WIRELESS TECHNOLOGY AND CLIMATE CHANGE
Report from the COP 27
In order to navigate the Conference, reports Cellular Phone Task Force assistant Kathleen Burke from Sharm El-Sheikh, Egypt, one must have a cell phone out and on nearly at all times. For the United Nations’ 27th Conference of the Parties on Climate Change, held this year at this resort city on the Red Sea, four fake palm trees have been erected on the grounds of the COP in order for the 40,000 conference attendees to all be on their cell phones at the same time, all day long, every day for two weeks. Each “tree”, captured in the foreground in the photo above, is simply a metal scaffolding for antennas. The Safe and Sound Pro II radio frequency meter, which Kathleen brought to the COP in order to measure radiation levels, reads “Extreme” at all times everywhere on the grounds of the COP, inside and out. She may be the only person at the conference who does not have a cell phone. The purpose of Kathleen’s participation as an observer at the COP is to begin to build bridges to the people who care most about the future of our world, who are not even aware of an existential threat that is even more urgent than the one they came to Egypt to address, and yet is intimately related to it. She is distributing the following letter to the delegates — a letter that I wrote and officially submitted to the COP 27 before she arrived. Kathleen delivered the letter by hand today to all the offices of the parties (the countries represented at the Conference), as well as the Environmental Defense Fund and the World Health Organization.
” A blind spot must be filled Outside of an atomic nucleus, there are only two fundamental forces in nature: gravity and electricity. “The electromagnetic force is 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,
000 times stronger than the gravitational force. Yet much of western science pretends that it does not exist. This is now having terminal consequences for life on Earth. The consequences for life are being blamed on microorganisms. The consequences for the environment are being blamed on climate change. This Conference is rightly concerned with halting the burning of fossil fuels. Unless that is stopped, the Earth will become uninhabitable. But even if it is stopped, the Earth will not survive unless global electrosmog is also stopped — electrosmog from the wireless cloud and from satellites. And electrosmog is even more of an emergency than climate change. We have only years to stop it, not decades. In addition, many of the strategies for reducing our dependence on fossil fuels — solar power, wind power, the smart grid, electric vehicles, smart highways, smart cities, and so forth — are only making matters much worse. The methods used to gather information about altered animal habitats — GPS, radio tracking devices, etc. — are killing wildlife instead of saving them. The following are a few of the facts that the United Nations must immediately recognize and take control of in order for our children to live to grow up: Electricity, and no other force, is responsible for life. The study of electricity must be restored to biology, chemistry, and medicine.
>Electromagnetic fields (EMFs) interfere with the flow of electrons in our nerves, our brains, and our hearts’ pacemakers. This is responsible for the recent huge increases in the prevalence of neurological diseases such as ADHD, Alzheimer’s disease, multiple sclerosis, and autism, and the large increase in the incidence of heart attacks in young people.
> EMFs interfere with the flow of electrons from the food we eat to the oxygen we breathe, which occurs day and night in the mitochondria of every cell in order to make the energy necessary for life.
>This interference with metabolism — interference with the burning of sugars, fats and proteins for energy — has put all living things into a state of oxygen deprivation. This is occurring to every person, every animal, every insect, and every plant, without ceasing and without possibility of escape.
> The reduced ability of our cells to digest sugars is called diabetes.
>The reduced ability of our cells to digest fats causes them to be deposited in in our tissues, resulting in obesity. It causes them to be deposited in coronary arteries, resulting in heart disease.
>The reduced ability of our cells to utilize the oxygen we breathe causes them to revert to anaerobic (non-oxygen-using) metabolism, resulting in cancer.
>The extraordinary increases in these four pandemic diseases — obesity, diabetes, heart disease and cancer — are predominantly caused by constant radiation from personal wireless devices and the global infrastructure that supports them.
>In bees, which have a very high metabolism, this interference is quickly lethal. Colony collapse disorder is caused almost entirely by electrosmog.
> The 75% decline in flying insects in nature reserves throughout Germany, and the 98% to 99% decline in the number of crawling insects in a Puerto Rican rainforest — decreases that reflect what is globally being called “insect apocalypse” — are predominantly caused by the enormous increase in the intensity of radiation from the global wireless infrastructure.
