An Act relative to advanced metering infrastructure in the Commonwealth 

An Act relative to advanced metering infrastructure in the Commonwealth 

The hearing is virtual, we have to register to speak by the deadline on Friday at 5 pm by filling out a form
Hearing Details – Joint Committee on Telecommunications, Utilities and Energy (malegislature.gov)

H.3309 An Act relative to advanced metering infrastructure in the Commonwealth

ndividuals who wish to testify virtually may register to do so by filling out this form by 5:00 p.m. on Friday, July 23rd. Once registered, you will receive further instruction on how to participate virtually. 

Written testimony can be submitted via email to Magda Garncarz at magdalena.garncarz@mahouse.gov and Sam Anderson at samuel.anderson@masenate.gov. The deadline to submit written testimony is Wednesday, July 28, 2021 by 5:00 p.m. When submitting written testimony, please use the following document title format:  

Bill# – Organization Name – Support/Oppose 

Example: H1234 – TUE Committee – Support 

Those who do not plan to testify but want to watch the public hearing may view the live stream under the Hearings & Events section of the [malegislature.gov/events] legislative website. 

You may contact committee staff with any questions by emailing magdalena.garncarz@mahouse.gov or samuel.anderson@masenate.gov.  

Nearly a year later, Pittsfield cell tower lawsuit awaits decision on appeal

Nearly a year later, Pittsfield cell tower lawsuit awaits decision on appeal

PITTSFIELD — A year ago, residents of the Alma Street neighborhood hoped to win a judgment in Berkshire Superior Court that might rewind the clock on a newly built cell tower.

They lost that case.

“The Abutters — greatly outmatched by Verizon’s vast wealth and resources — should not suffer the loss of property values or cherished characteristics of their residential neighborhoods …”

— Legal brief filed to the Massachusetts Appeals Court by attorney Patricia A. DeJuneas

For much of the past year, plaintiffs in that 2020 lawsuit against the city’s Zoning Board of Appeals and Verizon Wireless shifted their focus, pressing the City Council and Board of Health to respond to concerns about the tower’s potential health impact, while also calling for better outreach to abutters about projects.

Meantime, the legal case remained on its own track before the Massachusetts Appeals Court, with a decision now closer after a key filing.

In a recent brief, lawyers for the city and Verizon say that the lower-court judge was right to dismiss the complaint ahead of trial.

The crux of the case: Did the city fail, in 2017, to provide proper notice to abutters, as required by state law, that it was considering a special permit for the tower?

Diane and Paul Dalton were plaintiffs in the lawsuit filed in 2020 over the creation of a Verizon Wireless cell tower at the top of their residential street in south Pittsfield. The case now is before the Massachusetts Appeals Court.EAGLE FILE PHOTOEAGLE FILE PHOTO

The plaintiffs submitted affidavits to the lower court saying they did not get mailed notices. On appeal, their attorney, Patricia A. DeJuneas, argues that Judge Douglas H. Wilkins was wrong to grant an order of summary judgment in favor of the city and Verizon, as he did Aug. 13, 2020.

“There is a genuine issue of disputed fact as to whether the ZBA mailed the required notices to the Abutters, the Abutters lacked actual knowledge,” she wrote in her appeals brief June 7. Because of that factual dispute, DeJuneas argues, the case should have gone to trial.

The Berkshire judge acknowledged that the affidavits from residents raised questions about whether full notice was provided to abutters — those living within 300 feet of the tower project. But, in his decision, Wilkins said the neighbors’ complaint had come too late, long after the 90-day appeal period on the ZBA decision.

Original plaintiffs, defendants

The original plaintiffs in the case are Paul Dalton, Diana Wallett Dalton, Mark Markham, Angelika Markham, Aimee Erskine, William Coe, Todd Storti, Russell Holmes, Susan Holmes, Alison Ambrose, Dennis Desnoyers and Michael Goodrich.

In addition to the Pittsfield Zoning Board of Appeals and Verizon Wireless, the original defendants included ZBA board members Albert Ingegni III, Thomas Goggins, John Fitzgerald, Miriam Maduro and Esther Bolen.

The 2020 complaint also named Farley White South St. LLC, owner of the 877 South St. property on which the tower sits.

The Plaintiffs did not bring this case in timely fashion and, therefore, the court must dismiss the complaint,” Wilkins wrote.

Support our journalism. Subscribe today. →

For the plaintiffs, DeJuneas argued that state law says notice “shall” be provided by mail.

“It means that the ZBA had no choice but to comply with each of the three forms of statutory notice,” she wrote.

And if that is established to have been a failure, then the 90-day appeals period should have started when neighbors did become aware of the tower decision: when trucks rolled up their streets last spring.

“Where their residential properties and homes are at stake, the Abutters — greatly outmatched by Verizon’s vast wealth and resources — should not suffer the loss of property values or cherished characteristics of their residential neighborhoods,” the brief states, “simply because the ZBA violated its statutory obligation to mail notices of the hearing, decision, and extension.”

One neighborhood leader, Courtney Gilardi, says she is mystified about the notion of something not amounting to a “complete failure” of notice.

“To me, notification means people are notified — and they know about something,” said Gilardi, who is not an abutter and not a plaintiff.

Expanding, ensuring notice to abutters

The Pittsfield neighborhood that rallied to fight the Verizon Wireless cell tower off South Street, which began operating in September, pressed the City Council this past year to expand the issuance of notices to abutters.

The change would expand the reach of abutter notices from 300 feet to 500 feet. Notices would have to be sent by certified mail for all special permit applications, except in cases involving one-, two-, or three-family homes.

A petition to that effect will be taken up at a public hearing by the Community Development Board at 6 p.m. Tuesday in the City Council chambers. The full council will hold a public hearing on the petition at 6 p.m. Aug. 10 in the City Council chambers.

City’s view

The city and Verizon, in a brief filed July 6, point out, as they did in the case before the Pittsfield court, that at least one abutter received a mailed notice and attended a ZBA hearing. In addition, they provided proof that the tower special permit application was outlined in legal notices in The Eagle and was posted in City Hall.

“There was, at a minimum, substantial compliance with the statute,” the defense brief states. It was filed jointly by Mark J. Esposito of Shatz, Schwartz and Fentin of Springfield, representing Verizon, and Buffy D. Lord of Donovan O’Connor & Dodig of North Adams, representing Pittsfield.

“While Plaintiffs assert that the mailed notice was not received by them, they offer no evidence to dispute that the notice was actually sent,” the two lawyers argue.

