California court ruling upholds Wi-Fi disability case

A California appeals court has ruled that Wi-Fi sickness, also know as EHS, merits disability accommodation.

On February 18, 2021 a decision was entered in the case of Brown v. Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD) at the 2nd district Court of Appeals in California. The court concluded that “Brown adequately pled her cause of action for failure to provide reasonable accommodation for her disability.” They reversed a lower courts decision that had ruled in favor of LAUSD. 

Brown is a teacher in the LAUSD school district. After the school upgraded their Wi-Fi system Brown experienced, “chronic pain, headaches, nausea, itching, burning sensations on her skin, ear issues, shortness of breath, inflammation, heart palpitations, respiratory complications, foggy headedness, and fatigue, all symptoms of Microwave Sickness or EHS.”

Brown sued LAUSD after efforts to obtain reasonable accommodations failed. The trial court ruled in favor of LAUSD. Brown appealed that decision and won. The appeals court based their decision on California’s Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA) which provides disability protections independent of, and above and beyond the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Excerpt from the Decision:

“The Legislature has stated its intent that “physical disability” be construed so that employees are protected from discrimination due to actual or perceived physical impairment that is disabling, potentially disabling, or perceived as disabling or potentially disabling.”

“FEHA states a “physical disability” includes, but is not limited to, “any physiological disease, disorder, condition, cosmetic disfigurement, or anatomical loss that does both of the following: Affects one or more of the following body systems: neurological, immunological, musculoskeletal, special sense organs, respiratory, including speech organs, cardiovascular, reproductive, digestive, genitourinary, hemic and lymphatic, skin and endocrine…Limits a major life activity…`Major life activities’ shall be broadly construed and includes physical, mental, and social activities and working.”

You can read the decision here:  Brown vs LAUSD

STOP cell towers on every block in California #STOPSB649

Cell towers emit harmful radiation.
If Senate Bill 649 passes you could awake in 2018 to find a cell tower outside your bedroom window, or on your children’s school. Senate Bill 649 would create a state mandated system of cell towers every couple hundred feet apart.  SB 649 would harm California.

SB 649 would eliminate local control and public input.  It would allow refrigerator-size cell equipment on utility poles, streetlights, sidewalks, in parks, on schools, hospitals, and any public building with no safety oversight. Only fire stations, coastal commission and historic areas are exempt. Cities would have no recourse to remove a tower even if every resident complained.

Peer-reviewed published science shows harmful effects of cell tower radiation include: fatigue, headaches, sleep problems, anxiety, ringing in the ears, heart problems, learning and memory disorders, increased cancer risk, and more.  Children are especially vulnerable. See  Biological Effects from Radiofrequency Radiation  and www.emfscientist.org

SB 649 would harm nature. Peer reviewed published studies found radiation harms trees, birds, bees and insects.  Studies of radiation impacts on wild birds documented nest abandonment, plumage deterioration and death. https://www.ntia.doc.gov/files/ntia/us_doi_comments.pdf More studies here: http://www.emfresearch.com/emf-wildlife/

SB 649 would lay the groundwork for 5G millimeter wave technology.  What is 5G?  See this fact sheet.  Peer reviewed published science shows millimeter waves adversely affect health. https://goo.gl/gbBKHL More studies here.

300 cities, 47 (out of 58) counties, and dozens of health, environment, consumer, and justice organizations representing millions of Californians have opposed SB 649. Organizations opposed to SB 649 9:8:2017

Here are letters from specific groups: Environmental Working Group  AARP American Association of Retired Persons  Alliance of Nurses for Healthy Environments  Ecological Options Network, EMF Safety Network  Dr. Golomb Oppose SB 649

UPDATE! Governor Jerry Brown vetoed SB 649!

On October 15 Governor Brown Vetoed SB 649!  Can you thank him? You can call his office, send a letter by mail, fax, or contact him through his website.

