Category: Brochure for printing 8.5 x 11 What are EMFs?

What are EMFs?

Network News

EMF Safety Network News- Take Action to Save Landlines in our entire country!

📞📞📞 Please help protect landlines from a reckless new Federal Communications Commission Action. Initial Comments due Mon., Sept. 29, 2025

Yes, over 600 public comments were submitted to the CPUC (California Public Utility Commission) docket in support of retaining copper landlines from Oct. 2024, to August 27, 2025.

BUT, the FCC isn’t paying attention to state regulatory proceedings. The FCC wants to make it easy for AT&T & OTHER TELECOMS to slither out from under their Carrier of Last Resort (COLR) obligations. (Link at the end of this message)

🚩 We need to post comments to an  FCC docket in the next few days. Initial comments are due on Monday, Sept. 29.  (All is not lost if you miss the deadline, as Reply comments responding to what has already been posted are due by Oct. 27.). However, it is wise that we maximize initial comments by Monday, Sept. 29.

The Utility Reform Network (TURN) states that over a million residents in California rely on landlines.

These customers depend on the reliability, safety and voice quality of landlines because cell service is inadequate in their area or they are unable to tolerate wireless emissions. To date, copper landline connectivity remains the superior technology in homes, businesses, schools, government, etc.

In California, the CPUC (California Public Utilities Commission) has conducted an in-depth review of issues such as service quality and Carrier of Last Resort Obligations. The CPUC had taken extensive comments from members of the public, and its decisions are well-considered and based on state-specific conditions.

The co-director of the EMF Safety Network states: “The FCC should not attempt to override work undertaken by states, which have authority under federal statutes to act to protect the public health and safety of their residents.”

We must oppose any effort by the FCC to override state regulatory or state legislative action that is designed to protect customer safety and well-being.

HOW TO FILE FCC COMMENTS:

Go here: https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs/filings/express

See “Welcome to the FCC’s Electronic Comments Filing System” at the top.
Go to “Express Comment.” They do not have to be long.

1) Click on Submit a FILING (at the very top) then click on Express Comment just below that.
2) Proceeding(s): Type 25-208; click below for the orange highlight on the number, then type 25-209; click again below for the orange highlight.
3) Name of filer: your name.
4) Primary contact email: your email address (not required).
5) Address:(required).
6) Brief comments: Either type in your comments or paste your previously-prepared comments into the box..
7) Press Continue to review screen.
8) If okay, submit your comments.
     Print confirmation page for your records if you choose.

Talking points ideas (or tell your own story)
      • Copper landlines work in emergencies when power is out.
      • Cell phone networks didn’t work in CA fire disasters but landlines did.
      • Battery back-ups for modems and routers (needed for cable and fiber optic connections) are unreliable.
      • There are cyber security risks with cell phone connections.
      • AT&T claims people are abandoning landlines, but many AT&T service reps are telling customers AT&T no longer services copper and they won’t install landlines anymore.
      • Many human bodies are not compatible with wireless technology. People get headaches, ear ringing, vertigo, nerve disruptions, cancers, and more.
      • People in remote or rural areas rely on copper landlines.
      • Copper landlines work with DSL and medical alert systems.
      • Customers have been paying extra fees in their phone bill for years to maintain copper landlines.

Note: if you’re having trouble accessing the comment portal, call the FCC. If you call, make sure you mention the docket numbers: 25-208 and 25-209.

https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2025/08/28/2025-16540/reducing-barriers-to-network-improvements-and-service-changes

“Reducing Barriers to Network Improvements and Service Changes” — Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in WC Docket Nos. 25-208, 25-209; FCC 25-37, adopted on July 24, 2025, and released on July 25, 2025

Thank you!

Stop the proposed faux watertower Cell Tower at 9300 Mill Station Rd., Sebastopol

Stop Fake Watertower Cell Tower- 9300 Mill Station, Sebastopol

On Oct. 8, 2024,, the Sonoma County Board of Supervisors approved a 70 ft., T-Mobile cell tower for 9300 Mill Station Rd., Sebastopol.

