Lawsuit Against the FCC
Your Support is Needed Now
Please help support The Environmental Health Trust and a coalition of other commentators file a court appeal challenging the FCC’s order terminating its evaluation of the adequacy of FCC RF radiation limits.
Despite reams of scientific evidence showing serious biological effects at levels far below the existing FCC RF limits and evidence given by numerous individuals injured by RF, the FCC says RF limits established in the 1990’s are adequate to protect the public from today’s technologies and the new technologies being developed for widespread deployment across the nation.
The deadline for a legal challenge is February 3, 2020.
We have to raise $100,000 by February 3 to fund the first step in the lawsuit. A generous anonymous donor has pledged $50,000, providing that The Environmental Health Trust can secure matching donations. Please donate as generously as you are able.
Please make sure you note on the check specifically that the money is for the FCC appeal.
Checks payable to the Environmental Health Trust
- Mail to Environmental Health Trust PO Box 58 , Teton Village WY 83025
- FedEx or UPS please use this address Environmental Health Trust at 7100 N. Rachael Way, Teton Village WY 83025
Paypal Donations also can be made by at this link
More Information on the FCC Item
In December 2019, the FCC released an item stating they decline to update the US radio frequency (RF) human exposure limits despite scientific public health organizations’ arguments that the existing limits are 23 years old and outdated, not protective of children, and should be tightened in light of recent US government research findings that associated radio frequency with cancer and DNA damage. To read the over 1,000 submissions ignored by the FCC see Dockets 13-84 and 03-137.
This is online at https://ehtrust.org/action-alert-lawsuit-against-the-fcc/
Town of Rothesay, N.B. votes against installing smart meters at homes
At an Energy and Utilities Board (EUB) hearing in Saint John, NB Power is seeking permission to spend 92 million dollars to outfit homes with smart meters or AMI – advanced metering infrastructure.
The Town of Rothesay was asked to consider offering a letter of support.
Mayor Nancy Grant said NB Power sent a package of information to her in the middle of last week, just prior to a deadline for items to be included in a town council meeting on Monday, adding that councillors only saw the materials on the weekend.
Councillors were asked to vote on the request the same day the EUB hearings began.
he request for support was defeated unanimously, although Grant said she doesn’t believe council is necessarily opposed to smart meters.
“This smart metering is not easy for lay-people to understand,” Grant began. “And I think the councillors simply felt that they hadn’t had the time to be able to discuss this and ask questions. It is a very expensive decision.”
Grant said it would have been “much appreciated” for council to have been given the information well in advance, allowing time for discussion, questions or even a presentation from NB Power itself.
“(Council) felt like they didn’t have enough information to support the application,” Grant Said.
NB Power said its smart meter plan would provide a net benefit to New Brunswickers of $31.1 million.
The EUB hearings are expected to continue until next Wednesday.
In the meantime, a spokesperson for the neighbouring Town of Quispamsis said NB Power has yet to make similar request to that community.
Sickness from 5G Cell Towers | Technology is Killing Us Slowly
Director of Financial Services Cheryl Tkachuk explained to council the new meters send readings remotely via cell-phone text. Allowing someone to keep their old meter would complicate this streamlined process.
“We would still have to have someone go there to read the meter,” Director of Financial Services Cheryl Tkachuk told council.
“That means we’d have to have a vehicle drive there, we’d have to have the personnel.”
The woman’s request has been referred to the financial services department.
On Twitter: @alisandstrom
Utilities had no intention to save the consumer money on their electric bills. It is always the bottom line for them not us. When they rolled out the not so smart death traps their propaganda campaign highlighted a savings for us, the customer. All we have gotten is ongoing increases in our bills. Why do people continue to ignore those who are warning the public of the health dangers from exposure to pulses radio waves? It is urgent we stand up for ourselves because the government does not have our backs to stop this public health hazard. So on top of them breaking their promises to save us money; we are being exposed to unhealthy technology WHILE THE UTILITIES ARE MAKING MONEY!!…..…Sandaura
Most utilities aren’t getting full value from smart meters, report warns
- Most utilities are missing the opportunity offered by smart meters to help customers conserve energy, according to new research from the American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy (ACEEE).