 City & Verizon Wireless brief on cell tower appeal
 Appellant’s brief in Pittsfield cell tower case

The defense brief cites a Supreme Judicial Court decision that found that the town of Greenfield had satisfied the notification requirements in a separate case “by evidence that a municipal employee mailed the notice, regardless of whether the notice was received. … Put another way, evidence of non-receipt is not evidence of lack of mailing.”

The lawyers note that lawmakers did not require proof that abutters received notices. If so, they would have ordered that notices be served by Sheriffs’ Office personnel or by certified mail.

Larry Parnass can be reached at lparnass@berkshireeagle.com and 413-588-8341.

https://www.berkshireeagle.com/central_berkshires/nearly-a-year-later-pittsfield-cell-tower-lawsuit-awaits-decision-on-appeal/article_c903f146-e5af-11eb-83e6-cba33a0f3450.html

If you do not want a wireless “smart” meter forced on your home, opt-out programs canceled and disability rights eliminated, please read this email and help this effort. 

Hi All, 

If you do not want a wireless “smart” meter forced on your home, opt-out programs canceled and disability rights eliminated, please read this email and help this effort. 

Safe tech organizations from around the country are coming together to file an amicus brief in a Pennsylvania Supreme Court case challenging a wireless smart meter mandate. While this case addresses a PA law, we believe the court’s decision will have far-reaching implications nationwide and therefore this case is of crucial importance. See below how you can join and help this effort. 

The Case
In 2008, Pennsylvania passed a law requiring the installation of smart meters. The state Public Utility Commission (PaPUC) and the utility company Peco, have argued that the law mandates smart meters, and they have used this interpretation to deny accommodation to those whose health is adversely affected by these meters. In October 2020, the PA Commonwealth Court ruled that the law does not mandate smart meters and encouraged the utility company to offer accommodations to those who do not want these meters. The PA Supreme Court agreed to hear the appeals. Read more about the 2020 court’s decision

Smart Meters’ Harm 
Smart Meters are extremely harmful wireless radiation-emitting sources. both because of their proximity – they are forced on people in their homes – and because of the way they operate:  (1) the data is transmitted by up to 190,000 intense Radio-Frequencies pulses a day. Some pulses exceed even the FCC’s obsolete guidelines. Pulsation was found to be the more bioactive element when it comes to wireless harms. (2) The wireless frequencies are not only transmitted outward, but also enter the home’s electric system, turning the entire house into an antenna. 

The Risk 
The risk posed by this case is significant. If the court accepts the position of the PaPUC and Peco, we believe that industry will push state legislatures around the country to pass similar laws, and any existing opt-out programs and disability accommodations will be eliminated. The timing of the case is especially important, as we have been encountering renewed efforts by utility companies around the country to eliminate the opt-out programs, especially analog meter choice. It is possible that this renewed effort is connected to the recent focus on the deployment of ”Internet of Things” (IoT) networks. Particularly concerning is the push to eliminate all health-based accommodation for people who suffer from wireless radiation health effects, even in their homes, as we see also with OTARD. We must fight back against this assault. 

The Opportunity 
The PA case is a threat, but it is also an opportunity to convince the court of our position and to get a supportive decision from a state supreme court. 

The Amicus Brief
For these reasons, we decided we must file an amicus brief and show the court the widespread scientific and medical acknowledgement of wireless harms and electro-sensitivity / radiation sickness. The amicus effort is led by attorneys Dafna Tachover from Children’s Health Defense, Petra Brokken of Safe Tech Minnesota and PA resident Lexi McKnight.   
How You Can Help: 
Let Us Know of Doctors Who Acknowledge Wireless Harms

Because of the denial of sickness by the PaPUC and the electric company, it is very important that our brief shows widespread acknowledgement of wireless harms by medical doctors. Therefore, we would like to get doctors to join a statement about wireless harms that we will file with the amicus brief. If you know of doctors (MDs and DOs) who recognize wireless harms, please provide us with their information by filling out this form
Join the Amicus Brief 

We all must come together to make this amicus brief effort successful. The more organizations that join, the greater the impact. Both incorporated and unincorporated organizations are eligible. To join, please send an email to: PA.Amicus@childrenshealthdefense.org or fill out this form.  We are working on a tight deadline and need to hear from you no later than August 10. 
Please Contribute

The cost of the amicus brief is estimated at $30,000. Please support CHD’s ongoing commitment to 5G and wireless harms issue and the lead it has taken on the legal front by making a donation
We hope you join this important effort and share this email with others. 

Thank you,  
 Dafna


 
Further Information About the PA Case

In 2008, Pennsylvania passed a law requiring the installation of smart meters within 15 years. The state Public Utility Commission (PaPUC) and the utility companies argue that the law mandates smart meters.

The PaPUC has consistently interpreted “Act 129” (codified at 66 Pa. C.S. §2807) to require that all electric utility customers have and accept installation and use of a smart meter at their home. It has routinely rejected requests by individuals who object to these meters and does not allow for accommodations for those who may be harmed by them.

The PaPUC and the utility companies now claim that they do offer “accommodation” whereby the meter can be installed on the property somewhere other than an exterior wall and somewhat distant from the building. There is no opportunity, however, for a utility customer to entirely “opt out” of having a smart meter on the property.

Many (about 100) individuals have requested accommodation, but their requests have been denied by the PaPUC. Four individuals have challenged the PaPUC decisions rejecting their requests to opt out. The other requests in front of the PaPUC were stayed until a final decision in these four cases. In October of 2020, the Commonwealth Court affirmed the PaPUC decision in part and reversed it in part.

The Commonwealth Court decision was appealed to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, which agreed to hear a select few issues raised in the petitions for appeal by the PaPUC and Peco and one issue from the cross-petition made by the consumers that desire an opt out. 

SPACEX TO BEGIN WORLDWIDE SERVICE IN AUGUST On June 29, 2021

     To forward this newsletter via social media, copy and paste this link:https://www.cellphonetaskforce.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/SpaceX-to-Begin-Worldwide-Service-in-August.pdf 

SPACEX TO BEGIN WORLDWIDE SERVICE IN AUGUST On June 29, 2021, Elon Musk spoke at the Mobile World Congress held in Barcelona, Spain. He said SpaceX presently has about 70,000 active beta testers of the Starlink satellites in 12 countries, and that full, global commercial service will begin in August. Beginning next month, anyone who purchases a user terminal for $500 and pays the $100 per month subscription fee will have access to high-speed internet by satellite from their home or vehicle anywhere in the world except the polar regions. More than half a million people have already put down a deposit.

In his talk, Musk revealed that the solar array for each satellite generates more than 3,000 watts of actual power. It is these solar arrays that are disturbing both visual and infrared astronomy worldwide. And it is the radiation of (so far) more than 5 megawatts of combined power, focused into (ultimately) millions of powerful beams, that is radically disturbing the electromagnetic environment that we live in, that we evolved in, that surrounds and nurtures us, and that generates the electricity that runs through our veins, guiding our growth, health and life.