>The unprecedented mass deaths of nesting birds worldwide in the spring and summer of 2022 was due to the tremendous global intensification of wireless infrastructure now occurring on land, in space, and in the oceans.
>The emissions from wireless devices are called radio frequency (RF) radiation. In addition to the general interference with electron flow in our bodies that occurs from any source of EMFs, RF radiation carries complex information from one wireless device to another in the form of frequencies and pulsation patterns. It carries the same information to the cells of our bodies, interfering with and drowning out the communication between our cells, and between our bodies and the Earth.
>This interferes with reproduction, growth, differentiation, maturation, healing, and normal functioning, and is responsible for the dramatic degradation of human health in the past two and a half decades.
>This interference with internal communication does not depend on dose. Even at near-zero power levels, RF radiation has been shown to alter brain waves and change the structure of DNA.
>Every wireless device and every antenna is responsible for electrosmog. None can ever be used safely, not even theoretically. Not cell towers, not cell phones, not WiFi, not Bluetooth, and not any of the 25 different wireless devices owned by the average household today.
Communication satellites, now being launched almost every other day, up to 54 at a time, by governments and private corporations, are massively polluting and altering the electromagnetic environment of the Earth itself. This is further degrading all of life below, because every living thing is part of the global electric circuit which flows at all times between the sky and the Earth.
There are 15 billion cell phones on Earth today emitting RF radiation, along with more than 6 million cell towers. At least 5,000 satellites are emitting radiation globally from space, with at least 100,000 more being scheduled and planned. On behalf of my organization, the millions of people who support my work, and on behalf of humanity, all of life, and the Earth, I ask the Parties to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change to recognize electrosmog as the emergency that it is, and a huge contributor to aspects of the degradation of life that have heretofore been blamed only on climate change. I further ask the United Nations to open an official discussion on this emergency threat to all nations and I propose the drawing up of a new treaty and the establishment of a Convention on Electrosmog. I, and the thousands of global experts with whom I communicate, are available to assist in this effort in any way that is required.”
Kathleen also gave a copy of the above letter to Amy Goodman, who is the host of Democracy Now!, a news program that she founded 26 years ago and that airs on over 1,400 public radio and television stations worldwide. Her broadcasts from the COP 27 have been amazing. On Tuesday I heard her interview Vanessa Nakate, a climate justice activist from Uganda, and what Vanessa had to say about the climate emergency applies with equal force to EMFs. Tuesday was Vanessa’s 26th birthday, or “bearthday,” as she spelled it for Amy. Vanessa reported that the Horn of Africa is experiencing severe drought, while large parts of Nigeria and Pakistan are underwater from record floods. The world must stop talking about “adaptation,” she said, because adaptation is already impossible. “You cannot adapt to extinction,” she said. A just transition to renewable energy is essential, she said, as is the total cessation of investments in fossil fuels. She is appalled that the Conference on Climate Change is being openly used as a marketing venue for the fossil fuel industry: more than 600 representatives of the fossil fuel industry are marketing their products in the pavilions at the COP! Her sentiments are equally applicable to EMFs. With radiation already so pervasive that the majorityof people in some nations have diabetes or prediabetes, and 98% to 99% of insects have disappeared even in rainforests, “adaptation” is impossible. “Adaptation” in this case meaning “safe use” of wireless technology. The burning of fossil fuels must cease, and the use of cell phones must also cease. Those are the two things that must happen if we are to have a planet to live on in the near future. Yesterday (Wednesday), Amy interviewed Harjeet Singh, an activist from New Delhi, India who is with the Climate Action Network. Like Vanessa, he is outraged that not only has there been no progress on climate change in 30 years, but there is not even any mentionof fossil fuels in the Paris Agreement that was adopted in 2015. And (as of yesterday) there was no mention of fossil fuels in the draft report of the COP 27 either. He, too, is scandalized by the 600 fossil fuel lobbyists that have turned the COP 27 into an Expo for their products. He is urging the nations of the world to develop a Fossil Fuel Non-Proliferation Treaty, which Tuvalu and Vanuato are calling for. They are two island nations whose very existence is threatened by rising sea levels. The parallels to EMF activism are striking. Just as 600 fossil fuel lobbyists are hawking their products at a conference on climate change, so most people that attend EMF conferences and protests of 5G have cell phones in their hands. Just as there has been no progress on climate change for 30 years, so there has been no progress on radiation for 30 years. “A fight for climate justice is a fight for human rights,” said Vanessa Nakate. Likewise, a fight for a radiation-free world is a fight for human rights. It is time to stop nations from being flooded and submerged, and it is time to stop millions of people from being tortured and made homeless, and children worldwide from growing up with brain damage. It is time to stop burning fossil fuels, and it is time to stop using cell phones. My letter, as submitted by me to the COP on my organization’s stationery, with my credentials, is here: https://cellphonetaskforce.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/11/CPTF-
I ask everyone to please write to Amy Goodman requesting her to begin talking about radiation from wireless technology on Democracy Now! She is popular, respected, and reaches millions of people. Please do notquestion climate change when you write to her. We need to join forces with those who care about our planet if we want to keep it alive. The best way to contact Amy is on her website.
