Today the US Court of Appeals remanded the case against the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) back to the FCC to provide a “reasoned explanation for its determination that its guidelines adequately protect against harmful effects of exposure to radio frequency radiation unrelated to cancer…”
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.
Engage the US government to require the FCC to do an independent review of the RF standards and RF health risks;
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.
Require eye-level signage for every 5G antenna in the public rights- of-way.
“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.]
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.
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.
Require that any new wireless antennae be set back from residences, businesses, and schools.
Upgrade the educational offerings by the NH Office of Professional Licensure and Certification (OPLC) to include RF measurements.
The State of New Hampshire should develope a continually updated map of RF exposure levels across the state.
“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.”
“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.”
“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.”
“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.”
“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.”
“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.
EMF Safety Network and Ecological Options Network filed these comments to the Federal Communication Commission (FCC) in WT Docket 17-84 on why copper lines must be retained and maintained. The FCC is discussing “retirement” of the copper line telephone system.
1. Copper landline phones save lives.
Copper landlines work when the power is out, fiber optics don’t. In an emergency, with no power, no phone, and no 911 services, people will be at risk for life threatening situations. Who will pay the price for this aggressive push to end copper landline service?
Seniors
Businesses
People with Electromagnetic Hypersensitivity (EHS)
Low income people
Residents of rural areas
Hearing impaired
People who want a choice
2. Copper landline phone systems cost less.
A fiber optic VOIP system requires internet service, computer, router, VOIP device, plus a phone. A VOIP system costs more to purchase, maintain, and replace worn out devices. A VOIP uses more electricity. A copper landline phone is simpler and more cost effective because it only requires a phone.
3. Cell phones are not safe substitutes for corded copper landline phones.
Independent peer-reviewed published science links cell phone radiation to the risk of adverse health impacts, including cancer.
The National Toxicology Program found an increase in brain tumors from exposure to cell phone radiation. http://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/results/areas/cellphones/index.html
The BioInitiative Report reviewed 2000 peer reviewed published studies and found an increased risk of brain cancer from cell and cordless phone radiation. www.bioinitiative.org
Independent scientists who have published peer-reviewed studies warn about the safety risks of cell phones, cell towers and other devices that emit radiation. www.emfscientist.org
IARC, an arm of the World Health Organization classifies cell phone radiation as a possible carcinogen. http://www.iarc.fr/en/media-centre/pr/2011/pdfs/pr208_E.pdf
Brain tumors are the leading cause of cancer-related deaths in children age 0-14 http://www.abta.org/about-us/news/brain-tumor-statistics/
This week the Maine Supreme Court upheld the finding of utility regulators regarding smart meter safety. The Court supported this difficult to follow position: “It is one thing to make a finding that evidence is credible regarding potential harm and quite another to find there is a legally credible threat of harm—that a credible threat of harm is in fact credible: likely and probable to result in harm.”
The court weighed health and safety precautions with utilities bottom line. “The Commission, therefore, properly rejected Friedman’s approach because it would require an impractically high threshold for ensuring safety, and as a result would render nearly all utilities unsafe.”
The Court upheld this position, even though they knew there is evidence of risk. “The Commission acknowledged that there had been some evidence presented of potential future risk posed generally by RF exposure,…”
The key to the ruling is what the court calls, “balancing the potential for harm against the usefulness and pervasiveness of the technology at issue.”
This ruling culminates a four year legal battle in Maine over the health and safety effects of smart meters. Even though the legal burden was on the utility (CMP) to show smart meters were safe, the Court ignored this and placed the burden on the customer to pay to avoid the risk of pulsed radiation smart meters emit.
Ed Friedman stated: “ The Court has miserably failed the people of Maine. They ignored independent testimony from international experts on the credible threat of harm RF exposures at smart meter levels pose, and instead chose to believe the “Marlboro Man” that smoking is good for us.”
Investigative journalist Norm Alster exposes the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) in a new 59 page paper published by Harvard University. “Captured agency: How the Federal Communications Commission is dominated by the industries it presumably regulates.” http://bit.ly/FCCcaptured
Alster calls on the FCC to acknowledge there may be wireless health risks, to back off wi-fi promotion, to acknowledge children and pregnant women may be more vulnerable and more. Excerpts:
Perhaps the best example of how the FCC is tangled in a chain of corruption is the cell tower and antenna infrastructure that lies at the heart of the phenomenally successful wireless industry.
Personally, I don‘t believe that just because something can be done it should heedlessly be allowed. Murder, rape and Ponzi schemes are all doable but subject to prohibition and regulation. Government regulators have the responsibility to examine the consequences of new technologies and act to at least contain some of the worst. Beyond legislators and regulators, public outrage and the courts can also play a role but these can be muffled indefinitely by misinformation and bullying. Norm Alster
In a letter about a new nation wide wi-fi deployment (called *FirstNet), the US Department of the Interior states the wireless proposal threatens birds, and is not consistent with current information and laws that protect birds. They called for an environmental review.
Two hundred forty one bird species are at mortality risk from both tower collisions and from exposure to the radiation towers emit. This includes birds that are endangered or threatened, Birds of Conservation Concern, migratory birds, and eagles. They estimate up to 6.8 million bird deaths a year may result from collisions with towers.
Studies of radiation impacts on wild birds documented nest abandonment, plumage deterioration and death. Birds studied included House Sparrows, White Storks, Collared Doves, and other species. Studies in laboratories of chick embryos documented heart attacks and death.
In their letter, The Dept of the Interior criticizes the FCC’s radiation safety guidelines stating,“the electromagnetic radiation standards used by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) continue to be based on thermal heating, a criterion now nearly 30 years out of date and inapplicable today.”
EMF activists confronted the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) new head chairman, Thomas Wheeler in Mountain View and Oakland yesterday. The FCC sets the standards on wireless safety. Wheeler is a wireless industry leader and has buried the science on wireless health impacts. With Wheeler at the head of the FCC, there’s little chance for safe oversight.
In Oakland, Wheeler was greeted by grim reapers. “At one point, he [Wheeler] wandered the wrong way after being followed and questioned by an activist, and found himself surrounded by protesters shouting, “Wheeler buried the truth now we bury the dead.” He quickly scurried away, knowing that the truth was out there. He looked like a frightened animal and you could see the pain in his eyes. It can’t be easy to sacrifice people’s lives for profit.” Read the full story about the protests at Stop Smart Meters!
Investigative journalist Norm Alster exposes the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) in a new 59 page paper published by Harvard University. “Captured agency: How the Federal Communications Commission is dominated by the industries it presumably regulates.” 