Musk also spoke about the gigantic Starship that SpaceX has built, which will be able to lift 150 tons into orbit, that he plans to use to build a base on the Moon and a city on Mars, and that will be ready for its first test launch in just a few months.

He also spoke about what drives him. His goal with SpaceX, he said, is “to extend consciousness beyond earth.” His goal with Tesla, he said, is “to show that life is good on earth, with sustainable energy.” And his goal with his newest company, Neuralink, he said, is “long-term AI/human symbiosis.”
Musk does not seem to know that instead of extending consciousness, he is destroying it; that instead of decreasing the use of fossil fuels, he is consuming phenomenal amounts of them launching his rockets on a soon-to-be daily basis. And he is clueless about radiation. When asked, back in February, whether cell phones are dangerous, he said: “If I had a helmet of cell phones strapped around my head and around my nuts, I would not worry… If you had a helmet that was made of cell phones, you would be fine.” Musk’s comments on radiation begin at minute 1:00 of this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gvbgGUgADAE

I have been receiving inquiries for the past couple of weeks that indicate to me that anxiety levels may be increasing globally. Please contact me to report any changes (or not) in your physical or emotional well-being.
WE HAVE MET THE ENEMY AND IT IS US
A heartbreaking video shows what happened recently to all the bees in a hive in Eagle, Idaho within one month of a cell tower being erected nearby:
https://radiationdangers.com/2021/06/11/all-bees-dead-after-cell-tower-activated-in-eagle-idaho-video. Who is doing this to the world? We are. Who can stop doing this to the world? We can.

A new survey by Deloitte found that the average American household contains 25 different wireless devices.

There are smart phones, iPads, Kindles, wifi modems and routers, range extenders, wireless computers, wireless printers, wireless keyboards, wireless mice, wireless speakers, wireless headphones and earpieces, wireless garage door openers, wireless door locks, wireless doorbells, wireless baby monitors, wireless surveillance cameras, wifi video cameras, wifi digital photo frames, smart thermometers, smart thermostats, smart yoga mats, smart indoor lighting, smart security systems, voice controllers, gesture controllers, smart buttons, smart alarm clocks, smart air quality monitors, smart smoke and carbon monoxide detectors, smart navigation systems, connected exercise machines, fitness trackers, sleep trackers, location trackers, blood pressure monitors, heart rate monitors, smart appliances, controllers of smart appliances, ibeacons for home automation, smart ovens, smart irrigation systems, wireless garden sensors, Click and Grow Herb Gardens, smart grill thermometers, smart sprinkler controllers, smart air conditioners, smart TVs, video streaming devices for TVs, wireless gaming consoles, wireless leak detectors, smart watches, smart bracelets, smart air purifiers, smart home vent systems, remote pet feeders, smart light bulbs, bluetooth-connected espresso machines, and bluetooth-connected cookers.

Every one of these devices emits radiation. Every one of these devices, if you have it on your person or in your home, irradiates you and your family and your pets and your neighbors and the birds and bees and animals outside. This situation did not exist at all just 25 years ago and it must stop if we are to have a world to live in much longer. It is not necessary for a phone, computer or anything else to be wireless instead of wired in order for one to communicate and interact with the world.

All over the world, people are protesting against 5G.

In Switzerlanda popular initiative to amend the federal constitution to make telecommunications companies liable for personal injury and property damage caused by their transmitters gathered 92,515 signatures. The organizers fell just short of the 100,000 signatures that they needed to collect by July 3 in order to put the initiative on the ballot. They have now submitted the initiative as a petition to the Federal Assembly.

In Italy, in May, the Alleanza Italiana Stop 5G delivered 340,000 signatures to the Minister of Health asking for a moratorium on 5G and the Internet of Things, which their petition says is threatening “an electromagnetic overdose that is unprecedented in the history of humanity.” In April, 135 people — politicians, doctors, lawyers, engineers, diplomats, school teachers and others — went on an 18-day hunger strike to protest the proposed relaxation of exposure limits for radio-frequency radiation from 6 V/m to 61 V/m. They ended their hunger strike when Parliament removed the proposed text from consideration. But the proposed amendments to the National Recovery and Resilience Plan are back, and Parliament is set to vote on them. Other amendments would prohibit municipalities from regulating the location of cell towers and antennas, and would eliminate all restrictions on telecommunications facilities in national and regional parks and reserves. All this week, from July 12 to July 16, the Alleanza has been holding a national information and media campaign, together with protests at Parliament.

In Montgomery County, Marylandresidents are mobilizing to oppose the adoption of a new zoning amendment that would allow cell towers to be built on the sidewalk 30 feet from homes without any public hearings and without any notice to residents. The City Council of Tacoma Park has written a letter to the County opposing this amendment.

People all over the world are asking for cell towers not to be built and satellites not to be sent into the sky, yet most are holding cell phones in their hands that cannot work without the towers and satellites, and that are creating the demand that is destroying this planet.

People are always writing to me asking “What can I do?” You can throw away your cell phone and get rid of every wireless device that you own. That is within your power and it is the most effective thing that you can do.   Arthur FirstenbergAuthor, The Invisible Rainbow: A History of Electricity and LifeP.O. Box 6216Santa Fe, NM 87502
USA
phone: +1 505-471-0129arthur@cellphonetaskforce.org
July 15, 2021
The last 21 newsletters, including this one, are available for downloading
and sharing on the
 Newsletters page of the Cellular Phone Task Force.
Some of the newsletters are also available there in
German, Spanish, Italian, and French.
 

TOP STORY

Health impact of new cell tower remains unclear, Pittsfield officials say

Amelia.JPG
Amelia Coco Gilardi, 13, seated at left, addresses the Pittsfield Board of Health about how the operation of a new cellphone tower has affected her health. Behind her is her mother, Courtney Gilardi. Board members Kimberly Loring and Steve Smith listen.LARRY PARNASS — THE BERKSHIRE EAGLE

PITTSFIELD — First came testimony from people who say their lives were upended when a cell tower began transmitting in September.

“You can’t tell me that I’m not having this going on,” said Elaine Ireland of Alma Street, referring to headaches and nausea.

Then came a highly technical spiel on the meaning of a new field survey of that Verizon Wireless tower’s emissions — a report that found radio frequency radiation levels to be, at most, 1.66 percent of what the Federal Communications Commission allows.

What didn’t come: Resolution, after months of debate, about the tower’s safety.

