Radiation-free at end-of-year sales
The advertisements are everywhere. We’re almost at the end of the financial year and the June sales are now in full swing. It’s a good time to buy things for your home or office but, if you, do there are a few things to keep in mind. Don’t forget that many new products in the marketplace emit radiofrequency (wireless) radiation, whether you need them to or not. That’s because so many manufacturers are jumping on the ‘smart’ home bandwagon, building appliances that emit wireless radiation so that they can connect to a WiFi router or a mobile phone. So, whether you’re looking for a fridge or an oven, an air conditioner or a washing machine, a light globe or a children’s toy, there’s a chance that you could be getting a product that could expose you and your family to wireless radiation. So shop carefully! Here are some tips. Look for models of appliances that aren’t yet ‘smart’ – they’re still available; mobile phones that accommodate jacks so you can attach air tube headsets that allow you to use the phone at a distance from your body and reduce your exposure; laptops, PCs and tablets that accommodate ethernet cables (easier than using adapters) so they can be connected to a modem without wireless radiation; TVs that accommodate ethernet cables where the wireless function can be turned off – yes, they’re still available, too. Avoid products with words like ‘smart’, ‘GHz’ or ‘MHz’ on the packaging. Check everything the sales staff tell you – and this is why. Sad story of the airconditioner purchase A young woman planned to purchase an air conditioner. She asked the sales staff for one that didn’t emit radiation and was sold a model that ‘definitely’ didn’t do this. The trouble was that, once it was installed, it did. The sales staff hadn’t known it emitted radiation and neither had the installers. It was only by using our Acoustimeter that the customer found this out for herself. The moral of the story is, don’t rely on the sales staff (who probably won’t know). You’ll need to check with the manufacturers instead. What you can do Invest in our radiation meters so that you can measure the fields of appliances before you purchase them and as they arrive in your home. 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 May 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.
Warm regards

Lyn McLean
EMR Australia PL
02 9576 1772

EMR Australia

PLEASE SHARE WIDELY- Video to Share! Pittsfield MA Board of Health Cell Tower Forum

Thank you to everyone who participated in last night’s meeting!

It was a wonderful example of citizens, experts and public servants coming together to learn about wireless risks and discuss next steps for public safety.

Maximum capacity was indeed reached and we are grateful to Pittsfield Community Television for recording the event.

The cell tower issue was addressed in two segments:Public comments are from 16:35 to 47:40, then other agenda items are discussedCell tower expert presentations, discussion and next steps are from 1:11:48 to 3:20:00

View Video! 

More than a dozen children and adults became ill after a Verizon cell tower was turned on in Pittsfield, MA during the pandemic.

The residents have been asking their local officials to protect them for nearly a year to no avail.

As is the case with most town boards, the Pittsfield Health Director and Board of Health admit they know very little about the biological effects of today’s wireless technology.

So they turned to state-level authorities who offered to join them for a public forum, and to conduct an epidemiological study.

Then the Massachusetts Department of Public Health rescinded both offers.  We are grateful the Pittsfield Board of Health followed through on its promise to still hold a public forum and bring in qualified experts:Paul Heroux, PhD, Professor of Toxicology & Health Effects of Electromagnetism, McGill University
 David Carpenter, MD, Professor, Environmental Health Sciences, University of Albany 
 Sheena Symington, Director, The Electrosensitive Society
 Magda Havas, PhD, EMF Scientist and Professor Emeritus of Trent UniversityPlease share this with your own town’s Board of Health, Select Board/City Councilors, Zoning and Planning Boards, and Legal Council.

For far too long the wireless industry has given our towns disinformation, financial incentives and legal threats to install toxic wireless infrastructure. Our towns deserve to know the facts, risks and legally viable options for safer technology.

Please invite your town, and your loved ones, to learn from the experts brought in to Pittsfield so town-by-town, we can move the needle to safe, fast, sustainable fiber-optic technology — not more toxic wireless. View Video!

5G/EMF/RF Father’s Day Countdown: Real Men Do Not Deny Real Harm From Microwaves, 5G, & RF/EMF

By Patricia Burke

When I was living in Northern California from 2008-2010, the state was rolling out wireless smart utility meters.  I was one of the individuals who became disabled as the result of exposure to the pulsed microwave radiofrequencies.  California held a number of hearings where individuals who were concerned about billing fiascos, privacy, security, cost, green-washing, surveillance, and health damages gave testimony.

I remember the testimony of one father whose young son had been in a serious accident and was being sent home to convalesce and heal . . . and it reminded me that any of us, in this point in time, might believe that smart meters are safe. But our circumstances can change in a moment. Many of us were already losing ground due to lack of sleep and constantly being induced by the frequencies – what would the experience be for a child with a metal plate in the head?

For those of us already recognizing that the meters and infrastructure installations were capable of causing tremendous disruption to normal, healthy brain function, it was a terrible experience to be in the presence of unresponsive, detached, autocratic decision-makers who ignored the early warnings for whatever reason, whether they did not believe what was happening, or didn’t care.

The posture of not believing and/or not caring has grown worse over time, with the unsubstantiated claims and prevailing beliefs that increased wireless telecommunication (including “fixed wireless broadband” and 5G) is safe, sustainable, and necessary. But as the industry spin and surveillance has increased, so has the dawning of reason.

Many mothers, fathers, and children have been recognizing risks, and taking action, throughout the country and around the world, and the numbers continue to increase.  Many communities, neighborhoods, and families are seeking to prioritize wired, rather than wireless options.

