Citizens for Safe Technology
Empowering the public to protect children
and nature from unsafe wireless technologies.
Standing the Test of Time
These pages present informational materials that continue to be relevant and useful over time, even though they date back five years or more. The contents provide a perspective over time of the issue of wireless technologies, electromagnetic radiation, and their biological effects.
Looking for a specific topic or a past article? Search for it below:
Swiss Agency for the Environment, Forests and Landscape (SAEFL) June 2005
"Electricity supply systems, electrical appliances and a wide range of transmitters for various wireless applications generate non-ionising radiation (commonly referred to as "electrosmog") that can be harmful to our health, depending on its intensity. With its Ordinance relating to Protection from Non-Ionising Radiation, the Federal Council introduced a legal instrument to protect the population against the harmful effects of electrosmog.
"This brochure describes the main sources of electrosmog, assesses the associated risks, identifies existing gaps in research and suggests ways in which we can reduce our own level of exposure."
Approved March 3, 2011 - RESOLUTION OF RUSSIAN NATIONAL COMMITTEE ON NONIONIZING RADIATION PROTECTION
This Resolution was approved by members of the Russian National Committee on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (RNCNIRP) at its Committee session on 3 March 2011. The Resolution evolved from scientific statements adopted by RNCNIRP in 2001, 2004, 2007, 2008 and 2009, taking into account contemporary views and actual scientific data. The Resolution represents a viewpoint of the professional scientific community and is meant for public dissemination, for the consumers of the mobile telecommunications services, as well as for the legislative and executive authorities who develop and implement health protection, environmental, communication, scientific and safety policies.
(STILL HOT) Final Study: Working document for the STOA Panel March 2001
Directorate General for Research
Division Industry, Research and Energy
Scientific and Technological Options Assessment
This study focuses upon an aspect of how living organisms and humans in particular can be adversely affected by highly coherent electromagnetic fields of technological origin, in a way that is not entertained or addressed by existing Safety Guidelines - namely, through the possibility of non- thermal, frequency-specific influences of an informational nature. Supporting evidence is presented, and attention drawn to a disturbing consistency between some of these influences and the nature of certain adverse health effects found amongst some exposed people. On the basis of a detailed analysis of the present situation, a number of recommendations are made to promote a higher degree of electromagnetic biocompatibility between these fields and the living human organism than currently obtains.
Ulrich Warnke's Effects of Electric Charges on Honeybees (STILL HOT 1976)
Charges on the body of an individual bee and on the colony
Dr. Neil Cherry: The implications for the epidemiology of cancer and cardiac, neurological and reproductive effects (June 2000)
Dr Neil Cherry, for presentations in May 2000 to NZ Parliament and June 2000 in Italy, Austria, Ireland and at the European Parliament in Brussels.
Environmental Management and Design Division
P.O. Box 84
Canterbury, New Zealand
"Our frame of reference determines what we look at and how we look. And as a consequence, this determines what we find." Burke J, The Day the Universe Changed, 1985.
COMAR Technical Information Statement
IEEE stands for "Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers." COMAR stands for "Committee on Man and Radiation." This article was published in Engineering in Medicine and Biology Magazine 17(3):111-114 (1998)
IEEE Code of Ethics
"The past few years have seen increased reports that medical devices, such as pacemakers, apnea monitors, electrically powered wheelchairs, etc., have failed to operate correctly because of interference from various emitters of radiofrequency energy. This condition is called radiofrequency interference (RFI). The consequences of these failures range from inconvenience to serious injuries and death. Reasons for this problem are twofold:
1) increasing numbers of electronically controlled medical devices with inadequate electronic protection against RFI, and
2) a significant increase in the number of RF sources in the environment.
Medical devices are widely used outside the hospital and may be attached to, or implanted in, patients. Portable wireless communications equipment, including cellular phones, handheld transceivers, and vehicle mounted transceivers, comprise one of the largest sources of RFI. Some medical devices are especially sensitive to the type of digital modulation that some of the wireless communications devices utilize.
". . . Technology exists to protect, or "harden," most medical devices from RF fields that are much more intense than the 3 V/m level specified in present RFI standards. Most of these techniques, including shielding, grounding and filtering, are not costly if they are incorporated into the initial design of the electronics system. "COMAR recommends that the various parties involved in the manufacture and use of RFI prone medical devices take steps to avoid serious RFI problems that may lead to safety hazards. Medical device manufacturers should design and test their products to ensure conformance with current RFI standards and educate the users of their devices about the possible symptoms of potential RFI. If there exists the possibility of RFI problems to medical devices, steps should be taken to ensure that all sources of RF energy be kept at a sufficient distance . . .
INTRODUCTION "Since the early 1990s, reports of medical device failure from electromagnetic interference have increased. This is due to several factors. The number of electronically controlled medical devices has burgeoned in hospitals and other medical facilities. Newer instruments are often more sensitive to radiofrequency interference (RFI) because they incorporate low power integrated electronic circuitry that can be much more sensitive to electromagnetic fields than their electrical and electromechanical predecessors. In this document, RFI refers to radiated interference from electromagnetic fields that are coupled from a source to a medical device through the air (i.e. without connections via conductors such as wires or cables).