“I think we’re just beginning to get towards an answer,” Dr. Alan Kulberg, the Board of Health chair, said Wednesday night, after more than two hours of deliberations alongside fellow members. “But, I think we’re at the beginning of a process.”

Gina Armstrong, the city’s health director, suggested that despite the low radio frequency readings, the issue of the tower’s possible impact on health in the neighborhood cannot be dismissed.

“There can possibly be some health sensitivity among some people,” Armstrong said. ‘There’s a lot more that can be explored.”

On June 2, the board heard from experts in the field of electromagnetic radiation and human health. Armstrong said the city reached out to those experts again for help in interpreting the findings in a report by V-COMM Telecommunications Engineering of New Jersey. Pittsfield hired that company to test levels of radio frequency radiation in 17 locations around the new tower, located at the rear of 877 South St.

Armstrong said the study, which cost the city $3,725, was needed to check whether FCC limits had been exceeded, giving Pittsfield grounds to complain.

Three experts weighed in with suggestions earlier Wednesday, too late for their ideas to be fully reviewed by health board members.

But, it already is clear that the board is not inclined to take the V-COMM findings as evidence that the tower has had no impact on health in the surrounding neighborhoods.

This was the scene near Alma Street in Pittsfield last July, as workers put the finishing touches on a Verizon Wireless cell tower. This week, members of the city’s Board of Health said that reports of health effects in the neighborhood cannot be dismissed despite a recent field study that showed radio frequency radiation to be well within levels allowed by the Federal Communications Commission. EAGLE FILE PHOTO

Stephanie Koles of V-COMM summarized the survey’s method and result for the board. She said the study, a “standard tower survey,” found the 115-foot tower, set high on a hill overlooking south Pittsfield, to be operating well within what’s allowed.

One test location produced the highest reading, at 1.66 percent of the FCC threshold. That is less than one-fiftieth of the maximum.

“That’s a very small amount of the limit,” she said. “Now we know that it is operating in compliance.”

Koles, a former Verizon Wireless employee, declined to speak to possible health effects of the tower’s operations.

“We are not involved in any biological research or anything like that,” she said.

Experts who have advised the board and residents caution that the exposure levels allowed by the FCC are dated and do not do enough, as wireless technology has advanced, to protect health.

Support our journalism. Subscribe today. →

Brad Gordon, a member of the health board, said he is not ready to give the tower a clean bill of health.

“Yes, there is the FCC measurements, but those will not get you where you need to go in terms of understanding the impact,” he said, a view echoed by Kulberg.

“Perhaps those standards are outmoded. Perhaps those standards don’t take into account health considerations,” said Kulberg, a retired pediatrician. “It should be recognized that we are a board that has taken this seriously and have tried to operate within whatever powers we have.”

Gordon, an attorney, reminded fellow board members that the FCC holds authority over what companies like Verizon Wireless are able to do on towers. The board, he said, is constrained.

“What we want to do is be certain that we are maximizing what we can do,” he said.

Kulberg said health officials should continue to press for state lawmakers to raise the issue of wireless technology and cell tower safety. The board decided this spring to write a letter in support of legislation filed by state Sen. Julian Cyr that would create a commission “to study the impact of electromagnetic (EMR) and radiofrequency (RFR) radiation on consumer protection, public health, and technology in the Commonwealth.”

“Others have more potent standing with those who make the rules,” Kulberg said, suggesting that the next step lies with lawmakers “to bring forth the complaints of the citizens, which might help to establish a different standard [on allowable exposure] in the future.”

No forum. No health study. Did Pittsfield oversell DPH help with cell tower concerns?

PITTSFIELD — People unhappy about a new cell tower in south Pittsfield heard of two promising developments, when health officials took up thei…

Neighborhood accounts

Ireland, the 15 Alma St. resident, told the board that since the tower began operating in September, she has suffered headaches, nausea and ringing in her ears. She said she had not had health issues before.

“Recently, the ringing got so bad that I had to leave my house,” she said. “This has just turned my life completely upside down. Now I have to choose between my health and my house, and I shouldn’t have to do that. It’s really upsetting. I never imagined that something like this could happen.”

Ireland said she believes the tower stands too close to homes and should be relocated. Otherwise, she has no complaint. “I love my cellphone like anyone else and I’m not anti-technology.”

Amelia Coco Gilardi, 13, sat at a microphone before board members as her mother, Courtney Gilardi, stood behind her and displayed the sorts of remedies the family keeps handy to address symptoms of nausea and stomachaches.

“But, they don’t help,” said the teen, who has made appearances before numerous city boards. “Indigestion isn’t the problem, radiation is. No one should have to live like this.”

Another neighbor, carpenter William Coe, said that though he has been fixing up his house at 118 Alma St., he might opt to use it for short-term rentals, or might sell, to get away from exposure to tower transmissions.

“That’s what everyone talks about, getting out,” he said of people in the area, despite their affection for the place. “They’ll bend over backwards to keep the neighborhood together.”

Like Ireland, he said he is experiencing tinnitus, a ringing of the ears.

“When I put on my ear protection, it makes it twice as loud,” he said. “Our neighborhood is going to be a ghost town.”

Larry Parnass can be reached at lparnass@berkshireeagle.com and 413-588-8341.

TOP STORY

TOP STORY

Gina Armstrong, the city’s health director, suggested that despite the low radio frequency readings, the issue of the tower’s possible impact on health in the neighborhood cannot be dismissed.

“There can possibly be some health sensitivity among some people,” Armstrong said. ‘There’s a lot more that can be explored.”

On June 2, the board heard from experts in the field of electromagnetic radiation and human health. Armstrong said the city reached out to those experts again for help in interpreting the findings in a report by V-COMM Telecommunications Engineering of New Jersey. Pittsfield hired that company to test levels of radio frequency radiation in 17 locations around the new tower, located at the rear of 877 South St.

Armstrong said the study, which cost the city $3,725, was needed to check whether FCC limits had been exceeded, giving Pittsfield grounds to complain.

Three experts weighed in with suggestions earlier Wednesday, too late for their ideas to be fully reviewed by health board members.

But, it already is clear that the board is not inclined to take the V-COMM findings as evidence that the tower has had no impact on health in the surrounding neighborhoods.

This was the scene near Alma Street in Pittsfield last July, as workers put the finishing touches on a Verizon Wireless cell tower. This week, members of the city’s Board of Health said that reports of health effects in the neighborhood cannot be dismissed despite a recent field study that showed radio frequency radiation to be well within levels allowed by the Federal Communications Commission. EAGLE FILE PHOTO

Stephanie Koles of V-COMM summarized the survey’s method and result for the board. She said the study, a “standard tower survey,” found the 115-foot tower, set high on a hill overlooking south Pittsfield, to be operating well within what’s allowed.

