einsteinsays Peer-reviewed studies have linked electromagnetic fields and wireless radiation (EMFs) to many health problems including:  fatigue, headaches, sleep problems, anxiety, ringing in the ears, heart problems, learning and memory disorders, increased cancer risk, and more. Studies show radiation harms nature, and children are especially vulnerable.  Precaution is advised by healthcare and science experts. In California and other states, prudent avoidance of EMFs is recommended public policy.  See What are EMFs? brochure.

Prudent avoidance means taking steps to reduce exposure, for example using: corded (wireless off) internet; corded phones; and analog utility meters (no smart meters).  And reduce cell phone use. Keep cell phones away from your body and away from children. Best to use cell phones for emergencies only (if at all).  Learn to turn off the electricity at the breaker box; and set limits on computer and screen time, especially for children. We are working for this social change to protect children, public health, the natural environment, and our future.

For a current overview of EMF science watch the following video from the webinar “Invisible Hazards: State of the Science on EMF Health Impacts and Next Steps for Policy Change” which was held on Wednesday, May 9, 2018

Read more intro, or scroll down to read our blog.

Take action to stop 5G Senate Bill S.3157

The Federal government is once again trying to take away local authority over cell towers. Senators John Thune (R-SD) and Brian Schatz (D-HI) introduced the STREAMLINE Small Cell Deployment Act (S.3157).

S. 3157 is similar to a California Senate bill, SB 649, which would have stripped local authority over cell towers. Governor Brown vetoed SB 649 in October 2017.

The National League of Cities (NLC) opposes S. 3157.  They wrote, “Despite urging from NLC and other local government advocates during the bill’s drafting phase, many preemptive provisions remain in the bill, including limiting the actions local governments can take on small cell wireless facility siting in an effort to make deployments cheaper, faster, and more consistent across jurisdictions.”

Here’s an easy way to take action. They NLC will send a letter directly to your representatives in Congress for you. You will need to insert your zip code, (and maybe your full address), and then the letter template will appear.

PLEASE NOTE: Instead of using their letter, which has statements of support for small cells, copy and paste the words below the following link into their letter template. Start by clicking on this link:

http://advocacy.nlc.org/nlc/app/onestep-write-a-letter?0&engagementId=487075

As a constituent, I am writing to express my opposition to the “Streamlining The Rapid Evolution And Modernization of Leading-edge Infrastructure Necessary to Enhance (STREAMLINE) Small Cell Deployment Act” (S. 3157).

S. 3157 is similar to a California bill (SB 649) which would have created a state mandated system of cell towers and eliminated local review and safety oversight. SB 649 was opposed by 300 cities, 47 counties and over 100 community, planning, health, environment and justice organizations. SB 649 was vetoed SB 649 by Governor Brown on October 15, 2017.

The threat of public and environmental harm from wireless radiation is real and growing. Local control is needed to ensure community safety, welfare and compliance with federal, state, and local laws.

Peer-reviewed published science shows wireless radiation harms public health and nature. Health effects include: fatigue, headaches, sleep problems, anxiety, ringing in the ears, heart problems, learning and memory disorders, increased cancer risk, and more. Children, the ill, and the elderly are more vulnerable.

International independent scientists are calling for biologically-based public exposure standards and reducing wireless radiation.

S. 3157 represents a direct affront to traditionally-held local authority. S. 3157 introduces an unnecessary, one-size-fits-all preemption of local jurisdiction. The bill also imposes unfair and inappropriate timelines on local governments.

For more information see this joint letter to Congress asking you to oppose any and all bills related to 5G and wireless radiation expansion: http://emfsafetynetwork.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/Letter-to-Congress-2017-1.pdf

Thank you!

Free smart meter opt out for North Carolina

Great big thanks to activists in North Carolina who won a free utility smart meter opt out provided they submit a simple note from a doctor to the utility.

The North Carolina Utilities Commission (NCUC) decision states, “…the Commission believes it is inappropriate to require customers who maintain that they need to avoid exposure to RF emissions to the extent possible to protect their health to pay [Duke Energy Carolinas] DEC’s proposed smart meter opt-out charges.

Andrew McAfee, an activist leader in this case said: “The removal of Duke’s opt-out fees stops that added insult to injury for many who suffer debilitating electrosensitivity conditions and their associated health costs,”  “Most importantly, the NCUC order recognizes our medical doctor’s proper role in determining what is healthy, not the FCC.”

The note from the doctor does not need to explain any diagnosis or symptoms, but would need to be signed and notarized and simply state:

“I am a medical physician licensed by the North Carolina Medical Board. ______________(Name of Duke Energy Customer) must avoid exposure to RF emissions to the extent possible to protect ______ (his or her) health.”

In California, and in other states, utilities charge extortion fees to avoid smart meters. This case in North Carolina sets an important precedent.

More: Landmark NCUC decision

Verizon withdraws application for “small cell” towers in Sebastopol.

On February 6, 2018 Verizon applied for a major use permit to install two “small cell” towers in Sebastopol at Hutchins and S. Gravenstein, and at McFarlane and Woodland.

EMF Safety Network (EMFSN) opposed Verizon’s application in a letter sent May 29 stating, “The proposed towers would add unsightly equipment, overload poles, devalue property, and increase radio frequency radiation in our neighborhoods.” EMFSN presented peer-reviewed published science which shows cell tower radiation harms people and the environment.

In addition EMFSN retained Best Best and Krieger attorney Gail Karish to draft a letter outlining the legal ways a California city can deny a “small cell” in the public rights of way, and presented this letter to Sebastopol on April 24th..

