Protecting the Maryland Public from Harm by Wireless Technology

New document by Ronald M. Powell Ph.D.
Jan. 13th, 2018

If you are writing to our Maryland state legislators about protecting the public from harm by wireless radiation, here is a relatively short document to introduce them to the wireless challenges their constituents are facing. This document can also be used for other jurisdictions.

Ronald M. Powell Ph.D. urges Maryland State Legislators to protect the health of the people of Maryland from the onslaught of wireless radiation. This document addresses the health impacts of radiation from smart meters, cell towers, WiFi in schools, and 5g small cells.  

“The levels of man-made radiofrequency radiation in our environment, including right here in Maryland, are increasing.This increase is caused by the introduction of more and more wireless devices, without an
understanding of the health consequences.”

http://whatis5g.info/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/Protecting-the-Maryland-Public-from-Harm-by-Wireless-Technology.pdf

Kiss Your Child and Fight for Them; Letter from a Mom to FCC about Wireless and Children

Kiss Your Child and Fight for Them; Letter from a Mom to FCC about Wireless and Children

 

The following letter was written by a mom who tragically lost her one-year-old to leukemia. She learned too late that WiFi can potentially be a contributing factor in childhood leukemia.

The mom sent this letter to Commissioner Rosenworcel through the email address the Commissioner set up for the public to report on broadband coverage gaps – loosely interpreted to include other broadband problems.

broadbandfail@fcc.gov.

For more information and instructions on writing your own communication to the FCC opposing 5g and all wireless expansion, please see,  http://whatis5g.info/action/2017/11/not-happy-with-broadband-service-send-email-to-broadbandfailfcc-gov/

To contact your federal representatives, please see, http://whatis5g.info/small-cells/

 

Dear Entrusted Officials,

Raise your hand if your child has died before you. Hug your child if he or she is healthy. 

I write today to share that the choices you make about the environment we call home are far reaching, and that our precious homes must be protected.

RF radiation has never been proven safe for children. Ever. And the FCC wants to break down local barriers to deploy more of it?

RF radiation has been implicated by 400+ peer-reviewed studies as causing biological harms ranging from dizziness, sleeplessness and nausea to DNA damage, a precursor to cancer.

My daughter died before her second birthday of leukemia. How does this happen? As part of a university study, I learned that time in front of a WiFi-enabled computer while pregnant is a variable. 

My daughter’s death leaves my heart in the smallest of pieces. What was the happiest time in my life turned into tragedy the likes of which I couldn’t even imagine. Watching my husband carry her down the service elevator at the hospital to the funeral director’s car, parked back by the dumpster, for a last goodbye, is an image that will haunt me forever. Driving to the funeral parlor for several nights in a row to be with her dead body, while families were enjoying bedtime stories and playing games, is something I wouldn’t wish on anyone. A child’s death will wreck you. 

Please urge further studies of this invisible and very pervasive radiation. Please institute setback laws that protect our children — in our homes and in their schools.

You may think you are on the precipice of a technological heyday. Instead, you may be paving the way to a long, steady, massive health catastrophe. 

Follow other countries who revere their young; they have stripped WiFi radiation from schools and libraries, and are going back to wired connections. I beg you to find the middle ground. I beg you to conduct tests applicable to children and use aggregated exposure models.

For my deceased daughter, for me, for my husband and her brother, think twice before irradiating millions of people because a bunch of telecom titans have sold you a promise that will harm the innocent.

Even if it kills just one, believe me, that’s one too many.


For more information on WiFi in schools, please go to https://ehtrust.org/?s=Wifi+in+schools
For more information about the downsides of 5g and the Internet of Things, please see http://whatis5g.info

Letter from Ronald M. Powell to Montgomery County Council; Tragically, Small Cell Towers are about Life and Death

(Posted by www.whatis5g.info)
Letter from Ronald M. Powell, Ph.D. to the Montgomery County Council, Maryland.
October 31, 2017

To:

Roger Berliner, President
Hans Riemer, Vice President
Montgomery County Council
Montgomery County, Maryland
 
Dear President Berliner and Vice President Riemer,

My thanks to both of you gentlemen for your responses to my earlier email messages opposing small cell towers.  Both of you cited factors of importance when considering the installation of these towers in Montgomery County.  However, I was left uncertain about your own views of small cell towers.  At present, do you favor the installation of small cell towers in Montgomery County, or not?

If you favor installation

If you favor installation, and your goal is limited to maintaining control, at the County level, of the zoning requirements, then I can understand why County officials keep deflecting the health concerns raised by County residents.  Hence the frequent references to the “environmental effects” exclusion in the 1996 Telecommunications Act, which is frequently interpreted to be a “health effects” exclusion:
 
“No State or local government or instrumentality thereof may regulate the placement, construction, and modification of personal wireless service facilities on the basis of the environmental effects of radio frequency emissions to the extent that such facilities comply with the Commission’s regulations concerning such emissions.”