Governor Jerry Brown
c/o State Capitol, Suite 1173
Sacramento, CA 95814
Phone: (916) 445-2841 Fax: (916) 558-3160

 

[mashshare]

Changing the conversation on wireless in schools

[mashshare] Palo Alto is in the heart of Silicon Valley, home to tech giants like Google, Apple and HP.  In December 2016 the Palo Alto Unified School District discussed the need to mitigate the health risks of wireless as they plan to renew their internet technology systems.

Medical doctor Ann Lee talks to the board about her son who was diagnosed with a heart murmur at age five, and has chest pain in the library where there are seven wi-fi routers. Dr. Lee reviews the science supporting the connection between health effects and wi-fi.  Peter Sullivan of Clear Light Ventures suggests strategies for reducing wireless, like eco-wi-fi and using a wired computer system.

One board member said, “We have had medical experience with electromagnetic hypersensitivity and it’s quite a real phenomenon”. Another spoke in support of precautionary moves away from wireless, and a third asked for a safety plan.

This school board has been educated over time, which allows them the knowledge to speak out in favor of safety.  What every school board needs: more education.

Watch from 2:59:19 to 3:13:36 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UapcQ29ciro&start=10745&width=420&height=315

Scientists Challenge SCENIHR

Cindy SageWe are in an era of unprecedented psychological manipulation of the science on potential health effects of EMF and RFR.

Over the last few years, the BioInitiative Working Group has worked many hours on the European Commission’s science reviews of EMF and RFR.  What they say matters.  It’s the expert committee for the European Union (EU) recommending whether EMF and RFR public safety limits are okay, or need substantial revision.  You know where we stand on this.  The limits are grossly inadequate in Europe and the US.

The European Scientific Committee on Emerging and Newly Identified Health Risks (SCENIHR) did a bad job of it in 2009, and has unsurprisingly disappointed us again in 2015.  Through deceptive language tactics, the Committee has deliberately put out misinformation to erase what should have been clear findings of potential health effects of electromagnetic fields.  Health effects that matter greatly to millions of regular people who want to know about EMF.

What’s their NAME?

The Scientific Committee for Emerging and Newly Identified Health Risks, right?  Emerging (not proven).  Newly identified (not conclusively demonstrated).

What is the NAME OF THEIR REPORT?  

“Final opinion on Potential health effects of exposure to electromagnetic fields (EMF)”  Not conclusively proven health effects.

What did they conclude?

That there are no conclusively proven biological effects.

How Could That Happen?

” While the scope of the Opinion [SCENIHR, 2015a] did include potential health effects, it was not SCENIHR’s objective to decide whether the possibility of an effect exists, as erroneously suggested by Sage et al. It should be noted that the term “risk” already accounts for probability of a harmful effect and that various levels”. (SCENIHR Leitgeb, 2015)

WHAT?

It would be just an academic farce if our lives didn’t depend on the outcome.  But, we do.  All around the planet, we depend on good advice from educated experts that are supposed to be independent thinkers and good analysts of what is a ‘potential health effect’. No amount of dust-kicking can obscure the basic fact that the SCENIHR failed to do what it was directed to do.

Read for yourselves. This is double-speak.  The SCENIHR’S science review that has failed to carry out the central question asked of this Committee. This is an assessment on which the fate of billions of human beings depends, and upon which global health rests.

For SCENIHR to issue an unwarranted finding of  ‘all clear’ by redefining the reporting terms and misreporting the evidence is bad for science, bad for the public and intensely bad for school children who are sitting in classrooms with WiFi all day, required to use wireless tablets for schoolwork. Read more: http://www.bioinitiative.org/rebuttal-emf-effects/

Cindy Sage

Dr. David Carpenter talks about wireless cancer risks and what you can do to protect your family

Watch this short interview with Dr. David Carpenter, co-author of the Bioinitiative Report and director of the Institute for Health and the Environment at the University of Albany.

Dr. Carpenter talks about cell phones and brain cancer risk, children’s risk, high intensity pulses from smart meters, 60 HZ fields, radio towers, Obama supported wifi in schools and electrosensitivity.