"There has also been a significant rise in the use of electronically controlled medical devices outside the clinical environment. These devices are often used in homes, attached to patients, or implanted in their bodies. In addition, portable wireless communications equipment, such as cellular phones, handheld transceivers, and vehicle mounted transceivers, is a major source of RFI. The number of land mobile transmitters in the US alone currently exceeds 10 million and personal communications systems are burgeoning throughout the world. To an ever increasing extent, wireless communications equipment (e.g., cellular phones) is likely to be used in close proximity to medical devices without the knowledge of the patient or attending medical personnel.
"Digital mobile communications systems often utilize pulsed amplitude modulation, a type of modulation, that can enhance the potential for RFI. For example, cellular telephones based on some digital technologies generate peak powers of up to 8 watts and are modulated at 2 to 217 pulses per second. This range spans the physiological frequencies of the human body, from about 0.5 Hz to several hundred Hz, that are monitored by many medical devices. This is often termed the "physiological passband." While modulation at very low frequencies is critical, this document does not address RFI from sources with very low carrier frequencies. Thus, AC power line fields (50-60 Hz) are excluded from discussion. Also excluded are transient fields, such as pulsed gradient fields from magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) systems, where most of the frequency content is below a few MHz. The frequencies discussed in this statement are in the range of 30 to 3,000 MHz . . ."
A Proposal for Legislation (1979) Reprinted from Duke Law Journal (Karen Massey)
"Non-ionizing radiation is an important factor in the life of every member of an advanced technological society. This is particularly true of American society with its space program, its sophisticated weapons
systems, its highly developed electronics products, and the world's most advanced national communications system-all of which use non-ionizing radiation, generally in the microwave and radio frequency ranges. Most Americans are probably unaware of either the pervasiveness of non-ionizing radiation or the controversy surrounding its status as a pollutant and a health hazard. In the last decade, however, both the scientific community and the United States Congress have begun to pay more attention to this form of energy and its impact on our lives . . .
"When confronted with the complexities and uncertainties of the scientific enterprise, and with a bureaucracy that is in some ways disorganized, often inefficient, and always overburdened, even explaining the radiation problem, let alone proposing how the bureaucracy might control it, seems overwhelming. Congress has confronted the problem several times over the past decade, patiently questioning scientists and policy makers, private and public, in an attempt to find a path through the morass. The purpose of the examination of the problem undertaken by this Article has been first, to try to convince the reader that it is now time, or past time, to start making concrete legislative proposals for dealing with a problem that is grJwL'1g with each day of delay. Second, this Article has made such prcposals-proposals for adapting existing agency structures, for creating some new institutions and for opening new channels of communication among the numerous agencies, each with an important role to play in confronting and resolving the problems of controlling non-ionizing radiation . . .
"Non-ionizing radiation pollution presents to Congress a clear challenge to transiate the concept of technology assessment into practice on a national scale, assuring that the health and environmental perspectives gain their rightful place. First Congress and then the agencies must meet the challenge of making difficult choices and decisions creatively and forcefully-and without delay."
PUBLIC EXPOSURE (2000)
"Can microwaves alter our brains and DNA? Released in 2000, Public Exposure is the first - and still definitive - independently produced investigative report on this key issue, the human health dangers of Radio Frequency Radiation (RFR) from cell phones & cell towers... and what we can do to protect ourselves."
Broadcast on LinkTV and in constant use by community groups and concerned citizens around the world, with thousands of DVD copies sold, we now make the authorized one-hour version of Public Exposure available on-line for the first time. DVD copies are available for purchase here.
First Place award, EarthVision Film Festival.
Cases in the vicinity of the Sutro Tower, San Francisco, California
"The Sutro Tower is a prominent structure on an elevated site in San Francisco. Since 1973 it has provided radio and TV signals for the San Francisco Bay region. There have been long-standing concerns about the health effects of this high-powered transmitter located in the centre of a large urban population.
"The a priori hypothesis is that RF/MW radiation is a Ubiquitous Universal Genotoxic Carcinogen. This is based on a number of occupational studies and previous studies that have shown elevated cancer rates in residential populations living in the vicinity of radar and RF/MW broadcast towers. It is supported by many laboratory studies showing that ELF and RF/MW signals damage DNA. Thus it is predicted that at residential levels of RF/MW exposure cancer rates will increase in the vicinity of the Sutro Tower. This is tested by using the childhood cancer data-set from 1973-1988 with residential locations analysed to see if there is elevation of cancer and possible dose-response relationships. All of the analyses support and together confirm the hypothesis, and the radial patterns eliminate potential confounding factors.
"The objective of this study is to test the a priori hypothesis by analysing the spatial distribution of childhood cancer to determine its relationships to the emissions of RF/MW radiation from the Sutro Tower. The Sutro Tower is 977ft high, on a hill that is 921ft high and the top of the tower is at 1898ft (577m) above sea level . . .
October, 2002 - Over 2000 highly-qualified and concerned healthcare specialists have signed this Appeal
Out of great concern for the health of our fellow human beings do we - as established physicians of all fields, especially that of environmental medicine - turn to the medical establishment and those in public health and political domains, as well as to the public . . .
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.