(In the above quotation, the “Commission” is, of course, the Federal Communications Commission.)

If you oppose installation or are undecided

If you oppose installation or are undecided, then please consider the following line of reasoning for countering the supposed health exclusion in the 1996 Telecommunications Act.

Our laws are in conflict

The international biomedical research community has made it quite clear that radiofrequency radiation, and specifically cellular radiofrequency radiation, can harm people in an enormous number of ways.  Most recently the National Institutes of Health linked cellular radiation to brain cancer (glioma) which is usually fatal, and to a nerve cancer (schwannoma) that can be fatal.  That is, the scientific evidence suggests that we must treat radiofrequency radiation, and in particular cellular radiation, not only as dangerous to health generally, but also as a CARCINOGEN that is dangerous to life itself.

So, when a small cell tower is placed “up close and personal” to people, those people must be regarded as under “assault” by a carcinogen. And, there are laws against assault. Further, since that assault can result in death, those people must be considered as under “assault with a deadly weapon”.  That is also against the law.  Furthermore, if any of those people die as the result of that assault, that is “murder”.  Murder is also against the law.

So, it seems fair to ask this question:  Is the 1996 Telecommunications Act so powerful that it overrides the laws against assault, assault with a deadly weapon, and murder? I doubt very much that the authors of the 1996 Telecommunications Act, in their zeal to promote the rapid expansion of cellular technology without prior testing for safety, intended to convey a right to the telecommunications industry to assault, and even kill, people.

If County officials want to protect the public from harm, they need to rally their legal might to resist ALL EFFORTS to install small cell towers in the County, not just because that is the right thing to do, but also because such installation violates multiple existing laws that are reasonably believed to be preeminent.

I would be proud to see Montgomery County take the lead in making this argument against the 1996 Telecommunications Act, which has proved to be an unjust law.

If you don’t believe that cellular radiation is harmful

If you reject the above line of reasoning because you don’t believe that cellular radiation is harmful, then I ask you to consider these questions:

  • On which sources of information are you relying for assurances of safety?  Do those sources have extensive backgrounds in the biological effects of radiofrequency radiation?  Are those sources free from vested interests in cellular communications or other wireless technologies?
  • Are those sources more authoritative on health issues than the International Agency for Research on Cancer of the World Health Organization?  That organization linked radiofrequency radiation, and in particular cellular radiation, to cancer back in 2011?
  • Are those sources more authoritative on health issues than the National Toxicology Program (NTP) at the National Institutes of Health?  The NTP confirmed the link of radiofrequency radiation, and in particular cellular radiation, to cancer in 2016 and to DNA damage more broadly in 2017?  And further findings are due for release in 2018.  These findings are the result of the largest study ($25 million) that the NTP has ever conducted of any toxin.
  • Have you read some of the scientific research literature that connects radiofrequency radiation to biological effects and that has been funded by impartial sources?

If your answer to the last question above is “No”, I hope that you will explore at least some of the vast biomedical research literature that Maryland residents have already submitted to you.

Also, for an excellent online overview of the impact of wireless technology on health, please see the web site of the Environmental Health Trust (https://ehtrust.org/).  This organization is led by Devra Davis, Ph.D., M.P.H. who has had a distinguished career of public service in support of public health.  Dr. Davis was a member of the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change that was named a joint recipient of the Nobel Prize for Peace in 2007.

Who am I?

I am a retired U.S. Government career scientist (Ph.D., Applied Physics, Harvard University, 1975).  During my Government career, I worked for the Executive Office of the President of the United States, the National Science Foundation, and the National Institute of Standards and Technology.  For those organizations, respectively, I addressed Federal research and development program evaluation, energy policy research, and measurement development in support of the electronics and electrical-equipment industries and the biomedical research community.  I currently interact with other scientists and with physicians around the world on the impact of electromagnetic fields on human health.

Thank you for your attention.

Regards,

Ronald M. Powell, Ph.D.

 

Ronald N. Kostoff to Montgomery County Council on Small Cells

Posted by Kate Kheel, Nov. 4th, 2017 

Letter from Ronald N. Kostoff, Ph.D. to the Montgomery County Council on November 1, 2017

Dear Montgomery County Council Members,

I have been informed that Montgomery County is considering approval of the installation of small cell towers throughout the County, including up and down residential streets, starting with Potomac, MD and Germantown, MD.  I would like to offer my perspective on this proposal.