-Arthur Firstenberg, President Cellular Phone Task Force ECHOEarch.org (End Cellphones Here On Earth) P.O. Box 6216 Santa Fe, NM 87502 email@example.com November 17, 2022 I
Great presentation from the Lenox, MA forum November 2022 by Dr. Kent Chamberlain, PHD University New Hampshire
Excerpted from CASE STUDY: VERIZON TOWER IN PITTSFIELD
How the FCC shields cellphone companies from safety concerns
- By Peter Elkind, ProPublica Nov 16, 2022
The Berkshire Eagle newspaper
More than 20 foreign governments have adopted protective measures or recommended precautions.
- Italy, India, Israel, Chile, Croatia, Ukraine, Kuwait, Greece, China, Russia, Canada, Switzerland, Brussels Belgium, Bosnia Herzegovina, Grand Duchy of Luxembourg, Greece, Belarus, Georgia, Serbia, Slovenia, Montenegro, Croatia, Bulgaria, Turkey India, Liechtenstein, Tajikistan, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan, Moldova, Kuwait, Republic of Moldova, Iraq
France requires new phones to be sold with headsets and written guidance on limiting radiation exposures; it also bans phones marketed to small children and ads aimed at anyone younger than 14. Greece and Switzerland routinely monitor radio-frequency radiation levels throughout the country. Britain, Canada, Finland, Germany, Italy, India and South Korea urge citizens to limit both their own exposure and cellphone use by children. The European Environment Agency does too, noting: “There is sufficient evidence of risk to advise people, especially children, not to place the handset against their heads.”
Why isn’t the USA recommending precautions?
Thread of roadblocks below:
Henry Lai, an emeritus professor of bioengineering at the University of Washington, has compiled a database of 1,123 peer-reviewed studies published since 1990 investigating biological effects from wireless-radiation exposure. Some 77% have found “significant” effects, according to Lai. By contrast, an earlier review by Lai found that 72% of industry-sponsored studies reported no biological effects.
As the FCC moved toward adopting wireless-radiation limits in 1996, EPA officials, whose experts had conducted the most extensive government research on wireless-radiation risk, affirmed their concern about possible biological harm in a presentation to the FCC. They urged the FCC to follow a two-stage strategy: to meet a looming congressional deadline by first setting interim limits covering known thermal effects; then to commission a group of experts to study biological risks and develop permanent exposure guidelines. But the FCC never pursued “Phase 2.” Instead, just months later, Congress completed a multiyear defunding of the EPA’s wireless-radiation group, sidelining the agency from researching the issue.
in 1999, the FDA asked the NTP (National Toxicology Program) to “assess the risk to human health.” The results were dramatic. The study found “clear evidence” of rare cancerous heart tumors, called schwannomas, in male rats; “some evidence” of tumors in their brains and adrenal glands; and signs of DNA damage. The percentage that developed tumors was small, but, as the study’s authors noted earlier, “Given the extremely large number of people who use wireless communication devices, even a very small increase in the incidence of disease resulting from exposure” could have “broad implications for public health.”