One test location produced the highest reading, at 1.66 percent of the FCC threshold. That is less than one-fiftieth of the maximum.

“That’s a very small amount of the limit,” she said. “Now we know that it is operating in compliance.”

Koles, a former Verizon Wireless employee, declined to speak to possible health effects of the tower’s operations.

“We are not involved in any biological research or anything like that,” she said.

Experts who have advised the board and residents caution that the exposure levels allowed by the FCC are dated and do not do enough, as wireless technology has advanced, to protect health.

Support our journalism. Subscribe today. →

Brad Gordon, a member of the health board, said he is not ready to give the tower a clean bill of health.

“Yes, there is the FCC measurements, but those will not get you where you need to go in terms of understanding the impact,” he said, a view echoed by Kulberg.

“Perhaps those standards are outmoded. Perhaps those standards don’t take into account health considerations,” said Kulberg, a retired pediatrician. “It should be recognized that we are a board that has taken this seriously and have tried to operate within whatever powers we have.”

Gordon, an attorney, reminded fellow board members that the FCC holds authority over what companies like Verizon Wireless are able to do on towers. The board, he said, is constrained.

“What we want to do is be certain that we are maximizing what we can do,” he said.

Kulberg said health officials should continue to press for state lawmakers to raise the issue of wireless technology and cell tower safety. The board decided this spring to write a letter in support of legislation filed by state Sen. Julian Cyr that would create a commission “to study the impact of electromagnetic (EMR) and radiofrequency (RFR) radiation on consumer protection, public health, and technology in the Commonwealth.”

“Others have more potent standing with those who make the rules,” Kulberg said, suggesting that the next step lies with lawmakers “to bring forth the complaints of the citizens, which might help to establish a different standard [on allowable exposure] in the future.”

No forum. No health study. Did Pittsfield oversell DPH help with cell tower concerns?

PITTSFIELD — People unhappy about a new cell tower in south Pittsfield heard of two promising developments, when health officials took up thei…

Neighborhood accounts

Ireland, the 15 Alma St. resident, told the board that since the tower began operating in September, she has suffered headaches, nausea and ringing in her ears. She said she had not had health issues before.

“Recently, the ringing got so bad that I had to leave my house,” she said. “This has just turned my life completely upside down. Now I have to choose between my health and my house, and I shouldn’t have to do that. It’s really upsetting. I never imagined that something like this could happen.”

Ireland said she believes the tower stands too close to homes and should be relocated. Otherwise, she has no complaint. “I love my cellphone like anyone else and I’m not anti-technology.”

Amelia Coco Gilardi, 13, sat at a microphone before board members as her mother, Courtney Gilardi, stood behind her and displayed the sorts of remedies the family keeps handy to address symptoms of nausea and stomachaches.

“But, they don’t help,” said the teen, who has made appearances before numerous city boards. “Indigestion isn’t the problem, radiation is. No one should have to live like this.”

Another neighbor, carpenter William Coe, said that though he has been fixing up his house at 118 Alma St., he might opt to use it for short-term rentals, or might sell, to get away from exposure to tower transmissions.

“That’s what everyone talks about, getting out,” he said of people in the area, despite their affection for the place. “They’ll bend over backwards to keep the neighborhood together.”

Like Ireland, he said he is experiencing tinnitus, a ringing of the ears.

“When I put on my ear protection, it makes it twice as loud,” he said. “Our neighborhood is going to be a ghost town.”

Larry Parnass can be reached at lparnass@berkshireeagle.com and 413-588-8341.

Debate over cell tower safety returns to Pittsfield health panel, with new report in hand

[This seems to get lost in discussions. Everyone is at risk due to the proximity of smart meters on your homes The radiation exposure proximity is many times higher. There is no escaping this in your home. Please watch this video and see for yourself. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4NTSejgsjTc NO STUDIES ON SMART METERS IMPACT ON HUMANS THERE ARE DELETIRIOUS FREQUENCIES OTHER THAN JUST THE 900MHz.

Links to studies: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17…http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19…https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1…http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18…http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/artic…http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/artic…http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/artic…http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16…http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19…https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed?c…https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed?l…

License

Creative Commons Attribution license (reuse allowed)]

SANDAURA

Debate over cell tower safety returns to Pittsfield health panel, with new report in hand

Ruling goes against Pittsfield cell tower neighbors, but fight might continue (copy) (copy)
The Pittsfield Board of Health will discuss tonight a new study commissioned by the city into radiation levels around the new South Street cell tower. The report found electromagnetic energy produced by the Verizon Wireless tower to be well below limits set by the Federal Communications Commission. Neighbors and some experts question the validity of the FCC limits.EAGLE FILE PHOTO

PITTSFIELD — Though signed, sealed and delivered, a new technical report on a Pittsfield cell tower’s operation isn’t likely to resolve public questions about the 115-foot monopole’s safety.

On Wednesday night, the city’s Board of Health is scheduled to discuss findings in a nine-page study the city commissioned this spring into levels of radio frequency radiation produced by a tower that began operating in September at the rear of an 877 South St. parcel.

Since the Verizon Wireless device powered up, residents of the Alma Street area have questioned its safety and relayed anecdotal accounts of illness to city officials, including the City Council. 

In June, an Edison, N.J., company known as V-COMM Telecommunications Engineering, hired by Health Director Gina Armstrong, sent a technician to test radiation levels at 17 sites around the tower.

That study found that the maximum radio frequency radiation detected during field tests June 10 was 1.66 percent of the Federal Communications Commission standard.

“All measurements were well below the FCC’s public standard, and there were negligible differences observed in the measured exposure levels at various locations while performing the survey,” according to the V-COMM report.

The health board has been grappling with the issue for months. It will discuss those findings at an in-person session that starts at 6 p.m. Wednesday in the basement auditorium of the Berkshire Athenaeum, at 1 Wendell Ave.

Safety debated

On Monday night, nearly four dozen residents of the area listened to an online presentation by Kent A. Chamberlin, head of the Electrical and Computer Engineering Department at the University of New Hampshire. Chamberlain participated in a recent inquiry into the safety of electromagnetic energy for the state of New Hampshire. Download PDF

In an hourlong talk while using slides, Chamberlin shared examples from mainstream scientific journals that have found that close exposure to radio frequency radiation has adverse effects on human health.

In 2020, a University of Washington emeritus professor updated a study in which he summarized findings from studies into the health effects of radio frequency radiation. That researcher, Henry Lai, looked at more than 1,000 studies. He found that 73 percent of 335 papers on the topic of neurological effects from electromagnetic radiation found consequences from exposure; 65 percent of 348 studies on genetics found effects from exposure.

