Citizens for Safe Technology
Empowering the public to protect children
and nature from unsafe wireless technologies.
CANADIAN NEWS: INTRODUCTION to TOPIC
To streamline your search, anywhere on the website, for a specific topic, word or phrase, please use the white search bar located under the Action Kits below.
Looking for a specific topic or a past article? Search for it below:
Peer-reviewed scientific studies (50) documenting potentially harmful biological effects of Wi-Fi frequency (2.4-2.45 GHz) at or below Health Canada's Safety Code 61 guidelines and recommendations for precautionary measures (Margaret Friesen M.Sc. via C4ST)
Letter to Manitoba School Superintendent re Wi-Fi in Schools - A Health and Safety Issue
" . . . School boards need not wait for federal regulators to act. Use of the latest electronic tools for 21st Century learning can be achieved by using wired technologies. Two simple, no cost common sense measures that can be taken immediately are to turn Wi-Fi off when not needed and to turn down Wi-Fi routers so they are emitting as little as possible when in use. . . .
CMAJ - Medical knowledge that matters
" . . . Dr. Anthony Miller, a University of Toronto professor emeritus who served as scientific secretary on a scientific review completed in May 2011 by the World Health Organization's International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), which concluded that cellphones and other wireless devices such as cordless phones and Wi-Fi transmitters are possibly -- although not probably -- carcinogenic said he was "very pleased with the outcome," of the committee review.
"It will be interesting to see if Health Canada does anything," added Miller, who argued while testifying before the committee that new research overlooked by Health Canada "reinforces the evidence that radio frequency fields are not just a possible human carcinogen, but a probable human carcinogen."
"Health Canada spokesman André Gagnon said "the Department thanks the committee members for their work and is currently reviewing the report. The Government of Canada will respond to the Committee's report in due course."
HESA report of the Standing Committee on Health June 17, 2015
Warning Labels for Radio Apparatus Act - Conservative MP Terence Young / C4ST - February 1, 2015 - Ottawa Press Conference (CTV Winnipeg News Video)
Conservative MP Terence Young calls for more effective warning labels on cell phones, Wi-Fi, portable phones, baby monitors, and all wireless devices sold in Canada, in order to protect Canadians and empower them with the information they need to understand potential serious risks to their health from long-term continuous use of these devices, and the greater risk to children. This is the first time a government representative has brought a Bill past a first reading re health warnings and labelling for wireless devices in Canada. He has multi-party support for this Private Members Bill.
A new article in The Tyee. Near the end of the article, it includes one Industry response, which seems to be Industry's old-fashioned style of response that insults the intelligence of the public with regard to corporate positioning and strategies. The article ends: "He [MP Young] said there may not be any evidence now, but he is confident that one day it will be shown that cell phones do cause cancer."
For more details about the Press Conference, Bill C-648, and featured reference materials please click C4ST HERE.
February 2, 2015 - Canadian Occupational Safety announcement HERE.
Letter to Government from Sharon Noble - Director of Coalition to Stop Smart Meters in BC (includes A&E Policy Document)
Premier Clark, Mr. Bennett and Mr. Reimer,
RE: Lloyd's of London excludes coverage for claims caused by exposure to non-ionizing radiation.
"Based on inaccurate information provided by ITRON, Health Canada and Dr. Perry Kendall, you have been telling people that there is no health risk due to prolonged exposure to radiation from smart meters on homes and wifi in school -- this despite your having received 100s of studies by independent researchers and many letters from scientists and doctors to the contrary.
"I am now forwarding information that should concern you even if the potential health problems these devices cause British Columbians doesn't. Even though I know that the province and BC Hydro self insure their insurance coverage, I suspect you have a stop loss agreement with protection for catastrophic claims. If this stop loss agreement doesn't already contain this waiver, soon it no doubt will exclude any claims associated with exposure to radiation from wireless devices such as cell phones, smart meters or wifi. Premier Clark, Mr. Bennett and Mr. Reimer,
"Lloyd's of London is one of the largest insurers in the world and often leads the way in protection, taking on risks that no one else will. Attached is a recent renewal policy which, as of Feb. 7, 2015, excludes any coverage associated with exposure to non-ionizing radiation. In response to clarification, this response was received on Feb. 18, 2015 from CFC Underwriting LTD, London, UK agent for Lloyd's:
"'The Electromagnetic Fields Exclusion (Exclusion 32) is a General Insurance Exclusion and is applied across the market as standard. The purpose of the exclusion is to exclude cover for illnesses caused by continuous long-term non-ionising radiation exposure i.e. through mobile phone usage."
"This means that the Province (that is we, the taxpayer) will be held liable for claims from teachers and parents of children suffering biological effects from wifi in schools, from homeowners exposed to RF from mandated smart meters on homes, and from employees forced to use cell phones or exposed to wifi at work. Lawsuits in other countries have resulted in huge payments already, and it is only a matter of time before similar lawsuits are filed and won in Canada.
"Potentially those who allow such devices, after having been fully informed about the dangers, could be held liable for negligence, and directors' insurance may not provide financial protection. Directors' insurance applies when people are performing their duties "in good faith". It is hard to argue they are acting "in good faith" after having been warned by true scientific experts and by a well-respected insurer.