The FCC in 2013 had been prodded by a Government Accountability Office report to review its radio-frequency exposure limit, unchanged since 1996. “We recognize that a great deal of scientific research has been completed in recent years and new research is currently underway, warranting a comprehensive examination,” the FCC wrote, in opening its inquiry. An Interior Department letter voiced concern about the impact of radiation from towers on migrating birds, noting that the FCC’s limits “continue to be based on thermal heating, a criterion now nearly 30 years out of date and inapplicable today.” “The inquiry was just on a back burner, and the back burner was turned off.”
In 2014, the CDC added this modest language to its website: “Along with many organizations worldwide, we recommend caution in cellphone use.” They were coerced to revising it and changing there “we” to “some organizations.”
In 2017, as the FCC’s review of its wireless standards entered its fourth year, Mantiply, a soft-spoken physical scientist said, he and three colleagues proposed hiring an outside consulting firm to conduct an environmental assessment, a detailed formal examination, of the submissions on the radiation safety limits. But their boss, Julius Knapp, the head of the FCC’s Office of Engineering and Technology, summarily rejected the proposal. Mantiply’s proposal came at a time when the Trump White House and FCC commissioners were aggressively promoting 5G.
In 2018, a massive, nearly-two-decade study by the National Toxicology Program, part of the National Institutes of Health, found “clear evidence” that cellphone radiation caused cancer in lab animals. “We’re really in the middle of a paradigm shift,” said Linda Birnbaum, who was director of the NTP (National Toxicology Program) until 2019. It’s no longer right to assume cellphones are safe, she said. “Protective policy is needed today. We really don’t need more science to know that we should be reducing exposures.” The FCC rejected the need for any such action when it reviewed its standards on cellphone radiation in 2019. The agency decided it would continue to rely on exposure limits it established in 1996, when Motorola’s StarTAC flip phone was considered cutting edge.
To find out more about this potential hazard: www.safehelpsyou.org
You are mostly water so if this test shows how exposure by 5G affects water, what do you think it will do to your body and your cells?
Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) public health policy has focused on the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) virus and its effects on human health while environmental factors have been largely ignored. In considering the epidemiological triad (agent-host-environment) applicable to all disease, we investigated a possible environmental factor in the COVID-19 pandemic: ambient radiofrequency radiation from wireless communication systems including microwaves and millimeter waves. SARS-CoV-2, the virus that caused the COVID-19 pandemic, surfaced in Wuhan, China shortly after the implementation of city-wide (fifth generation [5G] of wireless communications radiation [WCR]), and rapidly spread globally, initially demonstrating a statistical correlation to international communities with recently established 5G networks. In this study, we examined the peer-reviewed scientific literature on the detrimental bioeffects of WCR and identified several mechanisms by which WCR may have contributed to the COVID-19 pandemic as a toxic environmental cofactor. By crossing boundaries between the disciplines of biophysics and pathophysiology, we present evidence that WCR may: (1) cause morphologic changes in erythrocytes including echinocyte and rouleaux formation that can contribute to hypercoagulation; (2) impair microcirculation and reduce erythrocyte and hemoglobin levels exacerbating hypoxia; (3) amplify immune system dysfunction, including immunosuppression, autoimmunity, and hyperinflammation; (4) increase cellular oxidative stress and the production of free radicals resulting in vascular injury and organ damage; (5) increase intracellular Ca2+ essential for viral entry, replication, and release, in addition to promoting pro-inflammatory pathways; and (6) worsen heart arrhythmias and cardiac disorders.
Relevance for Patients:
In short, WCR has become a ubiquitous environmental stressor that we propose may have contributed to adverse health outcomes of patients infected with SARS-CoV-2 and increased the severity of the COVID-19 pandemic. Therefore, we recommend that all people, particularly those suffering from SARS-CoV-2 infection, reduce their exposure to WCR as much as reasonably achievable until further research better clarifies the systemic health effects associated with chronic WCR exposure.