Chamberlin and others contend that the FCC’s limits, cited in the V-COMM study, are outdated and fail to protect people. Chamberlin noted that the FCC levels were established in the 1990s, a decade before the advent of the iPhone and other smartphones that depend on radio frequency radiation.

“We can’t trust those limits because they do not protect us,” said Cecelia Doucette, director of the group Massachusetts for Safe Technology. “We really take issue with how the V-COMM report was done.”

Theodora Scarato, executive director of the nonprofit Environmental Health Trust, told the forum Monday that it is not safe to use the FCC’s allowable levels as a measure of what’s safe.

“It is irrelevant to the symptoms that [people] are reporting,” she said.

Scarato’s nonprofit and the group Children’s Health Defense filed a lawsuit against the FCC last July, claiming that the agency has failed to update its radio frequency safety guidelines in light of new technologies, including 5G. 

The same law that set the FCC standards, the Telecommunications Act of 1996, barred state and local governments from regulating facilities like cell towers on the basis of perceived environmental effects.

Courtney Gilardi, the Alma Street resident who has led neighborhood efforts to examine the safety of the tower, said she believes more and more city officials are acknowledging and supporting residents’ concerns.

“It’s not just an injured neighborhood talking about this,” she said. “The dialogues are continuing, despite these V-COMM results.”

Larry Parnass can be reached at lparnass@berkshireeagle.com and 413-588-8341.

https://www.berkshireeagle.com/news/local/debate-over-cell-tower-safety-returns-to-pittsfield-health-panel-with-new-report-in-hand/article_76192c30-de98-11eb-a248-636d4f43ef52.html

Interfering with the Fires of Life

     To forward this newsletter via social media, copy and paste this link:https://www.cellphonetaskforce.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/Interfering-with-the-Fires-of-Life.pdf 

INTERFERING WITH THE FIRES OF LIFE 
Eating and breathing are the fundamental requirements of life. But the energy for life also requires combustion: the food we eat must combine with the oxygen we breathe. This combustion takes place inside our cells in tiny structures called mitochondria. And within our mitochondria are even tinier structures called electron transport chains. These are the invisible wires that carry the electrons generated by the digestion of our food to the molecules of oxygen supplied by our lungs and blood. Anything that interferes with these tiny electric currents interferes with life.

Wireless technology, by bombarding our cells with complex, pulsed, modulated electromagnetic fields, plays havoc with these currents of life. The whole process of eating, breathing, digesting, and producing energy — the process of living — slows down. We are seeing the consequences everywhere.

Diabetes, Heart Disease and Cancer

When the electron-generating enzymes in our mitochondria cannot keep up with the volume of sugars, fats and proteins being supplied by our digestive system, those components of our diet accumulate in our blood.

The accumulation of sugar in the blood, and its excretion by the kidneys, is called diabetes, a disease that was so rare before 1860 that most doctors never saw a case during their lifetime. Eating sugar, no matter how much, once did not cause diabetes.

The accumulation of fats in the blood, and their deposition in the walls of our arteries, including our coronary arteries, causes heart disease, which was uncommon in 1850 and almost never occurred except in infants and the elderly. Cholesterol, and high-fat diets, once did not cause heart disease. Later, the same changes occurred in zoo animals. Heart disease, for example, did not exist in any animals in the Philadelphia Zoo before 1945. And the first heart attacks ever recorded in zoo animals occurred in 1955. Yet sclerosis of the coronary arteries increased so rapidly that by 1963, over 90 percent of all mammals and 72 percent of all birds that died in the zoo had coronary disease, while 24 percent of the mammals and 10 percent of the birds had had heart attacks. Similar trends were reported from the London Zoo and the Zoo of Antwerp.

When our cells are starved of oxygen because they cannot use all the oxygen we breathe, sometimes they revert to anaerobic (non-oxygen using) metabolism and become cancerous. Cancer, too, was once quite rare. In 1850 it was the 25th most common cause of death in the U.S., behind accidental drowning. Even tobacco smoking, before about 1920, did not cause lung cancer. And during the 1930s and 1940s the rates of both malignant and benign tumors increased dramatically among many families of mammals and birds at the Philadelphia Zoo.

The modern pandemic of obesity is also an electrical disease caused not by overeating and lack of exercise but by the same slowing down of metabolism. Depending on our genetic disposition, our bodies either excrete a large portion of our digested food unused, causing weight loss, or else convert much of the carbohydrates and fats we eat into fatty tissues, causing obesity. Obesity has been steadily increasing, worldwide, not only in humans, but in zoo animals, laboratory animals, pets, farm animals, and wild animals, due to the increase in radiation.

Longevity

Contrary to popular belief, the lengthening of the human life span is not due to modern medicine. It is instead caused by the interference with metabolism that slows down our rate of living. And also contrary to popular belief, this is not a good thing: we are all living slower, sicker, less vital lives. This was observed in 1880 by Dr. George Miller Beard in his book on neurasthenia: “Although [neurasthenia] may tend to prolong life and to protect the system against febrile and inflammatory disease, yet the amount of suffering that [it] cause[s] is enormous.” And the same observation was made by Yasuo Kagawa in 1978 about the remarkable increase in lifespan in Japan: “Extended life expectancy but increased diseases.”

This, too, has been occurring in both humans and animals.

The evidence for what I have summarized so far is set out in detail in chapters of my book, The Invisible Rainbow: A History of Electricity and Life: Chapter 11, “Irritable Heart”; Chapter 12, “The Transformation of Diabetes”; Chapter 13, “Cancer and the Starvation of Life”; and Chapter 14, “Suspended Animation.”

The rest of this newsletter is devoted to additional evidence that has been brought to my attention only recently.

Normal Body Temperature is Decreasing

Dousing the fires of life by interfering with metabolism might be expected to lower the body’s temperature. And it is so.

Two weeks ago, Dr. Mark Thompson, a biochemist in the UK, called my attention to a paper published by a group of doctors at the Stanford University School of Medicine. They pointed out that normal body temperature is no longer 37° Celsius (98.6° Fahrenheit), but that it in fact has been steadily declining for close to 150 years. Their paper, published January 7, 2020, is titled “Decreasing human body temperature in the United States since the Industrial Revolution.” The data they relied on were hundreds of thousands of temperature measurements taken from three databases: the Union Army Veterans of the Civil War (measurement years 1862-1930); the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey I (NHANES) (1971-1975); and the Stanford Translational Research Integrated Database Environment (STRIDE) (2007-2017).

