE, it creates the opposite effect, the public will sympathize with the politicians being attacked instead of with you. Some significant 'edge' is necessary, you have to go after them, but don't go too far with emotion. Let the facts speak for themselves. You don't have to convince everyone, just a sufficient percentage. . . .
Four moms talk about their decision to avoid wireless radiation from cell phones and wireless networks during pregnancy, and Dr. Hugh Taylor from Yale University talks about his study linking exposure to wireless radiation to neurological and behavioral problems including symptoms resembling attention deficit / hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Learn more about wireless radiation and pregnancy at www.babysafeproject.org and join the conversation on Twitter at #KnowYourExposure.
ALSO: Baby Safe Project Video Newschannel 3 June 4, 2014
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.
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.
Citizens For Safe Technology
"Wi-Fi: Is It Safe?"
Citizens for Safe Technology is a not-for-profit educational society made up of parents, grandparents, teachers, business professionals, scientists, politicians and lawyers concerned about the exponential increase in public exposure to harmful wireless technologies.
We believe a profound urgency exists to protect the unsuspecting public, especially children, youth and pregnant mothers from unsafe wireless technologies.
The content of the Citizens for Safe Technology website is provided for information purposes only. Information is subject to change without prior notice. Every effort has been taken to ensure that the information on this website is accurate, but no guarantees can be made.
Neither Citizens for Safe Technology nor its authors are liable for damages resulting from the use of information obtained from this site. The authors are not responsible for any contents linked or referred to from this website or any damages resulting from information on those sites.
The responsibility for the interpretation and use of the information on this site lies with the reader.