He says, “the evidence is overwhelming” that cell phones increase your risk of brain cancer, and children are at 5 fold greater risk. He says, “Children are by far the most vulnerable.” Regarding wifi in schools, “everyone will be adversely affected.” The interview concludes with some solutions on what you can do to protect yourself and children.

Santa Clara County MD warns: Internet and Wi-Fi in schools can affect learning

Cindy Lee Russell, M.D., Vice President of Community Health, Santa Clara County Medical Association wrote an article warning about the health risks of technology in schools:  Shallow Minds: How the Internet and Wi–Fi in Schools Can Affect Learning

Dr. Russell writes: “There are a host of concerns with classroom technology, and the virtual world it creates, that have not been explored in the rush to “modernize” education and prevent our kids from becoming “computer illiterate,” despite the fact that computers are designed for ease of use.  These issues range from distraction in the classroom, impairment of cognitive development and long-term memory, deficiency in learning social skills, Internet addiction, cyber bullying, access to inappropriate content, eye fatigue,and security risks to online learning networks. In addition, the sheer cost of computers and continuous upgrades is likely to break many school budgets. We have not mentioned the issue of toxic e-waste, another growing public health problem.”

“We will not get rid of the Internet or computers. We should not ignore, however, the enlarging body of science that points to real threats to public health and, especially, our children’s safety and well-being. The best approach is precautionary. Reduce the risk by reducing the microwave emissions. It is our obligation as physicians and parents to protect our children. They are the future and our legacy.”

Dr. Russell recommends:

  1. Remove wireless devices (white boards and routers) in schools in favor of wired connections and fiberoptic.
  2. If there is Wi-Fi, then give teachers the authority to turn it off when not in use or if they feel it is not necessary.
  3. Ban cell towers near or on schools.
  4. Limit screen time on computers.
  5. Limit or ban cell phone use in the class
  6. Limit or ban cell phone use at home
  7. Do not allow laptops to be placed on laps
  8. Undertake independent scientific studies on Wi-Fi and computer use that look at acute and long-term health effects.
  9. Train teachers how to recognize symptoms of EMF reactions.
  10. Conduct meetings with parents and teachers to address this issue in each school.

Dr. Russel cites the science, international actions, and provides a reference list. This is an excellent paper to give to school principals and administrators.

Dad’s win school wi-fi battle

NZ dadNew Zealand dad’s concerned for the health and safety of school children have a won a battle against a local school to have the wi-fi removed and use wired connections instead.

Damon Wyman and David Bird led a campaign to remove the wireless system from Te Horo School and replace it with cable-based internet due to concerns it could cause cancer and other health problems.

Damon is the father of Ethan who died from a brain tumor and had attended the local school.  His son was exposed to Wi-Fi at school, and he also slept with an Internet-connected iPod under his pillow at night.

The school sent a survey to parents, and after reviewing the results agreed to remove the wi-fi in the junior classrooms.  Watch the video here: http://tvnz.co.nz/technology-news/fathers-win-school-wi-fi-battle-5787916/video

Students demonstrate wireless hazards at Science Faire

Two young scientists researched and studied wireless health risks for science fair projects. One student was interested in the controversy surrounding wi-fi and whether it should be in schools or not. She found fruit flies exposed to industrial wi-fi had genome mutations. Another student researched mobile phone radiation and warns about brain cancer, insomnia and other health problems.

In May of 2013 a team of Danish 9th grade girls did a science study on wi-fi and found watercress seeds would not grow near a wi-fi router.

The students placed six trays filled with water cress in a room without radiation, and six trays in another room next to two wi-fi routers. Over the next 12 days, the girls observed, measured, weighed and photographed their results. The cress seeds placed near the routers had not grown, whereas the cress seeds in the other room, away from the routers, thrived.

watercress_wifi studyThe experiment earned the girls top honors in a regional science competition and the interest of scientists around the world. Full story here: Student Science Experiment Finds Plants won’t Grow near Wi-Fi Router