Over the past decade, I have been performing studies on causes and treatments of chronic diseases.  Much of the focus has emphasized identifying the causes of these diseases, and their specific impacts.  The most comprehensive of the studies was a book titled Pervasive Causes of Disease,

https://smartech.gatech.edu/handle/1853/53714

and identified ~800 contributing factors that impacted more than a threshold number of the ~4000 diseases examined.

One of the specific factors I have been examining in detail is non-ionizing radiation.  Earlier this year, I published an invited book chapter on the health impacts of non-ionizing radiation combined with other stimuli, both toxic and non-toxic.  This chapter is attached.

For non-ionizing radiation in the power frequency band (~60Hz) and radiofrequency bands heavily used today (900 Mhz-cell phones and 2.45Ghz-WiFi), the biomedical literature is clear.  Heavy exposure of humans to this radiation for extended periods of time can be lethal, and exposure of test animals to non-ionizing radiation in isolation can be lethal.

As my book chapter shows, when non-ionizing radiation at the above frequencies is combined with other toxic stimuli, there is a strong synergy that results.  In some cases (depending on intensity, frequency, and duration), neither partner to the combination will exhibit effects when used in isolation, but will exhibit highly toxic effects when used in combination.  In most cases, the adverse effects of the combination will be much more highly toxic than the adverse effects of each partner used in isolation.  Thus, non-ionizing radiation in the above frequency bands is not only toxic/lethal in its own right, but it serves as a promoter/enabler/enhancer of the intrinsic toxicity of other stimuli.

For 5G, the proposed frequency band (~3Ghz-30Ghz, and higher) is in the millimeter-wave range, and has had little safety testing done, even in isolation.  There has been no long-term testing, and no testing on these frequencies in combination with other stimuli, which is the real-world condition.

Long-term testing on humans is required for two reasons.  First, latency periods for serious diseases can be measured in decades, in many cases.  For smoking, latency periods between initiation of smoking and lung cancer is between two and three decades, and for other types of cancers, latency times between onset of cause and eventual cancer can range up to five decades.  Latency periods for neurodegenerative diseases, such as Alzheimer’s disease, can be five decades or more, considering the advanced ages at which they occur.  Alarmingly, Hardell has found that even after the relatively short period of a decade of ‘heavy’ cell phone use (~30 min/day), certain types of brain cancers for adults doubled, and for adults who started using cell phones as teenagers, these brain cancer rates quintupled!  One can only imagine the results after two or three decades of ‘heavy’ cell phone use.

Second, animal tests are not adequate.  Animals are different from human beings biologically, and animal tests are usually performed under very controlled conditions, where the non-ionizing radiation is applied either in isolation or with one other toxic stimulus.  Humans experience myriad toxic stimuli in parallel over their lifetime, as I have shown in my book, and the complex combinations of toxic stimuli bear little resemblance to the pristine test conditions applicable to animals.  Allowing 5G cell towers to be constructed with essentially no safety testing having been performed would be the height of irresponsibility!

The usual excuse for inaction on opposition to cell tower construction of any type, including 5G, is the statement from the Telecommunications Act of 1996 that health reasons can not be used as a basis to halt tower construction.  This, in my view, is an abdication of responsibility of elected officials.

Suppose the Federal government passed a law stating that herbicides could be sprayed over populated areas by contractors, and these sprayings could not be opposed for health reasons.  If a local company wanted to initiate daily sprayings of Agent Orange over Montgomery County, would the members of the County Council allow it, despite what the law stated?  Would the residents allow it, despite what the law stated?  I suspect there would be an armed insurrection to block the spraying.  Yet, cell tower developers are proposing to ‘spray’ a highly toxic substance (non-ionizing radiation in RF bands) over Montgomery County, and the decision-makers act as if they have no options.

At some point in this one-sided battle between the wireless technology vendors and the defenseless public, someone has to take a stand.  Let Montgomery County at this time serve as the Waterloo for the 5G onslaught!

Dr. Ronald N. Kostoff

https://smartech.gatech.edu/handle/1853/56646

=======================

[Ronald N. Kostoff, Ph.D. is a Research Affiliate in the School of Public Policy at the Georgia Institute of Technology.  The book chapter that is referenced in his message above was co-authored with Clifford G.Y. Lau and appears in Microwave Effects on DNA and Proteins, edited by C.D. Geddes and published in 2017.  

Vision for a Different Way Forward

Vision for a Different Way Forward

Telecom begs (buys?) government officials – say they need more towers to “meet public demand.”

Laws are enacted to speed the build-out of towers and antennas.

Our rights are diminished, we have less of a say.

Towers crop up and life moves on. 

And the cycle begins once again ad fin-i-tum.

Consumption spirals upward, while the well-being of humans, wildlife, and our precious Earth spirals downward. Profits go up, while quality of life goes down. And many of us are left longing for a taste of the way our soul knows and wants things to be.