Today, we are beginning our countdown to Father’s Day of articles about many of the men involved in the 5G/EMF/RF issue. Our goal is to use storytelling, with a human focus, to help introduce the topic to a wider audience from different perspectives (in a way that does not trigger individuals to stop reading.) Although we frequently reference science, the focus is not about science, per se. 
Most of the articles in this series are by Jennifer Wood and Patricia Burke; many of the commissioned drawings in the series are created by Flo Freshman, who also offers research. We also often employ repetition.  Our hope also is to provide fresh content to the many facebook, twitter, and instagram pages devoted to the RF/EMF issue for those who feel inspired to share the effort.We are grateful to Natural Blaze for their consistent support in publishing articles about this topic. (The archive of past work, including the Mother’s Day and Memorial Day series, is posted here: Patricia Burke Archives – Natural Health News (


Amazon devices will soon automatically share your Internet with neighbors 

Amazon devices will soon automatically share your Internet with neighbors Dan Goodin, Ars Technica, May 29, 2021 If you use Alexa, Echo, or any other Amazon device, you have only 10 days to opt out of an experiment that leaves your personal privacy and security hanging in the balance. On June 8, the merchant, Web host, and entertainment behemoth will automatically enroll the devices in Amazon Sidewalk. The new wireless mesh service will share a small slice of your Internet bandwidth with nearby neighbors who don’t have connectivity and help you to their bandwidth when you don’t have a connection. By default, Amazon devices including Alexa, Echo, Ring, security cams, outdoor lights, motion sensors, and Tile trackers will enroll in the system. And since only a tiny fraction of people take the time to change default settings, that means millions of people will be co-opted into the program whether they know anything about it or not. The Amazon webpage linked above says Sidewalk “is currently only available in the US.” The webpage also states: What is Amazon Sidewalk?Amazon Sidewalk is a shared network that helps devices work better. Operated by Amazon at no charge to customers, Sidewalk can help simplify new device setup, extend the low-bandwidth working range of devices to help find pets or valuables with Tile trackers, and help devices stay online even if they are outside the range of their home wifi. In the future, Sidewalk will support a range of experiences from using Sidewalk-enabled devices, such as smart security and lighting and diagnostics for appliances and tools. How will Amazon Sidewalk impact my personal wireless bandwidth and data usage?The maximum bandwidth of a Sidewalk Bridge to the Sidewalk server is 80Kbps, which is about 1/40th of the bandwidth used to stream a typical high definition video. Today, when you share your Bridge’s connection with Sidewalk, total monthly data used by Sidewalk, per account, is capped at 500MB, which is equivalent to streaming about 10 minutes of high definition video. Why should I participate in Amazon Sidewalk?Amazon Sidewalk helps your devices get connected and stay connected. For example, if your Echo device loses its wifi connection, Sidewalk can simplify reconnecting to your router. For select Ring devices, you can continue to receive motion alerts from your Ring Security Cams and customer support can still troubleshoot problems even if your devices lose their wifi connection. Sidewalk can also extend the working range for your Sidewalk-enabled devices, such as Ring smart lights, pet locators or smart locks, so they can stay connected and continue to work over longer distances. Amazon does not charge any fees to join Sidewalk. Amazon has published a white paper detailing the technical underpinnings and service terms that it says will protect the privacy and security of this bold undertaking. To be fair, the paper is fairly comprehensive, and so far no one has pointed out specific flaws that undermine the encryption or other safeguards being put in place. But there are enough theoretical risks to give users pause.Wireless technologies like Wi-Fi and Bluetooth have a history of being insecure. Remember WEP, the encryption scheme that protected Wi-Fi traffic from being monitored by nearby parties? It was widely used for four years before researchers exposed flaws that made decrypting data relatively easy for attackers. WPA, the technology that replaced WEP, is much more robust, but it also has a checkered history. Bluetooth has had its share of similar vulnerabilities over the years, too, either in the Bluetooth standard or in the way it’s implemented in various products. If industry-standard wireless technologies have such a poor track record, why are we to believe a proprietary wireless scheme will have one that’s any better? The omnipotent juggernautNext, consider the wealth of intimate details Amazon devices are privy to. They see who knocks on our doors, and in some homes they peer into our living rooms. They hear the conversations we’re having with friends and family. They control locks and other security systems in our home. Extending the reach of all this encrypted data to the sidewalk and living rooms of neighbors requires a level of confidence that’s not warranted for a technology that has never seen widespread testing.Last, let’s not forget who’s providing this new way for everyone to share and share alike. As independent privacy researcher Ashkan Soltani puts it: “In addition to capturing everyone’s shopping habits (from and their internet activity (as AWS is one of the most dominant web hosting services)… now they are also effectively becoming a global ISP with a flick of a switch, all without even having to lay a single foot of fiber.” Amazon’s decision to make Sidewalk an opt-out service rather than an opt-in one is also telling. The company knows the only chance of the service gaining critical mass is to turn it on by default, so that’s what it’s doing. Fortunately, turning Sidewalk off is relatively painless. It involves: Opening the Alexa appOpening More and selecting SettingsSelecting Account SettingsSelecting Amazon SidewalkTurning Amazon Sidewalk OffNo doubt, the benefits of Sidewalk for some people will outweigh the risks. But for the many, if not the vast majority of users, there’s little upside and plenty of downside. Amazon representatives didn’t respond to a request for comment. Dan Goodin Dan is the Security Editor at Ars Technica, which he joined in 2012 after working for The Register, the Associated Press, Bloomberg News, and other publications.  

Wednesday 6 p.m. EST: Groundbreaking Pittsfield MA Board of Health Cell Tower Forum

Wednesday 6 p.m. EST: Groundbreaking Pittsfield MA
Board of Health Cell Tower Forum
Copy this Meeting ID: 828 3529 8060 and
paste it in at the Join Meeting linkor dial in to 312-626-6799
More than a dozen children and adults became ill after a Verizon cell tower was turned on in Pittsfield, MA during the pandemic.

The residents have been asking their local officials to protect them for nearly a year to no avail.

As is the case with most town boards, the Pittsfield Health Director and Board of Health admit they know very little about the biological effects of today’s wireless technology.

So they turned to state-level authorities who offered to join them for a public forum, and to conduct an epidemiological study.