- ACEEE surveyed 52 utilities about their smart meter programs and six use cases, from time of use (TOU) rates to conservation voltage reduction (CVR). There are close to 100 million smart meters on the U.S. electric grid today, costing billions of dollars to install.
- Failure to optimize advanced metering infrastructure (AMI) investments could lead regulators to deny cost recovery and endanger future investments, experts say. Of utilities surveyed, ACEEE concluded only Portland General Electric uses smart meters to their fullest energy-saving capabilities.
READ FULL ARTICLE AT:
JERRY FLYNN LETTER
Subject: Prime Minister Justin Trudeau must be told that Industry’s man-made radiation causes disease epidemics and death.
Jan. 5, 2020
Dear Prime Minister Justin Trudeau,
If your Chief of Staff understood today’s surreal but unprecedented danger that now literally threatens Canada’s entire population, she would warn you of what the electric power generation, and wireless and telecom industries are doing to Canada’s entire population, especially to children (of which you have three) and pregnant women.
Prime Minister Justin Trudeau needs to know what other countries are doing to protect their children from wireless technology in schools: France, Belgium, Spain, Canada, European Parliament, Australia, New Zealand, Italy, Finland, Israel, Switzerland, Germany, Austria, India, Russia, European Environment Agency, Singapore, United Kingdom, Cyprus, Taiwan, Namibia, Turkey, Greece, Chile, Ireland, Denmark, Tanzania, United States (see the actions taken by many individual states). https://phpa.health.maryland.gov/OEHFP/EH/Shared%20Documents/CEHPAC/CEHPAC%20Dec%2013%20Comments%20Part%204.pdf
Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and Justin Trudeau, the parent, also need to know other information in the above link which, we can only presume, has been kept from you, e.g.:
· Schools worldwide removing Wi-Fi/taking action (Pg. 49)
· Teacher unions and parent teacher organizations (Pg. 51)
· Doctors and scientists appeal for stricter wireless technology regulation (Pg. 55)
· Medical doctors and public health organizations – worldwide (Pg. 66)
· Letters by medical doctors to schools on wireless installations in schools (Pg. 80)
· Medical associations / organizations / agencies speak out on the hazards of wireless radio frequency fields (Pg. 82)
· International scientists /organizations / health agencies (Pg. 87)
· Minimize health risks from electronic devices (Pg. 100)
· The U.S. National Toxicology Program RF Carcinogenicity Research Study (Pg. 102)
· U.S. Air Force study in the 1980s showed low-intensity microwave radiation (4-10
times lower than was used in the above NTP study) developed cancer in male rates. (Pg. 116)
· No testing for safety was ever done on any wireless products (Pg. 119)
· Safe schools 2012 (Pg. 126)
· Warnings from international doctor societies / associations (Pg. 144)
· Warnings from Russian scientists – the health of following generations is in danger (Pg. 147)
· Additional educational information (Pg. 150)
· Studies that show Wi-Fi and devices health effects (Pg. 176)
· Laptop computers and Wi-Fi decreases human sperm motility and increases sperm DNA fragmentation. (Pg. 250)
· Wi-Fi technology – an uncontrolled global experiment on the health of mankind. (Pg. 271)
Surely, Canada’s unsuspecting and defenseless children deserve better than this? As do your own children, Mr. Prime Minister.
J.G. Flynn, Captain (retired)
Bowser, B.C., V0R 1G0
author of “Hidden Dangers – 5G” available from Amazon.com
By B.N. Frank
There’s a song, “Does My Ring Burn Your Finger?” that has nothing to do with metallic jewelry absorbing cell phone and WiFi radiation into the body. Regardless, research says it can and by a considerable amount. The Federal Communication (FCC) has even acknowledged this possibility, made inquiries about it, but has not informed the public. So now I can’t get that song out of my head and I’m really glad that I had my mercury fillings replaced years ago.