For more information visit Cecelia’s website: https://www.ma4safetech.org
87 folks turned up to see the movie Generation Zapped and hear the talk by the leader of Massachusetts for Safe Technology. Watch this 5 minute video to see the most important segments of the event held in Hillsdale, NY. https://youtu.be/g_BOGe7wF18
Joining the rest of the Five Eyes intelligence-sharing network, Canada is banning China’s Huawei Technologies and ZTE Corp (OTCPK:ZTCOY) from providing 5G (and even 4G) services in the country. Providers who have already installed the gear will also be required to remove it without compensation or reimbursement. With regards to deadlines, 5G machinery must be taken out by June 2024, while companies using related 4G equipment must clear them from their networks by the end of 2027.
Snapshot: The decision follows a nearly four-year national security review, prompted by the U.S. due to espionage concerns. Washington has cited fears over the potential use of 5G equipment as a backdoor for spying by the Chinese government, even warning allies it would limit intelligence sharing with countries that use Huawei equipment. “This is very much in line with what our allies have been doing in order to protect a critical piece of infrastructure,” said François-Philippe Champagne, Canada’s Minister of Innovation, Science and Industry.
Fearing an eventual ban, Bell Canada (NYSE:BCE) and Telus (NYSE:TU), two of the nation’s largest wireless players, had already started to exclude Huawei from their network buildouts, opting for alternative gear from Sweden’s Ericsson (NASDAQ:ERIC) and Finland’s Nokia (NYSE:NOK). The Chinese embassy in Canada was quick to slam the announcement, calling it politically motivated and a violation of the principles of free trade and market economies. “China will take all necessary measures to protect the interests of Chinese companies,” according to a spokesperson.
FAA: More on 5G and flights. Jan. 19, 22
The agency issued its first major update since AT&T Inc. and Verizon Communications Inc. began using new frequency bands for fast 5G mobile phone service in dozens of metropolitan regions around the U.S. The radio waves are close to those used by aircraft radar altimeters and the FAA has said there is a risk that they could cause interference.
“Even with these approvals, flights at some airports may still be affected,” the FAA said in the statement.
The expansion occurred because three additional models of altimeters were found to be resistant to interference from 5G, the FAA said. It had earlier cleared two altimeter models.
“The FAA also continues to work with manufacturers to understand how radar altimeter data is used in other flight control systems,” the agency said. “Passengers should check with their airlines for latest flight schedules.”
Absent from the list of cleared aircraft are any of the regional jet models that perform roughly half of all scheduled airline flights.
Ed[what about General Aviation (private) and helicopter operations that operate off airport?]
The FAA on January 13 published 1,478 notices to air missions (notams) related to pending activation of 5G C-band wireless base stations with far-reaching implications for air travel, including emergency medical transportation. https://www.aopa.org/news-and-media/all-news/2022/january/13/faa-publishes-long-expected-5g-c-band-notams
The central issue remains potential interference with radar altimeters, which have for decades operated on frequencies near the C-band and are installed in thousands of aircraft, including commercial airliners, some business jets, and many helicopters flying patients to hospitals surrounded by 5G antennas.
In that last category, helicopters used for emergency medical transportation and flown under Part 135 have been required to have radar altimeters installed since 2017, pursuant to a final rule published by the FAA in 2014. That rule mandated a package of safety requirements and updates, including increased weather minimums that apply to Part 91 helicopter operations.
If 5G can affect airplane electronics what can it do to the brain of pilot’s. So if they find a shield for the radar altimeters will we then see a rash of landing errors by pilot’s whose brains may be affected by these rogue frequencies?
Non Profit Groups Petition HHS and FDA to Declare Imminent Hazard from Wireless Radiation Petitioners Claim Inaction by FDA is Causing Confusion and Harm to the Public
A group of non-profit organizations and private individuals led by the national coalition Americans for Responsible Technology (ART) today petitioned the Health and Human Services Department and its constituent agency, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), to publicly issue a declaration of Imminent Hazard and clarify its position on the safety of human exposure to radiofrequency (RF) radiation emitted from cell phones, cell towers, smart meters, small cell antennas, wireless kiosks, tablets, computers and other wireless devices. The groups contend that the FDA is allowing and encouraging the misleading and false impression that it has engaged in a careful examination of the evidence, reached a science-based conclusion and developed standards for human exposure following government procedures. It has not.