Then the Massachusetts Department of Public Health rescinded both offers.  We are grateful the Pittsfield Board of Health is following through on its promise to still hold a public forum and bring in qualified experts.

Please join us on Wednesday, June 2 at 6 p.m. EST to show support and learn directly from:Sheena Symington, Director, The Electrosensitive Society
 Magda Havas, PhD, EMF Scientist and Professor Emeritus of Trent University
 Paul Heroux, PhD, Professor of Toxicology & Health Effects of Electromagnetism, McGill UniversityThis will be a good educational forum to share with your own town’s Board of Health, Select Board/City Councilors, Zoning and Planning Boards, and Legal Council.

For far too long the wireless industry has given our towns disinformation and financial incentives to install toxic wireless infrastructure. They deserve to know the facts and the risks.

Please invite your town, and your loved ones, to learn from the experts being brought in to Pittsfield. (We hope video will be available to share afterwards since we were given short notice.)Thank you to the courageous residents of Pittsfield for helping to educate your public servants, engaging the media, and for your indomitable spirit in leading the way to protect others!

See the News page at MA for Safe Technology for articles on the Pittsfield cell tower.

Let’s show our support, and use this opportunity to help advance education and protect our own towns too.

Please join the call on Wednesday at 6 p.m. EST:Copy this Meeting ID: 828 3529 8060 and
paste it in at the Join Meeting linkor dial in to 312-626-6799Logistics: typically only the cameras of the board members and scheduled presenters are on. You can sign on a few minutes before 6 p.m. There may be a couple of other quick items on the agenda before the forum begins.

Kind regards,

Cece & the MA for Safe Technology Team

Cecelia (Cece) Doucette, MTPW, BA
Technology Safety Educator
Director, Massachusetts for Safe Technology
Founder, Understanding EMFs
Education Services Director, Wireless Education
EMF Medical Conference 2021
TechSafe Schools
NH Legislative Commission Report
City of Boston Legal Comment to FCC
HiBR Conference @ NIH
Expert Forum on Wi-fi in Schools
Municipal Presentation on 5G & EMFs
Additional YouTube EMF Talks
Generation Zapped Award-Winning Film

Smart meters are a fire hazard,

West Hawaii Today

Saturday, May 29, 2021| Today’s Paper|74.408°

Not the way

In a Monday letter to the editor, John Powell suggested the Hawaii County Department of Water Supply “cut costs by using new technology” aka, introduce water smart meters in addition to/partnering with HECO’s “advanced (smart) meters.”

This opinion fails to address several key issues that are timely to consider:

Smart meters are a fire hazard, and such devices have been responsible for thousands of fires, explosions, and other serious safety problems. Smart meters have caused documented health problems. The WHO categorizes RF radiation as a Class 2B carcinogen. There is evidence the smart meters unpredictable blasts of RF make them more toxic than cell phones or Wi-Fi, which are toxic themselves but emit more steady signals. It’s the difference between white noise versus erratic loud blasts. The FCC is a captured agency, primarily interested in cheerleading for the wireless industry, not human health. There are zero biomedical professionals in the FCC, they are engineers.

Smart meters typically overcharge and inaccurately represent usage, when compared with reliable, accurate analog meters. “Smart meters” and the “smart grid” risk national security and reliability of the electricity supply by opening a new portal to hackers and others who wish to disrupt these services. This is a major cyber-security problem. Smart meters are surveillance devices and violate our Fourth Amendment right to privacy in our homes.

Most grid-tied solar homes have a smart meter, and also have the option of a safer, wired connection. HECO is currently petitioning the PUC to roll out smart meters on the Big Island on an “opt-out,” rather than “opt-in” basis, which may cost ratepayers greatly. You can submit comments to the PUC via email at Stay updated on the status of smart meters in Hawaii at

Naomi Melamed



There’s a story that you sometimes hear that goes like this: wireless radiation can’t cause health problems because it’s not ionising radiation, which is known to damage DNA and cause cancer. How lovely it would be if that were true! But it’s not—and this is why. Firstly, let’s take a closer look at what ionising radiation actually is. Physicist Vic Leach explains that ‘ionising radiation—such as X-rays and Gammaλ rays—has wavelengths that are a billion times smaller than those used for wireless communication. And they’re the same size as atoms, which means that they interact with atoms, dislodging electrons in their orbit and creating ionised molecules in air and tissue. Hence the label “ionising” radiation.’

On the other hand, non-ionising radiation—such as ultraviolet (UV) light, mobile phone radiation, WiFi and 5G—doesn’t have enough energy to knock electrons off atoms. However, this does not mean it’s safe. There are other ways that non-ionising radiation can interact with atoms and cause damage such as cancer. Take UV light, for example. We know that it causes skin cancer. There’s a large body of scientific evidence that wireless radiation, even though it’s non-ionising, can, in fact, cause both DNA damage and, most likely, cause cancer. In 2011 the International Agency for Research on Cancer classified radiofrequency radiation as a Class 2B (possible) carcinogen and since that time much more evidence linking it to cancer has been found, including data from animal experiments such as the $30 million dollar US National Toxicology Program and the Ramazzini Institute Italian study

An Italian court proclaimed that a plaintiff’s brain tumour, a rare nerve tumour similar to those seen in animal studies, was caused by his mobile phone use.A recent review by Y Choi found that 17 minutes of mobile phone use a day over a ten-year period increased a person’s risk of developing tumours by 60%. A recent review by Professor Henry Lai, found wireless radiation damaged genes. Wireless radiation causes “oxidative stress” which indirectly creates DNA damage, a precursor to cancer.You’ll be able to see more evidence that wireless radiation is harmful in our regular newsletter ‘EMR and Health’ (see link below).So next time you hear someone tell you that wireless radiation is safe because it’s not ionising radiation, you will know they are not familiar with the science on this issue.For more information see article by Professor Denis Henshaw

What can you do?Limit your exposure wireless radiation:Buy wired-only devices, not wireless devices.Measure to see what wireless devices you have in your home and how much radiation they are emitting:…Use our radiation-free equipment which can be used for internet and landline phones. Protect your body with our new shielded scarves.