The installer (Vertical Bridge) plans to make this twelve antenna T-Mobile cell tower look like a faux water tower to “blend in with the neighborhood.” The vote was 3-2, with Supervisors Lynda Hopkins and Susan Gorin voting against it. Now neighbors plan to take this to court!

This proposed tower first came before the Bureau of Zoning Adjustments (BZA) in March 2023. The BZA made a careful and in depth analysis over four public meetings and on June 13, 2024, they unanimously denied the tower, and for good reason!

Their final determination stated that the tower was “inconsistent with the surrounding neighboring residences and the character of the community….” The project was also “considered detrimental to the health, safety, peace and comfort or general welfare of the persons residing or working in the neighborhood or to the general welfare of the area in particular.”

Vertical Bridge was not happy with the decision.  They filed an appeal before the Board of Supervisors and had the BZA denial overturned. It was obvious to all of us in attendance that the Supervisors already had their minds made up to approve the tower prior to the public meeting on Oct. 8th. They had enough good evidence to deny the tower, but they ignored it all.

If this tower is allowed to be built, will our local governments ever stop a cell tower ANYWHERE for ANY REASON?

Stay tuned for more information on how to support legal action against this approval decision by the Board of Supervisors.

 

Sebastopol: Rethink smart water meters

Years of support for reducing EMF’s in Sebastopol evaporated in October 2021, when the city council unanimously approved smart water meters.

We hired attorney Ariel Strauss and he presented the city attorney with a compromise to only install the digital readers without antennas. The council rejected the compromise claiming the meters were a public good because of the drought. The council later approved a FREE opt out for anyone who doesn’t want the smart water meter. The meters are planned to be deployed in January 2023. 

Beware of Climate Washed Smart Water Meters!

Why did Sebastopol, who banned smart meters in 2013, do this?  Syserco, a registered contractor for PG&E, sold the 2.2 million dollar project to Sebastopol as a water and energy savings initiative. Council members promoted the meters as a climate action solution. When asked to provide clarifying information on the purported savings, Syserco wrote:

“…there has never been a claim that the new meters “save energy, save water and reduce greenhouse gas emissions”.

The real reason for the new meters according to Syserco is money.  However, Syserco did claim the meters would save water and were energy efficient, and the staff report called the meters a “green initiative”. This is climate-washing, the use of deceptive marketing spin.  Read more here. 

 

New study calls for EMF regulation to protect wildlife

There’s a new study by Blake Levitt, Henry Lai and Albert Manville: “Effects of non-ionizing electromagnetic fields on flora and fauna, part 1. Rising ambient EMF levels in the environment” https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34047144/

It is time to recognize ambient EMF as a novel form of pollution and develop rules at regulatory agencies that designate air as ‘habitat’ so EMF can be regulated like other pollutants. Wildlife loss is often unseen and undocumented until tipping points are reached. Long-term chronic low-level EMF exposure standards, which do not now exist, should be set accordingly for wildlife, and environmental laws should be strictly enforced.

 

Global EMF Monitoring Call for volunteers

Can you BRAG about your city?

Dr. Magda Havas has initiated a Global EMF Monitoring project, calling for volunteers to measure EMF’s in their city.  So far there are almost 200 volunteers from 16 countries.  Here’s short breakdown of what’s required of volunteers.

    1. You will need to either have or purchase a Safe & Sound Pro RF meter (either Pro I or Pro II) available at www.slt.com . If you volunteer for the Global EMF Project they will give you a discount code.
    2. You will be measuring at 4 corners of 5 main intersections in your city which will take about 2 hours. Because this is a science project, it’s important to follow these instructions carefully.
    3. Watch this video below for how to measure a location.

4. When you’re measuring people might ask you questions about what you’re doing. You can give them this fact sheet which will explain why you are measuring and help to educate people.