“We’re asking a simple and basic question that Americans have a right to know the answer to: where are the FDA’s science-based standards for exposure to RF radiation?” says ART founder and National Director Doug Wood, whose organization represents more than 130 grassroots organizations across the country. “The FDA is our nation’s primary agency to protect and promote public health and it has a statutory responsibility to evaluate the safety of wireless devices. This is an imminent hazard to human health. The FDA must act.”
The rapid deployment of 5G antennas in neighborhoods across the country, along with the national effort to make every school classroom wireless has raised questions among parents and others as to the safety of near-constant exposure. The concurrent publication of more studies linking RF radiation to cancer, DNA damage and reproductive and neurological problems, has ignited a fierce debate over the wisdom of increasing involuntary exposure to RF radiation. Petitioners argue that the current FCC thermal guidelines, developed more than a quarter century ago, do not address proven biological impacts occurring at levels below the thermal threshold.
“The public is completely uninformed and unprotected,” says Cindy Franklin, founder of Consumers for Safe Cell Phones, a co-petitioner in the action. “Most people think the FDA is carefully evaluating the science, and that FCC regulations are based on properly developed scientific input from the FDA. None of that is true.”
A recent lawsuit seeking a judicial review of the FCC’s decision to keep its outdated safety guidelines in place resulted in the Court ordering the FCC to look again at emerging science linking exposure to RF radiation with biological harm, especially to children and the environment. The court called the FCC’s decision to keep its thermal-only guidelines “arbitrary and capricious.”
“People all over the country are suffering from exposure, but may not realize it’s the RF radiation from a nearby antenna, smart meter or router,” says Ellen Marks, founder of the California Brain Tumor Association whose husband developed a brain tumor after years of holding his cell phone against his head. “RF radiation can cause headaches, dizziness, nausea, insomnia, inability to concentrate – and those are just the acute symptoms. Cancer takes longer to develop. We can’t wait. This is a public health crisis that needs to be addressed immediately!”
Airlines are concerned about 5G interference with radar altimeters making it unsafe to conduct instrument approaches.
We finally arrived at the finish line of the OTARD case and we are finishing with a smile. The hearing on December 7 went well and Scott McCollough did a fantastic job arguing the case. However, it is impossible to predict the outcome. We did the best we could, we are content with our efforts and we are hopeful. The title of a Law360 article published today about the hearing expresses my opinion of it. Full text: DC Circ. Appears Skeptical Of FCC Wireless Antenna Rules.
Court’s Decision – Now we just have to wait for the Court’s decision. The DC Circuit usually issues its decisions within 6 months of the hearing.
Join Our OTARD Webinar – I know many people have questions about this case and its implications and have questions. Therefore, on Wednesday, December 15, at 3 pm ET, Scott McCollough and I will conduct a webinar with a Q & A session in which we’ll discuss the case and the hearing.
Register for the Webinar Here (pre-registration is required). We thank 5G Free California for hosting this event.
Recording of the Hearing – For those who missed the hearing, the recording is available on YouTube. The hearing starts at 30:35 and ends at 1:12:00. It is only 37 minutes and I recommend listening to it. See below links to transcripts of selections from the oral arguments:
Transcript of CHD’s Oral Arguments
Transcript of FCC’s Oral Arguments
A Snapshot of the Hearing
The judges asked good questions including several regarding the increase in RF exposure, property and homeowners’ association rights and due process. It seemed they were especially concerned with aesthetics. Judge Randolph asked whether local communities would be allowed to pass regulations to prevent these antennas because “they are ugly and we don’t want them in our town?” The FCC’s attorney admitted that it would likely be considered an “unreasonable restriction” and therefore would be prohibited.
The judges’ questions led the FCC to reluctantly admit that we are correct in our assertions as to the impact of the rule amendment: no notice of installation of these antennas is required; there is no ability to object to their installation; and that essentially, the FCC considers any barrier to installation unreasonable and therefore unlawful, so indeed all state and municipal laws are preempted except for compliance with electric, building and fire codes.