On Thursday, May 31 Dana Morrison, Sebastopol assistant planner wrote, “This email is to inform you that this application, which was scheduled for a Planning Commission Public Hearing on June 12, 2018, has been withdrawn by the applicant. “

Sandi Maurer, Director of the EMF Safety Network said, ”We’re thrilled Verizon backed out. Wireless has become pollution, and we need to reduce, for example save corded landlines and use cell phones for emergencies, to better protect public health and the environment.”

Local Authority Over Wireless Facilities in Public Rights-of-Way

EMF Safety Network engaged Best Best and Krieger partner Gail Karish to provide the legal means in which a California city can deny a small cell application in the public rights of way (PROW). Attorney Karish presents this information alongside the limitations on local authority in order to know the full scope of what a city can and can’t do.

Although the attorney has addressed the City of Sebastopol, the letter and legal advice is applicable and can be presented to any California city so they can know they are not powerless over small cell deployments.

April 24 2018 Letter to EMF Safety Network re: small cell

 

New Mexico regulators reject smart meters!!

New Mexico Public Utilities Commission has rejected a plan to install a half million smart meters. “The plan presented in the Application does not provide a net public benefit and it does not promote the public interest,” wrote the Commission. Whereas every other US state with rare exception, is forcing smart meters on residents, or charging extortion opt-out fees, Santa Fe regulators have historically upheld the public’s best interest by rejecting smart meters!

The Santa Fe New Mexican reported Chairman Sandy Jones cited “rate increases, an excessive opt-out fee, and layoffs as deal breakers”.

This decision is in stark contrast to what the California Public Utilities Commission did in 2010, which was to partner with the utilities and rapidly deploy millions of smart meters with no safety review, and despite thousands of complaints. There are four appeals filed in 2015 still pending in this case.

According to New Mexico activist and author Arthur Firstenberg, “The decision means there will not be smart meters in the near future in New Mexico’s metropolitan areas: Santa Fe, Albuquerque, Las Vegas, Clayton, Ruidoso, Tularosa, Alamogordo, Silver City, Lordsburg and Deming.”

Thank you to all the activists and educators who helped make this happen. Great big Congratulations!

Dr. Gabriel Cousens on 5G: “It’s time we wake up”

Dr.Gabriel Cousens talks about how wireless is degrading public health, and how 5G is a danger to all people. He describes 5G as is “a complete unmitigated health disaster”

More information about Dr. Cousens here

Here is Dr. Cousen’s protocol for radiation protection and healing, which includes political action!  http://treeoflifecenterus.com/radiation-protocol/

Drunk Doctors? Why Wireless Headsets May be a Bad Idea for Patient Care and Doctors’ Health

Commentary by Cindy Sage:  Not long ago, a Physician Assistant in a hospital emergency room told us she was asked to wear a wireless headset (that connects wirelessly to the internet) while seeing her patients. She declined.

In that same week, a young mother went to a new internist in the bay area. The nurse asked if she would give consent for the doctor to wear a wireless headset while examining her child. She also declined.

What is it that these two young women know? Is it something you should be aware of? Here are some important things people should know about the problems posed by wearable wireless computers in the doctor’s office.

Driving drunk, and talking or texting on a cell phone may have in more in common than you think with extended use of a wireless headset. The exposure levels from a wireless headset are about equivalent to (or in some cases higher) than holding a smart phone to the head. Use of a cell phone while driving disrupts cognition and increases the risk of vehicular collision by 4-fold. Now imagine your doctor under the influence of constant workplace RF exposure while they treat patients, prescribe treatments, write prescriptions and juggle intense workday tasks.

Effects on brain function seem to depend in some cases on the mental load of the subject during exposure (the brain is less able to do two jobs well simultaneously when the same part of the brain is involved in both tasks). Some studies show that cell phone exposure speeds up the brain’s activity level; but also that the efficiency and judgment of the brain are diminished at the same time. Faster work but worse mental capacity is not a good thing for a practicing medical doctor.

Multitasking, memory, learning, attention, and concentration are all impaired by the use of wireless devices. Why would anyone want a distracted doctor with impaired thinking skills treating them? Or any healthcare person for that matter? And, doctors should know that wearing the equivalent of a smart phone mounted against their head is a potential risk for brain cancer (glioma and acoustic neuroma).

Next time you need to see your doctor, you may be asked if you object to them wearing wireless headsets. This could easily happen to you. Be prepared with some information.

Is your doctor using wireless medical glasses? A new paper by Cindy Sage and Lennart Hardell warns about the risks to doctors and their patients.

ABSTRACT
Wireless-enabled headsets that connect to the internet can provide remote transcribing of patient examination notes. Audio and video can be captured and transmitted by wireless signals sent from the computer screen in the frame of the glasses. But using wireless glass-type devices can expose the user to a specific absorption rates (SAR) of 1.11–1.46 W/kg of radiofrequency radiation. That RF intensity is as high as or higher than RF emissions of some cell phones. Prolonged use of cell phones used ipsilaterally at the head has been associated with statistically significant increased risk of glioma and acoustic neuroma. Using wireless glasses for extended periods to teach, to perform surgery, or conduct patient exams will expose the medical professional to similar RF exposures which may impair brain performance, cognition and judgment, concentration and attention and increase the risk for brain tumors. The quality of medical care may be compromised by extended use of wireless-embedded devices in health care settings. Both medical professionals and their patients should know the risks of such devices and have a choice about allowing their use during patient exams. Transmission of sensitive patient data over wireless networks may increase the risk of hacking and security breaches leading to losses of private patient medical and financial data that are strictly protected under HIPPA health information privacy laws. Link to this article:  https://doi.org/10.1080/15368378.2017.1422261