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 May 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.

Warm regards

Lyn McLean
EMR Australia PL
02 9576 1772
EMR Australia
PO Box 4721 Sylvania Waters, NSW 2224

Nineteen Hertz and Below: An Infrasonic History of the Twentieth Century

Nineteen Hertz and Below: An Infrasonic History of the Twentieth Century
Author(s): Sophia Roosth
Source: Resilience: A Journal of the Environmental Humanities , Vol. 5, No. 3, Common
Senses and Critical Sensibilities (Fall 2018), pp. 109-124
Published by: University of Nebraska Press
Stable URL:
Linked references are available on JSTOR for this article:
You may need to log in to JSTOR to access the linked references.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
University of Nebraska Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to
Resilience: A Journal of the Environmental Humanities
This content downloaded from on Mon, 28 Jan 2019 19:59:17 UTC
All use subject to htt
Nineteen Hertz and Below
An Infrasonic History of the Twentieth Century
Sophia Roosth
Th is is a history of a sound you cannot hear. Human hearing ranges,
on average, between twenty and twenty thousand hertz, and infrasound
vibrates at a frequency lower than twenty hertz, ever so slightly below
the envelope of human audition.1
Infrasound fi rst rattled the scientifi c
world in 1883, when the explosion of Krakatoa between the Indonesian
islands of Java and Sumatra registered on barographs as subsonic vibrations powerful enough to circle the globe seven times.2
shuddered back into scientifi c attention immediately aft er World War
II, when interest in infrasound oscillated between harnessing infrasonic vibrations as weapons and tuning into them as signatures or acoustic
footprints of nuclear testing, unheard vibrations from a stealthy enemy. Because infrasonic vibrations are not easily dissipated by physical
obstacles, they travel much farther than audible sound, a quality that
makes them a useful means for measuring events occurring far away,
from earthquakes and volcanoes to rocket launches. In 2011 the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty Organization presided over a controlled explosion in Israel’s Negev desert to fi ne- tune their infrasonicmonitoring equipment; they found that the explosion was recorded by
monitoring stations as far away as Mongolia.3
In February 2013, infrasound sensors recorded the strongest infrasonic wave on record— a
dense fi reball blooming from the Chelyabinsk meteor as it exploded high above Russia’s Ural Mountains. A report in Science described
the “meteor’s death throes” as emitting a piercing yet “silent scream,”
one that, while inaudible, nonetheless propagated powerful vibrations
across great distances.4
This content downloaded from on Mon, 28 Jan 2019 19:59:17 UTC
All use subject to htt
110 Resilience Vol. 5, No. 3
As a liminal category alternately dubbed “unsound” or “sound- like,”5
infrasound affords scholars the opportunity to interrogate sensorial ambiguity. Sound studies scholar Jonathan Sterne differentiates between
sound and other vibrations: “As part of a larger physical phenomenon
of vibration, sound is a product of the human senses and not a thing
in the world apart from humans.”6
Such a definition authorizes sound
studies to turn a deaf ear to those vibrations that are inaudible to humans yet are nonetheless key sensory capacities for nonhuman animals:
ultrasonic vibrations among dolphins, bats, and dogs, for example, or
infrasonic vibrations with which whales and elephants can communicate and anticipate danger in their immediate environments, such as
earthquakes and tsunamis.7
How, then, might sound studies admit into
its purview (its percussion?) those aspects of the vibratory world that
are not, strictly speaking, sonic? To productively draw sensory studies
into conversation with multispecies science studies requires that the
non human umwelt be examined as rigorously and on the same footing
as the human sensorium (and, indeed, to query the very notion of a singular and homogenous “human sensorium” in the first place).8
A more
capacious understanding of sound could consequently reorient its focus away from not only anthropocentric but also “earcentric” models of
sonic perception in favor of an extra cochlear modality that recognizes
entire percussing bodies as vibratory sensory apparatuses.9
Once we retune hearing to incorporate the entire body, rather than
ears alone, then the sensory hierarchy falls away. Sensory studies
scholars consequently must admit the possibility that sound— or any
other sense— cannot be studied (or experienced) in isolation but only
on a spectrum with other sensory and affective states. Infrasound is on
the fringe of the audible yet bleeds into the palpable. It occupies the
threshold between hearing and the many other perceptual modalities
that audition both complements and overlaps (most significantly,
tactility and proprioception, but also nausea and dizziness, as well
as affective, cognitive, and emotional states). The twentieth- century
history of infrasound is one place to begin such a project, as it
problematizes which vibrations do or do not count as “sound”; requires
an extra cochlear model of hearing; and attaches audition to somatic
feelings and moods, including agitation, anxiety, irritability, and
In her history of vibration, Shelley Trower demonstrates how
This content downloaded from on Mon, 28 Jan 2019 19:59:17 UTC
All use subject to htt
Roosth: Nineteen Hertz and Below 111
nineteenth- century physiologists, poets, and spiritualists used sound
“to make audible the silent vibrations that were shaping the experience
of modernity.”10 Gillian Beer similarly notes late- nineteenth- century
anxieties that attended the limits of perception: “Not only the distortion
but the extreme tenuity of our senses was brought home as the
subsonic, ultrasonic, and subsensible . . . began to surround and imbue
the human.”11 Dovetailing with these histories, I fi nd that infrasound
became an increasingly salient cultural concern precisely during the
midcentury moment when nuclear weapons testing, Cold War logics,
and ecological consciousness inaugurated planetary thinking anew. A
vibration that could circle the earth and indicate precarious or degraded
environments crystallized widespread scientific and popular concerns
about the hazards of modern geopolitical globality, which resonate to
this day.
Auditing infrasound as it echoes from the mid- twentieth century to
now allows sensory scholars to inquire into the epistemic status of that
which is palpable yet unheard. How do our understandings of sound
change when they are not vibrations acting on bodies but vibrations
that resonate with and within our fleshy, pulpy selves? In this essay, I
relate how infrasonic vibrations were cast as sonic weapons, as well as a
signature of the use of atomic weapons— specifically, in order to monitor international compliance with the Limited and Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaties. I examine infrasound as both cause and register of human anxiety in a technological world stuff used with vibrations
both heard and unheard. Finally, I stray into infrasound’s use as a way
of debunking ghostly hauntings in order to tune in to infrasound as
diagnostic of modern paranoias about the imperceptible risks to which
we imagine ourselves exposed. At stake is the relation of sounds to vibrations, of vibrations to bodies, and of bodies to the vibrating and perilous environments in which they are nestled.
A Devastating Whistle: Silent Weapons in a Cold War
In 1941, infrasound reverberated through the pages of Robert Heinlein’s
speculative fiction novel The Day after Tomorrow. Originally serially
published in Astounding Science Fiction as Sixth Column the same year
as the attack on Pearl Harbor, Heinlein’s book features American scientists who develop an infrasonic weapon designed to kill a Pan- Asian
This content downloaded from on Mon, 28 Jan 2019 19:59:17 UTC
All use subject to htt
112 Resilience Vol. 5, No. 3
enemy alliance. Vibrations pitched at fourteen hertz struck fear in the
hearts of America’s enemies. Paging through Heinlein’s xenophobic
fantasy of vibrant infrasonic retribution, one reads, “Those damned
subsonics give me the creeping horrors even when I know what’s going
on. . . . There’s nothing like the fear of something you can’t understand
to break a man down.”12
Stories about weaponizing infrasound were not, however, limited to
science fiction novels— they also seeped into peer- reviewed scientific
publications, popular science magazines, and mainstream and yellow
journalism. Foremost among these was the strange tale of Russian- born
French scientist Vladimir Gavreau.13 Twenty years aft er the publication
of The Day after Tomorrow, Gavreau, head of the Electroacoustics
and Automation Laboratory of the Centre National de la Recherche
Scientifique (CNRS), and his fellow researchers began to feel nauseated,
dizzy, and unfocused. While investigating vibrations visible in the
liquids found in his laboratory, Gavreau discovered that a defective
industrial ventilator in a nearby building had caused a standing wave to
vibrate below twenty hertz in his laboratory, though not in any adjacent
laboratories. Upon disabling the fan, he and his colleagues immediately
recovered. Intrigued by the connection between low- frequency
vibrations and feelings of illness and unease, and in particular by
the conundrum of “directive vibrations,” Gavreau began researching
whether infrasonic vibrations, while unheard, might nonetheless be
physically palpable. What happens next, however, oscillates between
fact and fiction, making it difficult to separate history from conspiracy
theory. Some writers doubt to this day whether Gavreau existed, despite
the fact that journal articles and patents bear his name.14
A 1967 issue of the UNESCO Courier speculated that Gavreau was
researching a lethal “black noise,” building a “devastating whistle” and
a “mammoth organ pipe” twenty- four meters long that could disable or
even kill enemy combatants by surrounding them in a sonic “envelope
of death” or turning their internal organs into “jelly.”15 Researchers in
his laboratory, the press reported, would be snatched from near death
after their internal organs “hit critical resonance frequencies.”16 One
champion of Gavreau was cut- up writer William S. Burroughs, who
carried a clipping of a Sunday Times article about Gavreau in his wallet
and showed it to several musicians he interviewed in the early 1970s.
Burroughs explained to Led Zeppelin guitarist Jimmy Page,
This content downloaded from on Mon, 28 Jan 2019 19:59:17 UTC
All use subject to htt
Roosth: Nineteen Hertz and Below 113
Professor Gavreau of France developed infra- sound as a military
weapon. A powerful infra- sound installation can, he claims, kill
everyone in a fi ve- mile radius, knock down walls and break windows. Infra- sound kills by setting up vibrations within the body
so that, as Gavreau puts it, “You can feel all the organs in your
body rubbing together.” The plans for this device can be obtained
from the French Patent Office, and infra- sound generators constructed from inexpensive materials.17