5. To learn more details about this project go to their website at globalEMF.net  and if you would like to volunteer please send a quick email to:  info@globalEMF.net

Save the analog meters in Maine

Maine Utilities New Smart Meter Scam

Simmering in the background with little notice since early 2019, Central Maine Power Company’s (CMP’s) proposal to get rid of analog electric utility meters opened for public comment at the Maine Public Utilities Commission (MPUC). The comment period ends Monday the 22nd. (Docket 2019-00044)

In 2011 the MPUC ordered CMP to provide two “opt out” alternatives for customers who didn’t want the controversial smart meters, an electromechanical (analog) meter, and a “radio off” smart meter. CMP was ordered to retain enough analog meters for the opt out customers. At that time they had 600,000 analog meters.

CMP now claims they are out of analog meters. They are proposing to only offer “solid state” meters. Solid state meters are in fact smart meters. “CMP appears to have violated their requirement to keep enough electromechanical meters for opt out customers”, said Ed Friedman, spokesperson for the Maine Coalition to Stop Smart Meters. “If they truly “misplaced” or scrapped the approximately 594,500 meters not being used by current opt out customers, they need to be held accountable.” he added.

Former State Representative Andrea Boland pointed out CMP’s history of vacant pretenses of expertise and failures. “Now”,she said, “they set out to again dissemble and deceive in an attempt to convince the MPUC that smart meters are not smart meters and the order permitting opt-outs by customers (even at a hefty monthly penalty) is not a valid order.”

Maine Coalition to Stop Smart Meters wants to save the analogs because smart meters, including “radio off” smart meters, create dirty electricity which is a heath hazard.

Elisa Boxer, one of the original complainants to the MPUC in 2011 said: “We presented evidence from engineers and other experts that digital solid-state meters were not an acceptable alternative to analogs for several reasons, including the emission of transients onto the home wiring. Voltage transients, otherwise known as one type of “dirty electricity,” are spikes of electromagnetic interference (EMI) that travel along the wiring in the walls and have been implicated in cancer cases worldwide.” (see Woodward & Harding oscilloscope comparisons)

Woodward & Harding-Power Quality Comparison: Smart Meter v Analog
These emissions from home wiring may be one reason why smart meters have had such devastating health effects. Dr. Beatrice Golumb MD PhD, Professor of Medicine at UC San Diego said:  “Our survey study shows this smart meter induced electrical sensitivity often led to catastrophic impacts in the lives of those affected”. She requested the PUC “please ensure purely analog electromechanical meters remain available for those who wish them”, citing this as an issue of importance for the health of vulnerable members of the public.
Golumb, 2020, EMF Medical Conference 2021
Dr. Albert Manville, retired wildlife biologist specializing in bird impacts from towers, powerlines and wireless radiation wrote: “concerns with smart meters (with or without transmitters) include radiation sensitivity, cancers and other health problems caused by the radiation frequencies, issues with dirty electricity, high maintenance costs, privacy and hacking concerns, fire dangers, and unfair opt-out fees we pay each month (at best, our meter is read every other month but we’re billed each month – double dipping).”
 
Summary of Symptoms after Exposure to Wireless Utility Meters

Thanks to: Maine Coalition to Stop Smart Meters.

Landmark 5G study by New Hampshire legislative Commission recommends reducing wireless exposure

The state of New Hampshire established a legislative commission to study the environmental and health effects of 5G wireless technology in 2019.  They recently completed their final report which includes 15 recommendations to raise awareness, educate, promote oversight, and reduce radiofrequency radiation (RF, also known as wireless).

The commission met between September 2019 and October 2020 and included 13 members with backgrounds in physics, engineering electromagnetics, epidemiology, biostatistics, occupational health, toxicology, medicine, public health policy, business, law, and a representative from the wireless industry.

They were tasked with answering 8 questions which included: why the insurance industry has exclusions for RF damages; why cell phone manufacturers have legal advice warning about distance between cell phones and the body; why 1,000’s of peer-reviewed RF studies that show a wide range of health affects, including DNA damage, brain and heart tumors, infertility, and many other ailments, have been ignored by the Federal Communication Commission (FCC); why the FCC guidelines do not account for health effects of wireless; why the FCC RF limits are 100 times higher than other countries; why the FCC is ignoring the World Health Organization (WHO) classification of wireless as a possible carcinogen; why when the world’s leading scientists signed an appeal to protect public health from wireless radiation nothing has been done; and why the health effects of ever-growing numbers of pulse signals riding on the electromagnetic waves has not been explored.