Because these scientists could not figure out what could make body temperature drop so steadily, they attributed it to “physiologic evolution” instead of to an environmental factor.
Another study, this time of the Tsimane’ people in the Bolivian Amazon, came to my attention a few days ago. It is titled “Rapidly declining body temperature in a tropical human population.” Most Tsimane’ villages still have no electricity, but in 2004, many of the villagers acquired cell phones, radios, antennas, light bulbs, and solar panels, and in 2009 a 374-kilometer, 115-kilovolt transmission line was completed through the area. The line runs close to about a 50-kilometer stretch of the Maniqui River, where many of the villages are located. Today there is cell phone service for at least 25 kilometers, and probably farther, in every direction from the only town, San Borja. 16,800 measurements of body temperature were made between 2003 and 2018. During this period of time, normal body temperature plummeted among these people from 37.4° C (99.3° F) to 36.4° C (97.5° F).

I have charted all the data from both these papers on the same graph:   One detail that the Stanford scientists ignored is the sharp drop in body temperature that occurred in the U.S. when it entered World War I in 1917 and that continued through most of the 1920s. This is consistent with the deployment of immensely powerful low frequency radio stations by the United States in order to reach Navy ships overseas during the war, most of which were dismantled or replaced by lower power shortwave stations by the end of the 1920s.

The role of electricity and radio in causing influenza, including the Spanish influenza of 1918, is also explored in my book: Chapter 7, “Acute Electrical Illness”; Chapter 8, “Mystery on the Isle of Wight”; and Chapter 9, “Earth’s Electric Envelope.”

Cancer is Not a Genetic Disease

Additional evidence that cancer is a metabolic mitochondrial disease has also come to my attention recently. Although modern oncologists are wedded to the idea that cancer is caused by genetic mutations caused by environmental toxins, a rival theory, formulated a century ago by Otto Warburg, holds that cancer is a metabolic disease caused by lack of oxygen, and that carcinogens cause cancer by damaging cellular respiration.

Warburg based his hypothesis on the observation that cancer cells do not require oxygen, and this observation is behind the modern method of diagnosing and staging cancer using positron emission tomography, or PET scanning. Because anaerobic metabolism is inefficient and consumes glucose at a tremendous rate, PET scans can easily find tumors in the body by their more rapid uptake of radioactive glucose.

Now, new research by Thomas Seyfried at Boston College has virtually proven that cancer is not caused by genetic mutations. He reviewed evidence from nuclear transfer experiments done in his own and other laboratories in recent years that prove that it is the mitochondria-containing cytoplasm, and not the DNA-containing nucleus, that determines whether a cell is cancerous or not.

When the nucleus of a cancer cell is combined with the cytoplasm of a normal cell, the resulting fused cell grows normally when implanted into an animal. Conversely, when the nucleus of a normal cell is combined with the cytoplasm of a cancer cell, the fused cell forms a tumor when implanted. It is the mitochondria, and not the DNA, that determines whether a cell is cancerous or not.

“In contrast to the somatic mutation theory,” writes Seyfried, “emerging evidence suggests that cancer is a mitochondrial metabolic disease, according to the original theory of Otto Warburg.” Cancer, he says, is caused by lack of oxygen, and DNA mutations are a secondary effect of that lack. “It has been my view,” he writes, “that the plethora of random somatic mutations seen in tumors of almost every kind arise ultimately as downstream effects of insufficient respiration with compensatory fermentation.”

The prevailing, mistaken view of cancer is responsible for the artificial, wrong, and devastating distinction made by scientists, governments, and the World Health Organization between ionizing and non-ionizing radiation. Ionizing radiation is energetic enough to knock electrons off of atoms and create ions, and anything that can ionize your DNA is supposed to be able to cause genetic mutations which is supposed to be the cause of cancer. Therefore, according to the prevailing theory, wavelengths much shorter than light waves (high-energy ultraviolet, X-rays, and gamma rays) are dangerous and wavelengths longer than light waves (infrared, radio waves, and power line radiation) are safe, and can be pulsed, modulated and manipulated, and sent all over the planet with impunity.

Seyfried and his colleagues have virtually proven that this is wrong.  Arthur FirstenbergAuthor, The Invisible Rainbow: A History of Electricity and LifeP.O. Box 6216Santa Fe, NM 87502
USA
phone: +1 505-471-0129arthur@cellphonetaskforce.org
June 30, 2021
The last 20 newsletters, including this one, are available for downloading
and sharing on the
 Newsletters page of the Cellular Phone Task Force.
Some of the newsletters are also available there i

iPhone 12 risks Can a mobile phone interfere with the implantable device a person wears? Apparently, the answer is YES



iPhone 12 risks Can a mobile phone interfere with the implantable device a person wears? Apparently, the answer is YES, according to new research published by the American Heart Association. The researchers conducted two experiments in which they examined how the Apple iPhone 12 Pro Max affected cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs).In the first experiment, they placed the phone on the skin, directly over the position of the cardiac devices implanted in three patients. In the second experiment, the researchers placed the iPhone 12 over implantable cardiac devices that were still in their packaging. In both cases, they monitored the effects of the phone on the devices. The researchers found that the iPhone 12 interfered with the operation of the cardiac implantable electronic devices in all three patients and in over 72% of the boxed equipment. Some smart phones utilise magnets to enable them to charge wirelessly. The Apple iPhone 12 generates a particularly high magnetic because it has more magnets than previous generations of mobile phones. The findings highlight potential risk for iPhone users with implantable cardiac devices. ‘People often put their smartphones in a breast pocket over a device which can be in close proximity to CIEDs. This can lead to asynchronous pacing or disabling of anti-tachy cardic therapies,’ the authors wrote. Fahd Nadeem et al, ‘Magnetic Interference on Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices From Apple iPhone Mag Safe Technology’, https://doi.org/10.1161/JAHA.121.020818Journal of the American Heart Association. 2021;10:e020818What you can do Reduce your exposure to mobile phone radiation. Use our shielded mobile phone cases Use our air tube headsets with no wires for conducting radiation into the head Use our radiation-free equipment for a safe landline phone so you can reduce your use of mobile phones. What else you can do If you found the information above of interest, please forward this email to others. If you’d like more information, you can download our latest issue of EMR and Health here. If you’ve been sent this message by a friend and would like to subscribe to future updates, you can do that here.
EMF Health Summit online You can join the EMF Health Summit 2.0: Navigating EMFs, 5G, Wi-Fi and Our Electromagnetic World. The Summit is online and FREE from July 12-18, 2021. You can see details and register here. Warm regards

Lyn McLean
Director
EMR Australia PL
www.emraustralia.com.au
02 9576 1772

Join Us Virtually for Our Next 2021 Film! The Jackson Hole Environmental Health Trust Film Series Presents “Overload: America’s Toxic Love Story “Watch the film for free from June 23 to June 30, 2021