Burroughs similarly sketched out Gavreau’s story to David Bowie
while interviewing him for Rolling Stone in November 1973; the
two imagined making music that might “maim [the audience].”18
Weaponized infrasound left an indelible impression on Bowie, who
told Dick Cavett in a televised interview a year later that a “black noise
bomb” that could destroy a city had been invented in France and that
you could purchase the patent for less than four dollars.19 Industrial
musicians. The robbing Gristle, also devotees of Burroughs, incorporated
infrasound into their live performances, as The robbing Gristle synthesist
Chris Carter explained, to “make people do things that they didn’t
want to do— making people feel ill and dizzy and stuff .”20 The band
also bombarded squatters with infrasonic waves to force them out of
Genesis P- Orridge’s backyard.21 Gavreau’s “mammoth organ pipe”
featured in a 1973 volume of Belgian feminist comic book Yoko Tsuno,
in which the titular electrical engineer must rescue a famous organist
from the villainous Karl Moebius and his destructive infrasonic L’orgue
Du Diable (devil’s organ).
Such anecdotes are, perhaps, symptomatic of Cold War paranoia
heavily dosed with the coke- fueled avant- garde industrial and glam
scenes of the early 1970s. Nonetheless, they persist in sober sources
to this day; the Hastings Center issued a 2010 report warning its
readers, “Acoustical weapons, which have not yet been perfected,
would employ inaudible infrasound to resonate in body cavities and
cause disorientation, nausea, vomiting, and bowel spasms.”22 Such
hypothetical weapons are, in many ways, an insidious obverse to the
use of sonic booms by the American military during the Cold War—
in the 1964 Oklahoma Sonic Boom Experiment, citizens were regularly
exposed to sonic booms (eight times a day over six months) to test
the psychological repercussions of the “sound of freedom.” In such
This content downloaded from on Mon, 28 Jan 2019 19:59:17 UTC
All use subject to htt
114 Resilience Vol. 5, No. 3
exercises, “through sound, the state touched people’s bodies,” such that
“the Cold War was mapped onto the field of sensory experience.”23
In Sonic Warfare, Steve Goodman notes how a “tactics of frequency”
“brings into the field of power the dimension of unsound.”24 While the
use of audible sound— loud, piercing noises and grating pop music—
has been studied as part of the history of sonic warfare, from crowd
control to human torture, panic over (or enthusiasm for) infrasonic
weaponry draws our attention toward the specter of sounds unheard,
transmitted from far away yet acting intimately on the bodily interior.
“The Voice of the Atmosphere”
Given that infrasound was already understood to be a weapon in itself, it
is unsurprising that infrasound would soon also be enrolled as indexical
of weaponry and hence a deterrent against the proliferation and testing
of nuclear weapons. By the 1950s both the United States and the Soviet
Union had set up infrasound monitoring stations in order to detect
atmospheric nuclear testing.25 Over two thousand nuclear weapons tests
were conducted between 1945 and 1996; and in the first two decades
following World War II, infrasound was an efficient mechanism for the US
government to keep tabs on Soviet atmospheric weapons detonations.26
“Studying VLF [very- low frequency] emissions produced by nuclear
explosions,” Douglas Kahn notes, “was part of a larger scientific task
of producing and monitoring seemingly every possible electromagnetic
and acoustical (seismic, infrasound) signal and chemical and isotopic
signature from around the world.”27 The 1963 Limited Test Ban Treaty
moved nuclear testing underground, where its monitoring became the
province of seismic rather than infrasonic recording devices. Infrasound
monitoring of nuclear weapons was revived again in the 1990s, when the
Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty was drafted and codified by the
United Nations General Assembly.28
In the intervening years, a global network of infrasound stations
were installed to monitor compliance with the Comprehensive Nuclear
Test Ban Treaty (CTBT), the organization of which is headquartered in
Vienna.29 Sixty global infrasound stations are currently being built, and
forty- five, at last count, are already functioning, registering infrasonic
waves, and transmitting signals back to the Comprehensive Nuclear
Test Ban Treaty Organization (CTBTO) headquarters in Vienna.30
This content downloaded from on Mon, 28 Jan 2019 19:59:17 UTC
All use subject to htt
Roosth: Nineteen Hertz and Below 115
When North Korea detonated nuclear weapons in 2010, scientists at
the CTBTO offices knew hours later, before North Korea had made
an official announcement.31 In this respect, infrasound monitoring is
not simply a technology deployed in the service of desired geopolitical
harmony but rather functions as harmonic geopolitics.
While nuclear weapons detonations were rare occasions for most
citizens, other sources of infrasound were growing increasingly commonplace. The same 1967 issue of the UNESCO Courier that publicized Gavreau’s research also reported on the dangers of modern noise
to human welfare. “The Danger of Sounds We Cannot Hear” blames
infrasound for a host of conditions, from the discomfort experienced
by airline passengers to dizziness, fatigue, and a “fl uttering sensation”
plaguing urban dwellers. Readers are warned that “inaudible noise, like
an invisible enemy, is even more deadly than the noise we hear.”32 No
longer thought of only as a literal weapon but also as an inaudible yet
deadly by- product of modernity, infrasound had bifurcated.
Fig. 1. Infrasound monitoring station, Schauinsland, Germany. Image courtesy
of the CTBTO Public Information, https:// www .ctbto .org.
This content downloaded from on Mon, 28 Jan 2019 19:59:17 UTC
All use subject to htt
116 Resilience Vol. 5, No. 3
In May 1976, scientists at the Lamont- Doherty Earth Observatory,
Columbia University’s atmospheric infrasound station, began
registering what researcher William Donn reported as “strange signals
[that] began to appear . . . at about the same time on alternate days.”33
After several weeks, the researchers realized that they were recording
the first Concorde flights landing at Dulles International Airport. They
used the resulting infrasonic vibrations, which were degradations of
the Concorde’s “sonic boom,” as an atmospheric probe to listen to what
Donn called “the voice of the atmosphere.” Following the Concorde’s
rumblings, Donn noted small atmospheric differences that registered
on morning and afternoon flights, in summer and in autumn; and in
so doing, he realized that environmental change could be monitored by
listening to infrasonic frequencies.34
Around the same time, physicians began attending to infrasound’s
possible effects on the body. No longer concerned with infrasound as a
weapon, it was now recognized as a resonant, inaudible, yet potentially
hazardous and inescapable artifact of urban modernity— a subauditory
miasma. A literature review published in Lancet in 1973 noted that different parts of the body resonated at various frequencies— “for example,
the abdomen at about 10 Hz. . . . Abdomen vibrations may cause distress
and sickness, whilst excessive chest vibration may interfere with the
normal respiratory system.”35 The authors were careful to note, however,
that while infrasound may be detrimental to one’s health, one person’s
nuisance was another’s pleasure; “Chest vibrations,” they wrote, “incidentally are a welcome effect at discotheques and pop concerts, where
the music is felt as well as heard— the total experience.”36 Th e attention
to our bodies as entities already vibrating in tune with the infrasonic environment triggered concerns that the wrong kind of infrasound
might be deleterious, even fatal. The medicalization of infrasound built
on earlier anxieties that infrasound might be weaponized, joining them
to worries over the ways in which a vibratory ecosystem might impact,
penetrate, and resonate with human bodies.
In 1980, physician Nuno Castelo Branco was appointed the chief
medical officer at an aircraft manufacturing and repair facility owned
and operated by the Portuguese Air Force. He began noting strange
symptoms and behavior among his employees, which he chalked up to
their long- term exposure to infrasonic vibrations.37 He reported that
several employees, in apparent fugue states or epileptic fi ts, would want This content downloaded from on Mon, 28 Jan 2019 19:59:17 UTC
All use subject to htt
Roosth: Nineteen Hertz and Below 117
der dangerously close to spinning propellers, from which fellow colleagues would drag them away at the last minute. He named this condition “vibroacoustic disease.” Castelo Branco compared diseases caused
by acoustic vibrations to other conditions that result from invisible or
impalpable environmental phenomena; “It is high time that scientists
begin to view acoustical phenomena with a framework usually applied
to electromagnetic phenomena,” he pronounced.38 Within the electromagnetic spectrum, for example, the eye registers light within a small
range of frequencies. Electromagnetic waves beyond that frequency—
most notably, x- rays— are unseen yet nonetheless profoundly hazardous to one’s health. He proposed a similar model for vibratory phenomena; while not perceived by the human ear as sound, the acoustical
spectrum nonetheless includes frequencies that can do serious bodily
damage or be harnessed for medical diagnostics and therapies, as is the
case with ultrasound.
Castelo Branco’s work has in the last five years been bolstered by
physicians studying a contested illness that was named wind turbine
syndrome in 2009. Nina Pierpont, the pediatrician who coined the
term, noted that infrasonic waves emanating from wind turbines cause
“a sensation of internal quivering, vibration, or pulsation accompanied
by agitation, anxiety, alarm, irritability, rapid heartbeat, nausea,
and sleep disturbance.”39 Recall Robert Heinlein’s science- fictional
scientists railing against “those damned subsonics” giving them “the
creeping horrors.”40 Though not recognized as a legitimate medical
illness, people who live or work near industrial wind turbines report a
wide variety of symptoms ranging from vertigo to nausea, irritability,
annoyance, stress, and panic attacks.41 Anxiety is here treated as a suite
of symptoms triggered by resonance frequencies, similar in many
respects to Vladimir Gavreau’s report half a century earlier. If anxiety
and paranoia was once a side effect of what infrasound vibrations might
be indexical of, now infrasound itself is identified as the immediate
cause of embodied anxiety. If infrasound was once considered a rarity,
triggered by a rogue nuclear blast or a defective generator, for those
who today identify as suffering from vibroacoustic disease or wind
turbine syndrome, it is an unavoidable blight, a vibration blanketing the
modern technologically mediated globe.
In the last ten years, infrasound monitoring facilities are increasingly being repurposed toward monitoring and predicting environment. This content downloaded from on Mon, 28 Jan 2019 19:59:17 UTC
All use subject to htt
118 Resilience Vol. 5, No. 3