Early on in their research the Commission learned that they could not discuss 5G without including all things wireless “…the Commission concluded that all things emitting radio frequency (RF) radiation needed to be considered together because of the interaction of all these waves.” At the heart of their discussion was whether or not RF affects humans, animals and nature. The introduction states:

There is mounting evidence that DNA damage can occur from radiation outside of the ionizing part of the spectrum.

The Commission heard from ten experts in physics, epidemiology, toxicology, and public policy. Everyone except the telecom representative acknowledged the large body of science showing RF-radiation emitted by wireless devices can effect humans, especially children, animals, insects, and plants.

The Commission endorsed 15 recommendations. “The objective of those recommendations is to bring about greater awareness of cell phone, wireless and 5G radiation health effects and to provide guidance to officials on steps and policies that can reduce public exposure.”  

The following is a summary of their recommendations. Only exact wording is quoted and italicized. See their final report for exact wording for all their recommendations.

  1. Engage the US government to require the FCC to do an independent review of the RF standards and RF health risks;
  2. Require NH state agencies to include links on their website(s) about RF-radiation from all sources, including 5G, and showing how to minimize exposure, as well as public service announcements warning of RF health risks especially to pregnant women and children.
  3. Require eye-level signage for every 5G antenna in the public rights- of-way.
  4. “Schools and public libraries should migrate from RF wireless connections for computers, laptops, pads, and other devices, to hard- wired or optical connections within a five-year period starting when funding becomes available.” [please note, we support hard-wired connections, but as far as we know optical connections, such as Lifi, have not been proven safe. It is unfortunate that it’s included in this recommendation.]
  5. Collect signal strength measurements including worst-case conditions for all wireless facilities, including when changes are made, and make that information public. If measurements exceed radiation thresholds, the municipality can take the facility offline. Measurements taken by an independent contractor and the cost paid by the installer.
  6. Establish new protocols for measuring RF to better evaluate signal characteristics, taking into account the high-data-rate radiation known to be harmful to human health. Enable the summative effects of multiple radiation sources to be measured.
  7. Require that any new wireless antennae be set back from residences, businesses, and schools.
  8. Upgrade the educational offerings by the NH Office of Professional Licensure and Certification (OPLC) to include RF measurements.
  9. The State of New Hampshire should develope a continually updated map of RF exposure levels across the state.
  10. “Strongly recommend all new cell phones and all other wireless devices sold come equipped with updated software that can stop the phone from radiating when positioned against the body.”
  11. “Promote and adopt a statewide position that would strongly encourage moving forward with the deployment of fiber optic cable connectivity, internal wired connections, and optical wireless to serve all commercial and public properties statewide.”
  12. “Further basic science studies are needed in conjunction with the medical community outlining the characteristics of expressed clinical symptoms related to radio frequency radiation exposure.”
  13. “Recommend the use of exposure warning signs to be posted in commercial and public buildings. In addition, encourage commercial and public buildings, especially healthcare facilities, to establish RF-radiation free zones where employees and visitors can seek refuge from the effects of wireless RF emissions.”
  14. “The State of New Hampshire should engage agencies with appropriate scientific expertise, including ecological knowledge, to develop RF-radiation safety limits that will protect the trees, plants, birds, insects, and pollinators.”
  15. “The State of New Hampshire should engage our Federal Delegation to legislate that under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) the FCC do an environmental impact statement as to the effect on New Hampshire and the country as a whole from the expansion of RF wireless technologies.”

This is a model of exemplary action by a state government. Please consider reading and sharing this landmark report with decision makers in your community and state in order to begin the reductions needed to protect people and nature from increasing exposure to RF radiation.

A minority report written by Senator James Gray, David Juvet (Business and Industry rep) and Bethanne Cooley (telecommunications rep) is included since they did not agree with the majority opinion. This minority report parrots the language of the telecommunications industry and exposes their agenda to ignore science and continue to confuse the public.

Special thanks to Cece Doucette, Theodora Scarato, the Environmental Health Trust, and the Senators, experts and committee members who collaborated on this important effort.