The judges, especially Judge Millet, who presided over the panel, appeared to see through the FCC’s efforts to minimize the impact this rule has. The FCC continuously argued that the only thing the rule does is to remove the “private use” restriction. McCollough explained that this alleged small change completely flips the whole purpose of the rule, resulting in a massive impact.
It felt as if the FCC’s attorney attempted to avoid answering the questions knowing the answers would not help the FCC’s case. It was quite noticeable, even to a child. In a comment on my Facebook page Amy wrote: “I had my 10-year-old son listening and he could understand what she [Judge Millet] was asking. He didn’t understand why the FCC attorney couldn’t answer. While usually attorneys want more time to speak, not less, after yet another intense exchange with Judge Millet, the FCC attorney told the court “I am out of time, your honor.”
Concluding his arguments, McCollough used vivid comparisons suggested to him by Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. to demonstrate the difference between the old and the new rule allowing “really really ugly powerful antennas”: “The difference is like the difference between a porch light to stadium lights emitting out to a mile, or the difference between TV speakers to a large rock band playing at a stadium for people who can hear it up to a mile.“
It Takes A Village
As always, it takes a village. Many people were involved and worked hard and under a lot of pressure. First and foremost – a huge thank you to Scott McCollough, who as always has done a superb job at every step of the way. To Shannon Koenig who is an essential part of our team, and to Ed Friedman for his help with editing even though it was always late and last minute. I have the utmost appreciation for our Petitioners and our Affiants and their family members for being willing to share their personal experiences and hardships. It takes a lot of courage. Thank you Dr. Elliot, Ginger, Jonathan, Angela, Dr. Hoffman, Michele, and Jennifer. Special thanks to the medical experts who filed reports: Prof. Beatrice Golomb, Prof. Riina Bray and Dr. Toril Jelter. Most Importantly, thank you Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., and the Children’s Health Defense team and their donors for enabling us to bring this case.
ISED’s concerns about the potential interference with altimeters by 5G operations in the 3.45 – 3.65 GHz band in Canada emerge the same week that the FCC completed the auction of licenses in the 3.45 – 3.55 GHz band in the United States for more than $20 billion. The FCC order authorizing the auction has no mention of altimeters, much less potential interference.
The Canadian restrictions include “exclusion zones” around 26 airports where outdoor 5G base stations would not be permitted to operate—but indoor 5G operations would be allowed. ISED has also established “protection zones” where 5G operations would be allowed, with restricted power. Furthermore, ISED requires, until it decides otherwise, that the 5G antennas tilt down, rather than horizontally or upward, so as not to interfere with the radio altimeters. These restrictions would be in effect until both domestic and international studies have come to a definite conclusion about the scope of the problem.
Similar discussion is going on in the United States, following the planned rollout of 5G in the 3.7 – 4.2 GHz section of spectrum known as the C-Band, originally due on December 5, now postponed until January 2022. Last year the Federal Communications Commission auctioned the rights to licenses in the C-Band to, among others, Verizon, AT&T, and T-Mobile to use for 5G services. These companies paid over $80 billion for spectrum that would help provide consumers with faster mobile Internet services. The C-Band is much closer to the spectrum used for altimeters, and consequently the C-Band would reasonably pose greater interference concerns than the 3.45 – 3.55 GHz band. The FCC order authorizing the C-Band auction mentions altimeters but makes no specific accommodation for them.
Link to the video is below the text..
The ubiquitous installation of smart meters raises serious legal and policy concerns over false claims, RFR/EMF exposure, privacy, surveillance, hacking, national security, disability, consumer choice, energy inefficiency, and fire. This webinar will assess the public’s legal rights and remedies and offer a balanced path forward for policy makers
Doug Wood is the co-creator of the TechSafe Schools Program and founder of Americans for Responsible Technology.
Julian Gresser, international attorney, professional negotiator, inventor, and former Professor at Harvard Law School is a principal at the law firm of Swankin and Turner and co-founder of the Broadband International Legal Action Network (BBILAN).