In the last ten years, infrasound monitoring facilities are increasingly being repurposed toward monitoring and predicting environmental risks— earthquakes, tsunamis, volcanoes, meteors hurtling toward
earth from outer space— in addition to anthropogenic phenomena such
as nuclear explosions and rocket launches. Though built to eavesdrop
on clandestine nuclear tests, infrasound is now a burgeoning and globalized data- collection project aiming to hearken the vibratory world,
a “soundtrack to catastrophe.”42 A Science article reported on the rumbling of Mt. Etna in the summer of 2001: “The shaking mountain, with
its roiling ash cloud, acted like a giant transmitter, triggering pressure
waves that undulated through the atmosphere.”43 Volcanoes register
signature infrasonic vibrations in advance of exploding, giving CTBT
stations a few minutes’ to hours’ lead time in warning communities living nearby. In 2013 the CTBTO signed an agreement with the director
of the Geophysical Survey of the Russian Academy of Sciences allowing Russians to receive data from infrasound stations in order to deliver near- real- time global tsunami warnings.44 Russia, the country for
which infrasound monitoring stations were built in the United States in
the first place, is now a steward of infrasonic vibrations.
The retooling of CTBT stations to monitor and predict volcanoes
and earthquakes filters infrasound’s previous technological uses, refashioning the enemy not as a political threat but an environmental
one. In this regard, infrasound might be considered, following sound installation artist Raviv Ganchrow, to be “the bandwidth of the Anthropocene,” because “environmental infrasound exhibits an intermingling
of large- scale human industrialized activity with these other earth- and
atmosphere- related frequencies.”45 Such techno-ecological vibrations
are, to quote Douglas Kahn, “emissaries of earth magnitude” that allow
globalized auditing of an imagined “whole earth” absent the technological surveillance afforded by “the ‘earthrise’ and ‘blue marble’ photographs of the 1960s and 1970s” or contemporary GPS satellites.46
Conclusion: A Shiver in the Air
In the early 1980s a British engineer named Vic Tandy started doing design work for a company that manufactured medical equipment. Working in the company’s laboratory one evening, he began to feel unwell:
“There was a feeling of depression, occasionally a cold shiver.”47 Sitting
at his desk writing, he “began to feel increasingly uncomfortable”—
“sweating but cold,” he reported, “and the feeling of depression was not. This content downloaded from on Mon, 28 Jan 2019 19:59:17 UTC