READ FULL ARTICLE AT:
The health impacts of cell towers
How are cell towers similar to DDT, an insecticide infamous for its environmental impacts? It’s a good question. On Dec. 8, about 90 local residents asked this question and many more at an event to explore the health and environmental impacts of wireless technology. As new cell towers are being proposed in the area, interest was high, with standing-room only in the Point Reyes Community Presbyterian Church.
The event was sponsored by the West Marin Alliance for Human and Environmental Health, the Point Reyes Coalition for SafeTech and the Ecological Options Network. I spoke alongside Dr. Madga Havas from Canada and Ellie Marks of the California Brain Tumor Association.
I am a physician who has studied and developed policies for environmental toxins for over 25 years. When I learned of a proposal to place a cell tower on my daughter’s school 10 years ago, I dove into the research. What I learned is that wireless technology and infrastructure is a broad environmental and human toxin. We use and are increasingly surrounded by these devices: cell phones, laptops, “smart” watches, “smart” meters and internet routers. Unfortunately, we are told these devices are safe, that we do not really know if there is harm or that the research is inconclusive. Myself and over 250 expert scientists who have looked at this issue conclude the opposite.
To start with, the standard set by the Federal Communications Commission is based only on a single impact: heating of the tissues. This is like a cooking standard, and it ignores other biological effects. Nature and human biology are much more complex than technology. Humans evolved over millions of years in an environment with extremely low electromagnetic radiation. Our bodies use very tiny electrical signals that communicate within a labyrinth of molecules which are critical to the proper development of a fetus and to the healthy functioning of an adult.
In medical school, I learned about only a fraction of the thousands of dizzying interactions within and between cells that regulate reproduction, energy metabolism, the immune system, the gut, the brain and the nervous system. I learned that biology is both intricate and fragile, like a symphonic orchestra in which every instrument must be played perfectly. In studying toxic exposures, I learned that there can be different mechanisms at work that cause harm to our cells and biology.
One of these mechanisms is oxidation, which, like rust, causes aging and the breakdown of DNA, proteins, lipids and other critical molecules. The insecticide DDT causes oxidation, and antioxidants we consume counter this effect. The effect of oxidation on cells has been well studied; scientific literature connects oxidative cellular harm to inflammation and human disease. This mechanism does not involve heat injury.
When non-ionizing electromagnetic radiation is emitted from wireless devices, it passes through us and is variably absorbed in our bodies. The radiation is absorbed by water and blocked by metal. Of 100 peer-reviewed articles on radio frequency radiation and oxidation, 93 studies found a positive result, or resulting damage to DNA, lipids and proteins. This is not a thermal effect; it is a biological effect.
Dozens of studies have linked wireless radiation to sperm, ovarian and embryo harm, and to miscarriage. Neurologic injury is also a worry because studies show damage to nerve cells, the alteration of neurotransmitter levels, the opening of the blood-brain barrier (with large epidemiologic studies indicating memory impairment), behavioral changes and an increase in brain cancer.
Addiction to and the overuse of wireless devices is especially problematic for children. Six studies have demonstrated brain shrinkage—in white and grey matter—in those addicted to electronic devices. A new article in the Journal of the American Medical Association Pediatrics showed evidence of microstructural brain changes and brain shrinkage in children age 3 to 5 years who use an electronic device more than one hour a day.
Studies on cell towers show an increase in cancer in those living within 1,500 feet of towers; other studies show an alteration in stress hormones and blood abnormalities. A significant percentage of people also report non-specific or vague health symptoms, including headaches, fatigue, dizziness, nausea and insomnia when living close to cell towers. Electro-sensitivity is a real disease and more people—from 3 to 18 percent—are reporting vague symptoms when they use wireless devices.
Wireless radiation can also affect the health, behavior and migration of animals. Bees appear particularly sensitive, and plants and trees are also adversely affected. Precaution on all fronts is needed with the placement of cell towers, as the radiation they emit is constant. Once a large cell tower is in place, 5G small cells will follow. Cell towers become a permanent Trojan horse.
Cindy Russell, a plastic surgeon practicing in Mountain View, is the executive director of Physicians for Safe Technology. For more information, visit MDSafeTech.org.