The current and aggressive push by the Telecom industry for wireless “small” cells is much like an ambitious start-up company that builds a huge warehouse hoping they will some day “grow into it”. 5g “small” cells are being put in place to “house” the hoped for massive explosion in wireless data that will be generated from the Internet of Things (IoT). Once the infrastructure is established, the sky is the limit for what new gadgets and applications the private sector can dream up to fill the airwaves, collect our data, and dangle before a largely, tech-addicted and uninformed public.

From predictions of Artificial Intelligence surpassing and destroying humans, to health and environmental impacts worsening due to the huge increase in wireless radiation. From cyber attacks on the grid now inevitable, to the exponential increase in electronic waste as every discarded “thing” makes its way to the ranks of e-waste — The future looks bleak.

Can we forge a different path forward? Can we write a different story?  I would like to believe so.  But we will need to approach this from four angles simultaneously:

1. Educate the public about the true costs of 5g and the Internet of Things

The true costs of 5g, and its partner in crime, the IoT, include

  • Health, from the soup of harmful wireless radiation we will be immersed in 24/7, due to “small” cells, and all the Internet connected “things”, devices, appliances, sensors, machines, robots, virtual reality, and artificial intelligence…and let’s not forget microchipped humans and animals.
  • Environment, with the increasing loss of birds, bees, butterflies, and other forms of wildlife
  • Cyber Security, with estimates ranging from $6-11 trillion for the cost of trying to secure an ever changing, and impossible-to-secure IoT
  • Privacy, from every Internet connected “thing,” device, appliance, sensor, machine, robot, virtual reality, artificial intelligence, and microchipped humans and animals, collecting boatloads of our personal data to be shared with marketers, government, and law enforcement
  • Energy consumption, where the footprint from energy needed to produce and run all these wireless IoT products and platforms, will likely exceed the hoped for, and hyped about, energy saving technologies the IoT promises
  • E-waste, much of which is sent to the far East or Africa where it pollutes the air, water, and ground of remote villages, and where workers earn a dismal day’s pay by dismantling our toxic e-waste largely with the use of crude tools or by hand
  • Conflict minerals, which are used in nearly all our technology, and in the last 20 years, have contributed to the death of 5-6 million men, women and children from the Democratic Republic of Congo
  • Effects on our brains and humanity, with suicide rates, depression, anxiety, autism, and ADHD now reaching epidemic proportions due to both the radiation exposure and excessive screen-time use.
  • Ethics – Could something be awry that we are now considering a new human rights law to “remain natural, i.e. ‘merely’ biological and organic”?
  • Job loss, with predictions as high as 50% job loss due to the IoT
  • Decline in property value – would YOU want to buy a house with a cell tower beaming radiation through the bedroom window?

2. Cultivate the sweet point of satiation

There is a three-word phrase from the Hebrew Grace after meals that religious Jews recite after eating a full meal: “V’achalta, v’savata, ou v’rachta,” which roughly translates as “And you shall eat, and you shall be satiated, and you shall bless.”  We must reawaken and cultivate in ourselves the notion of sweet satiation – the place of just enough not one ounce too much, nor one iota too little…but perfectly enough. Then as we go about our days “consuming” food, experiences, relationships, and all that life has to offer, we may feel less of an urge to take more than we need.

3. Redefine “progress”

As we settle into the sweet point of satiation, our notion of progress can then gently find its way from more, faster, bigger and new, to kinder, more abiding, deeper, and more fulfilling.

4. Know there are safer and more wholesome alternatives

We can envision a better tomorrow than what industry is presenting today. Fiber is faster, safer, consumes at least 25 times less energy, and is far more cyber secure than wireless. If we shift to using fiber for the vast majority of our Internet and Telecommunications needs – thus relegating cellphones to short, on-the-go communications, and emergency response where needed – we will be removing or lessening the impacts of almost all the downsides of 5g and the IoT. By so doing, we not only protect ourselves, our families, and our environment, but we will get the added benefit of becoming reacquainted with ourselves, others, and the present moment.

If we stay the course and demand safe technology, industry and government will have no choice but to deliver. And we will once again reclaim our treasured and sacred inheritance of true connection and Presence.

Blog post by Kate Kheel  
September 21st, 2017 

For more information about 5g and the Internet of Things, please visit, http://whatis5g.info
Please also, check out the Facebook page, What is 5g and the Internet of Things, https://www.facebook.com/whatis5g/
and the Facebook group, Responding to 5g and the Internet of Things, https://www.facebook.com/groups/637378223136039/
To sign up for bi weekly news updates about 5g and the IoT, go to, http://whatis5g.info/newsletter-archive/