“sweating but cold,” he reported, “and the feeling of depression was noticeable. . . . It was as though something was in the room with” him. He
had the uncanny sense of being watched. He saw a ghostly apparition
appear on his left , moving, he later wrote, as one “would expect a person to.” He felt a chill in the room, and his hair stood on end. When he
turned his head, the apparition vanished.
The following morning, Tandy, an amateur fencer, was sharpening
his fencing blade in the laboratory, when he noticed that it quivered at
a regular frequency. Using acoustic equipment, he investigated the lab
and found that there was a standing infrasonic wave in the laboratory
vibrating close to nineteen hertz, which was caused by a new fan recently installed in the extraction system. Once the fan was replaced, the
hauntings ceased. Tandy speculated that the infrasonic vibration was
responsible for the feelings of unease and dread sometimes associated
with ghostly hauntings. He even suggested that the spectral figure was
caused by the viscous fluid in his eyeball vibrating at the same frequency as the standing wave, thereby distorting his vision and causing visual
hallucinations. He made a modest career over the next few years as an
amateur ghost hunter, traveling to other haunted sites— medieval cellars, moldering castles— in the United Kingdom in search of infrasonic
Infrasound cannot be contained by canonical definitions of “sound,”
nor has it ever been properly contained by scientific orthodoxy. From
the alarmed report of a Soviet scientist’s “devastating whistle” that could
liquefy internal organs to science- fictional death rays to contested illnesses marked by feelings of quivering and vibratory dread, infrasound
has, since its discovery, been associated with hidden, oft en sinister or
malevolent forces, those which are all the more unsettling because exposure is unnoticed, even insensible. A liminal vibration propagating
at the cusp of human audibility, ever so slightly below the threshold of
human perception, invites all- too- human anxieties about the limits of
our own capacity to sense and know the environment in which we are
The infrasonic calls attention to our embodiment, our status as sacs
and pockets of quivering fluid and pulp that are submerged in and resonate with an uncertain environment— hence long- standing worries
over vibrating vitreous humors, organs jellifying, and head- exploding
sonic waves. Infrasound also pulsates with human panics over hidden
forces and the limits of our ability to perceive them— phenomena not…