 Environmental Health Trust info@ehtrust.orgHide
Toschianfoni@verizon.net
Join Us Virtually for Our Next 2021 Film! The Jackson Hole Environmental Health Trust Film Series Presents “Overload: America’s Toxic Love Story “Watch the film for free from June 23 to June 30, 2021

Live Q&A With Film Director Soozie Eastman Wednesday, June 30, 2021, 7:00 p.m. MT
If you registered for “Death By Design” then you DO NOT need to register for “Overload.” We will send the streaming link to you!
Register to Receive the Streaming Link on June 23!WHAT IS “OVERLOAD”?
Before starting a family, Soozie Eastman, daughter of an industrial chemical distributor, embarks on a journey to find out the levels of toxins in her body and discover if there is anything she or anyone else can do to change them. Soozie has just learned that hundreds of synthetic toxins are now found in every baby born in America and the government and chemical corporations are doing little to protect citizens and consumers.
With guidance from world-renowned physicians and environmental leaders, interviews with scientists and politicians, and stories of everyday Americans, Soozie uncovers how we got to be so overloaded with chemicals and explores whether there is anything we can do to take control of our exposure.
Just as she feared, extensive blood testing reveals alarming levels of chemicals such as organophosphates and PBDEs in her body, so she undertakes a rigorous detox regimen of dietary changes, exercise, and informed product choices designed to manage and minimize her toxic body burden. But can she hit the reset button or is it too late?
Register to watch this film at your convenience between June 23-30, 2021, and be amazed by what you learn! Then join us on June 23, 2021, at 7:00 p.m MT for a discussion with the film’s director Soozie Eastman.
As always, we recommend that you watch the film on a wired device!
WHAT: “Overload: America’s Toxic Love Story,” the third film presented in the 2021 Jackson Hole Environmental Health Trust Film Series DATE: Streaming Wednesday, June 23, 2021, to Wednesday, June 30, 2021.LIVE EVENT: Discussion and Q&A With Film Director Soozie Eastman Wednesday, June 30, 2021, 7:00 p.m. MT
REGISTRATION: Registration is free but if did not register previously for our film, then you must register to receive the streaming link. REGISTER TO WATCH “OVERLOAD: AMERICA’S TOXIC LOVE STORY” WATCH THE TRAILERWHAT PEOPLE ARE SAYING
Overload’ leads viewers along an entertaining personal journey, beginning with the startling discovery that we each carry hundreds of synthetic chemical ingredients in our bodies that are commonly used in consumer products, without any effective regulatory oversight or understanding of the consequences. … As conscious consumers, we have the potential collective power to help drive changes that ripple further out into our communities and the industries that are the ultimate source of the problem.”— Charlie Cray, Senior Research Specialist, Greenpeace USA
“Soozie’s personal journey to learn about and reduce her exposure to harmful chemicals in everyday products is illuminating. Overload highlights that we each have the power to make meaningful changes to protect our health. Her experiences also underscore the need for governments and corporations to step up and remove these chemicals from the marketplace.”— Dr. Katie Pelch, Senior Scientist, The Endocrine Disruption Exchange REGISTER TO WATCHABOUT SOOZIE EASTMAN
Soozie Eastman is a documentary filmmaker and short film producer. During her time at Chapman University completing her MFA in producing for television and film, she returned to her hometown of Louisville, KY., to produce and direct “By The Wayside, ”a feature length documentary about the city’s homeless.
The film won several awards and Soozie went on to work under Michael Ovitz (founder CAA, former president ABC/Disney) and Janet Yang (Producer “The Joy Luck Club” and “People vs Larry Flynt”). She was post-production accountant and festival liaison for “Dark Matter,” which premiered at the 2007 Sundance Film Festival. She is currently the executive director of the Louisville Film Society, serves on the Louisville Film Commission, and produces the annual Flyover Film Festival. LEARN MORE ABOUT THE JACKSON HOLE EHT FILM SERIESOUR EVENT IS FREE BUT YOUR SUPPORT IS WELCOME
Environmental Health Trust was created to promote health and prevent disease one person, one community, and one nation at a time. EHT promotes awareness of why and how to practice safe technology and works directly with communities, health and education professionals, and policymakers to understand and mitigate hazards and develop policy changes to reduce risks. DONATE

Olle Johansson on wireless radiation, immunity and health



Olle Johansson on wireless radiation, immunity and health
Does wireless radiation affect a person’s immune system?Absolutely!Are these effects psychosomatic?Absolutely not!Professor Olle Johansson is a world authority on the effects of electromagnetic fields on the immune system and how they can impact on health.He has kindly shared his findings and his experience with us in an online interview that you can see here.In it, we talk about:how electromagnetic fields affect the body – whether a person knows it or notelectromagnetic hypersensitivity and how it’s often causedthe importance of reducing exposure, especially for childrenwhat you can do to protect yourself and your familyhow you can boost your immune systemthe effects of wireless radiation on beesthe digital detox trendthe need to support Professor Johansson’s important work.We also suggested an exercise that we’re inviting you to participate in and let us know your feedback – more on that below.More about Professor JohanssonAssociate Professor Johansson (retired) was head of The Experimental Dermatology Unit in the Department of Neuroscience at the Karolinska Institute in Sweden.He was also previously at the Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, Sweden, and, at these two world-famous academic institutions, he served as an where he was assistant professor, associate professor, guest professor and adjunct professor, in basic and applied neuroscience.He has published over 800 scientific papers.You can read more about his credentials hereHow you can support his workProfessor Johansson is seeking funds for ongoing research projects. You can read about and, if you like, support this work hereWhat you can doTry this exercise and please let us know your feedback.Reduce your exposure and your children’s exposure to wireless radiation as much as you can for a few days (or, better, a week). For example:move your mobile phone away from your beddon’t hold your phone against your head or body while it’s ONleave your mobile phone at homekeep device-free.Do you notice any changes in the way you feel? Did you notice any changes in your children? Please let us know about them.What else you can doIf you found the information above of interest, please forward this email to others.If you’d like more information, you can download our latest issue of EMR and Health here.If you’ve been sent this message by a friend and would like to subscribe to future updates, you can do that here.How else we can help you
You will find lots of information about how to measure and reduce your exposure on our website.If you’d like information about a specific problem you have and can’t find it on our website, you can book a phone consultation with us to provide you with professional help.
Warm regards

Lyn McLean
Director
EMR Australia PL
www.emraustralia.com.au
02 9576 1772
EMR AustraliaPO Box 4721, Sylvania Waters NSW 2224
AustraliaYou received this email because you signed up on our website or made a purchase from us.Unsubscribe