Joshua Hart is Director of StopSmartMeters.org, an advocacy, media outreach, and direct action network providing activism consultation and advice to groups who are fighting the wireless ‘smart’ meter assault.
Nina Beety is an investigative writer and public advocate on the environment and wireless radiation hazards, working for policy changes, and a disability rights advocate. Her reports for public officials on Smart/AMI meters are on her website www.smartmeterharm.org. She lives in California.
Eric Windheim is a Certified Electromagnetic Radiation Specialist, Certified Building Biology Environmental Consultant, and Radio Frequency Safety Officer based in Sacramento, CA. WindheimEMFSolutions.com
Jennifer Andree is a wife, mother, nurse, veteran, and a victim of Smart Meter radiation exposure.
WASHINGTON (Reuters) – The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has raised significant concerns about a plan to use spectrum for 5G wireless networks on aviation safety and is planning to issue a formal warning about the issue, according to sources and a letter seen by Reuters.
The aviation industry has voiced alarm about the plan to use C-Band spectrum for more than a year. Network carriers are expected to begin using the spectrum starting Dec. 5 starting in 46 markets.
FAA Deputy Administrator Bradley Mims in a previously unreported Oct. 6 letter said the agency shares “the deep concern about the potential impact to aviation safety resulting from interference to radar altimeter performance from 5G network operations in the C band.”
An FAA spokeswoman said Friday it “continues to engage with other agencies so that aviation and the newest generation of 5G cellular technology can safely coexist.”
The Federal Communications Commission said Friday it remains committed to ensuring air safety as the agency’s successful track record demonstrates, while moving forward with the deployment of new technologies that support American business and consumer needs.”
The FAA held a lengthy Oct. 14 meeting with the aviation industry on the issue. FAA and FCC officials have held numerous discussions about the issue, the sources said.
The FAA is planning to soon issue a Special Airworthiness Information Bulletin and an airworthiness directive about the issue, two officials told Reuters, confirming a Wall Street Journal report.
The aerospace and airline sector met with the FCC in August https://ecfsapi.fcc.gov/file/1081157361951/Aviation%20and%20Aerospace%20Ex%20parte%20Notice%20Aug%206%202021%20w%20OET%20WTB%20IB.pdf, warning without changes “major disruptions to use of the National Airspace System can be expected from the rollout of 5G” and added the FAA will be forced to “drastically reduce aviation operational capacity.”
Wireless trade group CTIA said Friday 5G networks can safely use C-band spectrum “without causing harmful interference to aviation equipment,” and cited numerous active 5G networks using this spectrum band in 40 countries… Any delay in activating this spectrum risks America’s competitiveness.”
One longer-term solution is retrofitting some altimeters with “out-of-band filters,” but it would likely take years and “many thousands of civil aircraft are likely to be impacted, the aviation industry said.
(Reporting by David Shepardson)
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit court ruled the Federal Communications Commission failed to provide a reasoned explanation for its determination that its current guidelines adequately protect against harmful effects of exposure to radiofrequency radiation.
This is an historic win. The FCC will have to re-open the proceeding and for the first time meaningfully and responsibly confront the vast amount of scientific and medical evidence showing that current guidelines do not adequately protect health and the environment.
The court’s decision continued to say:
“…the FCC completely failed to acknowledge, let alone respond to, comments concerning the impact of RF radiation on the environment…The record contains substantive evidence of potential environmental harms.”
The petitioners in the case filed 11,000 pages of evidence of harm from 5G and wireless technology which the FCC ignored, including evidence of already existing widespread sickness. This historic case was filed by CHD on Feb. 2, 2020. The case challenged the agency’s decision not to review its 25-year-old radio-frequency emissions (RF) guidelines which regulate the radiation emitted by wireless technology devices (such as cell phones and iPads) and infrastructure (cell towers, Wi-Fi and smart-meters), and to promulgate biologically and evidence-based guidelines that adequately protect public health.
CHD’s lawsuit was filed in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. However it was transferred to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit where it was joined with a similar lawsuit filed by the Environmental Health Trust and Consumers for Safe Cell Phones. The main brief and the reply brief were filed jointly by all petitioners.