Human and Pollinator Sanctuary Resolution-a Hill town Health Initiative

HAPS: Human and Pollinator Sanctuary Resolution
a Hill town Health Initiative
To see if the town will vote to declare itself a human and pollinator sanctuary (HAPS) free of
microwave radiation from low-altitude satellites and additional wireless infrastructure until a
panel of independent MD’s and scientists familiar with long term patterns of disease in
populations completes a risk and environmental assessment for these additional layers of
microwave radiation exposure.

  • Whereas the Federal Communication Commission (FCC), a “captured agency”1 has approved more than
    13,000 low altitude 5G satellites and appears ready to approve many more.
  • Whereas corporations like SpaceX and OneWeb have already launched more than 1,400 such satellites
    and along with Telesat, AST and Science, Lynk, Amazon, Omni-space and Facebook are planning to launch
    approximately 100,000 in total.
  • Whereas the majority of independent studies on this type of radiation indicate significant biological
    harm to humans, pollinators and other flora and fauna.2
  • Whereas the increased number of rocket launches required for this deployment will likely increase air
    pollution, deplete the ozone layer and accelerate global warming according to researchers.3
  • Whereas we have not consented to be part of any biological experiment conducted by any corporation
    or government entity.
  • Whereas our taxpayer dollars are currently being given to Big Wireless by the FCC to build cell towers in
    rural areas which require pollinators to continue farming and which are already served by broadband
    internet, often at additional taxpayer expense.
  • Whereas rural areas are the last and final refuge for millions of people around the world suffering from
    electrical sensitivity, aka electro-hypersensitivity (EHS) aka microwave sickness, a debilitating condition
    recognized under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).
  • Whereas fiber to the home is a secure, safe, energy-efficient and future-proof way of insuring everyone
    has access to the digital economy.
  • Whereas the FCC and Big Wireless are currently facing multiple lawsuits for failure to protect public
    health and/or willfully obscuring relevant scientific studies.4
    If adopted, the town clerk is directed to communicate the results of this resolution to local, state and
    national elected officials.
    2,,, etc.




MA-an opt-out tariff which is likely illegal under ADA to discriminate against those with the ADA recognized disability of electromagnetic sensitivity. There is a lawsuit in Maine on this right now and the court is allowing it to proceed.

From: Cecelia Doucette <>

To: Michael O. Moore <>;

Cc: MacNeill, Shelly (SEN) <>
Sent: Thu, May 27, 2021 6:25 pm
Subject: Thank You for DPU Letters!

Dear Senator Moore, Senator DiZoglio and Representative Linsky,

The members of Massachusetts for Safe Technology wish to extend our gratitude for the letters you sent to the DPU for Docket 20-69. The Order on the Grid Modernization Plan, attached, was issued this month. It references your input (p. 21) and requires the utility companies to submit a plan that includes a ratepayer opt-out (p. 35-36).
Unfortunately, it also includes an opt-out tariff which is likely illegal under ADA to discriminate against those with the ADA recognized disability of electromagnetic sensitivity. There is a lawsuit in Maine on this right now and the court is allowing it to proceed.

So, Senator Moore, we are grateful you have once again filed your no-fee utility meter choice bill S. 2204. Thank you, Senator DiZoglio for co-sponsoring this too, and we hope Rep. Linskey will consider doing the same.
Senator Moore, and others, if you are planning to send a letter of bill support to the Joint Committee on Telecommunications, Utilities and Energy may we once again ask to receive a copy? 
Now that New Hampshire legislators passed a law to investigate the health and environmental impact of wireless radiation and issued their final report documenting the conflicts of interest with industry and our federal agencies, and making 15 recommendations to inform the public and transition to safe technology, we are hopeful MA will be next to act by passing the EMF bills this session.

Thank you again for looking out for the public, and for all you do, especially during these most unusual times.

Kind regards,
Cece and the MA for Safe Technology Team
Cecelia (Cece) Doucette, MTPW, BATechnology Safety EducatorDirector, Massachusetts for Safe TechnologyFounder, Understanding EMFsEducation Services Director, Wireless EducationNew Hampshire Legislative Report on EMF/5GCity of Boston Legal Comment to FCCHiBR Conference @ NIHExpert Forum on Wi-fi in SchoolsTechSafe SchoolsMunicipal Presentation on 5G & EMFsAdditional YouTube EMF TalksGeneration Zapped Award-Winning FilmEMF Conference for Health Practitioners