"Consider yourself notified once again that you could be held legally responsible for the decisions you have made."
See page seven (7) #32 below for exclusion statement re electromagnetic fields:
Should smartphones have a warning label on them? Some Canadian MPs say yes.
"A growing number of Canadian parliamentarians are lending their name in support of a Private Member's Bill requiring warning labels on cell phones, Wi-Fi routers and even baby monitors sold across Canada.
"Conservative MP Terence Young has introduced a bill calling for safety warnings on all such radiation-emitting wireless devices. Young has represented a federal riding in Oakville, ON since 2008.
"Known officially as Private Member's Bill C-648, An Act Respecting the Prevention of Potential Health Risks from Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Radiation (Warning Labels for Radio Apparatus Act), the Bill was seconded by NDP Health Critic, Libby Davies.
"Young, and other supporters of his initiative, want to change the way Canadians think about wireless devices by putting cautionary information about their use and potential health hazards front and centre.
"Or on the back. Or on the box. Or some other location to be determined - the issue is complex, controversial and complicated by the small size and limited real estate on many wireless devices, much less the still hotly debated science and research surrounding electromagnetic radiation, EMR, emitted by devices from cellphones to baby monitors to smart meters and more. . . .
SEE ALSO: Warning labels for cell phones and WiFi Bill C648 to protect Canadians from radiation
The $1-billion smart-meter file has sparked boycotts and petitions over the safety of the devices and Hydro-Quebec's pushy installation measures.
"MONTREAL -- Two Hydro-Quebec executives in charge of the contentious smart-meter program quietly resigned last week along with CEO Thierry Vandal, QMI Agency has learned.
"The $1-billion smart-meter file has sparked boycotts and petitions over the safety of the devices and Hydro-Quebec's pushy installation measures. . .
"Vandal, the president and CEO, quit after 10 years on the job. His resignation takes effect May 1.
"An industry insider said the sudden loss of the three top managers was a shock.
"It's as if Hydro-Quebec has been decapitated," he said.
"The utility is Canada's largest in terms of revenues and capacity.
"Aside from its Quebec monopoly, the utility powers up parts of Ontario, New Brunswick, Labrador and New England. . .
"Some clients, and even some entire towns, are refusing to let Hydro-Quebec install the smart meters on their property."
Commonly Made Statements: What's the Real Story? (July 2013)
When asked about the impacts that "Smart Meters" will have on B.C., representatives of Hydro have a standard set of responses-- a scripted "mantra" intended to justify their decision to install these meters. In form letters and interviews, advertisements and news reports, the statements are repeated and repeated again.
To explain their inaccuracies and clarify facts is a highly repetitive exercise, problematic when Hydro representatives and government officials make the same false statements over time, and when reports in the mainstream media continue to present these inaccuracies as truth.
The following collection of "Frequently Asked Questions and Statements made about Microwave/ Radiofrequency Radiation" contains information that helps to separate the fact from the fiction. Hopefully it will answer any questions regarding "Smart Meters": their safety and their health effects, their costs and impacts on B.C. and beyond.
updated letter signed by renowned scientists and physicians urging Health Canada to stop denying that evidence exists that shows harm.
Also Declaration: SCIENTISTS call for Protection from Radiofrequency Radiation Exposure
Canada's Safety Code 6 Guideline is fundamentally flawed.
Health Canada's Safety Code 6 is based on an obsolete account and analysis of RFR research and has disregarded or minimized certain recent studies, such as cancer, DNA damage, protein synthesis, stress response, and detrimental biological and health effects in humans that occur at RFR intensities below the existing Code 6 Guideline. . . .
One time donation: Click the donate button below and follow the instructions on the screen.
Monthly donation: If you wish to contribute every month, please select the amount from the Donation Options list below and click Subscribe. Your contribution will be sent for you every month for the amount you selected.
Citizens for Safe Technology (CST) is funded and supported solely by those who wish to help us. Thank-you for learning, sharing and helping if you can.
Meetings and events on the issue of wireless technologies in homes and communities throughout North America.
Click the button above to sign our online petition to return to hardwired computers in schools.
Click the button above to sign our online petition against Smart Meters in British Columbia.
Citizens For Safe Technology
"Wi-Fi: Is It Safe?"
Citizens for Safe Technology is a not-for-profit educational society made up of parents, grandparents, teachers, business professionals, scientists, politicians and lawyers concerned about the exponential increase in public exposure to harmful wireless technologies.
We believe a profound urgency exists to protect the unsuspecting public, especially children, youth and pregnant mothers from unsafe wireless technologies.
The content of the Citizens for Safe Technology website is provided for information purposes only. Information is subject to change without prior notice. Every effort has been taken to ensure that the information on this website is accurate, but no guarantees can be made.
Neither Citizens for Safe Technology nor its authors are liable for damages resulting from the use of information obtained from this site. The authors are not responsible for any contents linked or referred to from this website or any damages resulting from information on those sites.
The responsibility for the interpretation and use of the information on this site lies with the reader.