Take Action! Send your comments on 5G to the FCC by March 8

The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) is accepting comments on whether or not to fast-track 5G wireless networks. 5G will use a dense distribution of antennas (called “small cell”) on power and light poles throughout our towns, cities and rural areas. Fast tracking 5G deployment will thwart public participation and impede local control.

Mobilitie, the company that has petitioned the FCC claims: “ALL Americans” want wireless, and wireless is now an essential public service. Mobilitie argues “Robust deployment of wireless facilities and networks demonstrably serves the public interest…”, and “The Commission has found that all consumers require wireless broadband to have true and meaningful access to the Internet.”

Wireless is not required to access the internet! We can have safer internet access by using wired connections!

Last year, the US government, led by the National Toxicology Program (NTP) linked cancer to cell phone radiation. This study illustrates the need to reduce wireless frequencies not add more!

Will you take a few minutes to comment? The deadline is Wednesday March 8.
1. Start here: https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs/filings
2. Click on “Express Comment”
3. Type in 16-421 into the “Proceedings” Field.  A drop down menu will appear, choose Docket No: 16-421
4. Fill out all required fields, write your comment and click continue.
6. Review and submit.
7. Write down your confirmation # so that you can check on your submission.

NTP study can be found here:
http://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/results/areas/cellphones/index.html

Mobilitie Petition to FCC http://narc.org/wp-content/uploads/Mobilitie-253-Petition-AS-FILED-c1-c1.pdf

THANK YOU!

“I’m shouting, but no-one is listening!” How to talk to people about wireless radiation.

Rachel Gaunt has an extensive 20 year background in advertising, marketing and social activism. Rachel has written this article, “I’m shouting, but no-one is listening! How to talk to people about wireless radiation so they can hear…and care” to help EMF activists.

She writes, “Why is it that our earnest explanations about the dangers of wireless radiation so often fall on deaf ears? Why in the face of so much science are people not rushing to protect themselves?

I have long been an observer of humans and how they behave, and have spent a long time puzzling the resistance and denial that conversations about wireless radiation can generate.  Recently, a meeting with behavior expert, Matthew Wilcox, author of The Business of Choice, helped to provide the final pieces of the puzzle.

When you look at the way humans make decisions, it turns out that there are three major factors working against us when it comes to shifting beliefs about wireless radiation.

Three factors working against us

First and foremost there is the “It will never happen to me,” response to anything bad that may happen to us in the future. This is especially true among young people.

“It will never happen to me. I am never going to die. It might happen to someone else but not to me.”…

Read Rachel Gaunt’s full article here: I’m shouting but no-one is listening!”

CA Department of Public Health sued for hiding cell phone radiation warnings

Dr. Joel Moskowitz, Director of UC Berkeley School of Public Health has sued the California Department of Public Health (CDPH) for failing to provide a tax payer funded study on cell phone radiation risks. The CDPH refused to comment on the case.

Attorney Claudia Polsky states this is “tax payer funded scientific research over a period of years resulted in a review of the scientific literature about cell phone risks and the production of a document that was supposed to reach the public informing people about how to reduce risks from cell phone use.”

Dr. Moskowitz was asked why the state is trying to suppress the document. He stated, “They [CDPH] claim that they are concerned that this would lead to chaos and confusion among the public. I suspect that they were afraid of the reaction of the telecommunications industry should they publish this document; in fact, they even argued that in their brief.”

UPDATE: In response to media pressure the CDPH pre-released the cell phone advisory to the SF Chronicle. Here it is:  CDPH cell phone document April 2014

Trees injured by cell tower radiation

Scientists in Germany studied tree damage in relation to electromagnetic radiation for nine years, from 2006-2015.  They monitored, observed and photographed unusual or unexplainable tree damage, and measured the radiation the trees were exposed too.

“The aim of this study was to verify whether there is a connection between unusual (generally unilateral) tree damage and radiofrequency exposure.”
They found significant differences between the damaged side of a tree facing a phone mast and the opposite side, as well as differences between the exposed side of damaged trees and all other groups of trees in both sides. They found no tree damage in low radiation areas.
The 30 selected trees in low radiation areas (no visual contact to any phone mast and power flux density under 50μW/m2) showed no damage.
The scientists concluded, “Statistical analysis demonstrated that electromagnetic radiation from mobile phone masts is harmful for trees.”  Link to the study: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27552133?dopt=Abstract#
Damaged Magnolia trees across the street from a cell tower

Changing the conversation on wireless in schools

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

Dangers of EMF radiation


Psychic and author Joseph Martin interviews Building Biologist and EMF specialist Eric Windheim on electromagnetic fields and radiation (EMF) hazards. Joseph and Eric bring a candid and humorous approach to the discussion of the science and risk of harm from everyday EMF exposure in the modern world.

Major US study finds link between cell phones and cancer

The National Toxicology Program published a 25 million dollar study which is one of the largest and most comprehensive studies on cell phone radiation and cancer.  In the study the rats exposed to cell phone radiation developed two types of cancers, glioma, a brain tumor, and schwannoma, a tumor in the heart.

The summary includes,  “Given the widespread global usage of mobile communications among users of all ages, even a very small increase in the incidence of disease resulting from exposure to RFR could have broad implications for public health.”

A media teleconference is being held today by the National Institutes of Health.  However the news is already being reported on by Mother Jones, Wall Street Journal and others.

Photo credit Mother Jones
Photo credit: Mother Jones

“Game-Changing” Study Links Cellphone Radiation to Cancer” “It’s the moment we’ve all been dreading.”-Mother Jones

“A major U.S. government study on rats has found a link between cellphones and cancer, an explosive finding in the long-running debate about whether mobile phones cause health effects.”- Wall Street Journal

You can find the full study here:  http://biorxiv.org/content/early/2016/05/26/055699.full.pdf+html