Citizens for Safe Technology
Empowering the public to protect children
and nature from unsafe wireless technologies.
U.S. and International
The following articles, editorials, videos and links have been gathered from locations outside Canada. Although most have been sourced from locations in the U.S. and U.K., a growing number come from all continents. As this issue affects everyone, we are looking for relevant and pertinent news from all countries and continents worldwide.
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:
Ashland, Massachusetts Public Schools have implemented Wi-Fi Device "Best Practices" which include turning the Wi-Fi off when not in use and keeping devices on a table.
" . . . Based on its own review of the matter, the Ashland Public School District is reducing wireless radiation exposures to children by instituting district wide "best practices for mobile devices". Spurred by parent Cecelia Doucette's concerns about the lack of safety data on Wi-Fi and children, the district investigated the issue and developed a policy to substantially reduce wireless exposures to students and staff. Doucette not only brought the issue to the district's attention, but then also worked with state legislatures who introduced two bills concerning electromagnetic radiation this session. The Environmental Health Trust submitted written testimony on MA Senate Bill 1222 after expert scientists presented information on wireless health risks at a briefing at the Massachusetts State House in June 2015.
"Since wireless devices are constantly emitting radiation even when the user is not using the Internet, the instruction to "turn it off when not in use " stops the Wi-Fi antennas from continuously emitting radiation and is one simple way to reduce the radiation dose and exposure time for children and staff. . . .
"This ground breaking policy action by the Massachusetts school district is indicative of the wave of parents raising concerns about Wi-Fi across the country. Ashland, Massachusetts parent Cecelia Doucette wrote an article in Ashland Local Town Pages about these new best practices. Significant news and print media have picked the issue up after Massachusetts parents filed a lawsuit against a private boarding school alleging the school did not accommodate their 12-year-old child's diagnosed debilitating sensitivity to the school's WiFi system.
"Ashland is the first US public school to create such policy on wireless transmitting devices. However, this US Massachusetts school district now joins dozens of schools and governments that have already implemented even more stringent measures to reduce wireless exposure to children. For example, Israel and France have banned Wi-Fi in kindergarten. The European Union recommends wired Internet rather than wireless in schools.
"Right To Know" efforts by local governments are also moving across the United States. . . .
Published on Feb 5, 2013
OUTCOME September 2015 Naperville settles lawsuit with smart meter foe
Sparks fly when outraged Naperville residents confront elected officials who arrested two stay-at-home moms and invaded residental private property to install Agenda 21 Smart Meters.
Smart Grid and Compteurs Intelligents = Arnaque et Danger de Mort
Following the 5th Paris Appeal Congress that took place on the 18th of May, 2015 at the Royal Academy of Medicine, Brussels, Belgium
A response to this declaration is expected by the 15th of September, 2015.
From: Sarra Selatnia firstname.lastname@example.org
Objet: 2015 International Scientific Declaration on EHS and MCS / Declaration Scientifique
Internationale sur l'EHS et le MCS 2015
Date: Sept 4 2015
Following the fifth Paris Appeal congress, which took place on the 18th of May, 2015 and focused on environmental hypersensitivities, the attending European, American and Canadian scientists unanimously decided to create a working group and to write a Common International Declaration to request an official recognition of these new diseases and of their sanitary consequences worldwide. The declaration calls upon national and international bodies and institutions and particularly the WHO, for taking urgently their responsibility for recognizing electrohypersensitivity and multiple chemical sensitivity as real diseases, including them in the International Classification of Diseases. This International Declaration also asks national and international institutions to adopt simple precautionary measures of prevention, to inform populations and requires the appointment of real independent expert groups to evaluate these sanitary risks in total scientific objectivity, which is not the case today.
For the Scientific Committee of the Paris Appeal Fifth Congress:
Pr. David Carpenter, MD (USA)
Pr. Lennart Hardell, MD, PhD (Sweden)
Pr. Dominique Belpomme, MD, MS (France --
Chargee de Projet
Recherche & Communication
EMF Safety Network
Engineering Expert to Rhode Island Governor's Disability Board
August 24, 2015
CONTACT: Patricia Burke email@example.com
Engineering Expert to Rhode Island Governor's Disability Board, "Wireless Is Not Sustainable"
The Rhode Island Governor's Commission on Disabilities forum in N. Kingston featured testimony from individuals experiencing discrimination as the result of health conditions related to wireless radio frequency exposures. The unprecedented hearing was scheduled in a Wi-Fi free setting in an attempt to provide accommodation for electromagnetic hypersensitive residents. Testifiers explained that they are being denied access to every aspect of society, including education, employment, health care, religion, transportation, and safe housing. Citizens reported that requests for assistance have fallen on deaf ears in RI..
In 2002, the federal Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board stated, "multiple chemical sensitivities and electromagnetic sensitivities may be considered disabilities under the ADA if they so severely impair the neurological, respiratory or other functions of an individual that it substantially limits one or more of the individual's major life activities." Cell phones and antennas, cordless phones, wireless computers, unshielded transformers and wiring, security scanners, and other devices can make a building inaccessible. Wireless utility meters pose and additional threat to the electro-sensitive population.
Utility expert Sam Parrish testified, "Wireless networking is not a sustainable technology for many reasons including cyber security and adverse health effects. "Wi-Fi" has already begun to be rolled-back and removed from installations in schools and public facilities globally. Conventional wired networks are exceedingly more secure and appropriate for the majority of municipal government and public infrastructure."
Camilla Rees of ElectromagneticHealth.org summarized international concern regarding the inadequacy of US exposure guidelines. Retired law professor Judy Jackson quoted Dr. Olle Johansson of the Karolinska Institute in Sweden, stating, "Inaccessibility and discrimination are prohibited by law. Thus, it is not alright to deliberately make EHS persons' symptoms worse." Representatives from Citizens for Safe Technology and Worcester Opts Out also addressed the panel, reporting harm and discrimination, including being characterized as tin foil hats. Patricia Burke of Worcester Opts Out told the panel, "The name-calling and ridicule will continue until we as a society decide to act."
Cecelia Doucette shared "Best Practices" developed by the Ashland MA school system in response to concern about Wi-Fi exposures, and submitted a report on the FCC by Norm Elster published by the Harvard Center for Ethics. "The FCC has ignored the growing evidence that wireless technologies pose serious health risks."
Peggy Patton of HaltMAsmartmeters.org presented testimony submitted to the FCC in 2013 by the City of Boston, "The 1999-2000 judicial challenge to the FCC's 1996 rules never reached the issue of "electrosensitivity" as a cognizable disability under the Americans with Disabilities Act. After more than a decade, that investigation remains unopened. The dockets here have been updated with massive additional evidence of the crippling effects of RF radiation on an admitted minority - but a suffering minority - of U.S. citizens."
A teacher, several parents, and RI residents who practice prudent avoidance to protect their health joined experts in calling on the RI Disabilities Board to examine emerging evidence of harm and to take action.
Sweden recognizes EHS as a functional impairment and provides essential services, and court cases in France and Italy have recognized damage from wireless exposure. A federal ADA lawsuit has been filed against the Fay School, a private school in Southborough, MA for failure to accommodate an EHS student.
Preliminary Injunction for violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act and damages for breach of contract and negligence
In Massachusetts, a 12-year-old minor and parents suing School and Board of Trustees. The minor suffers due to electrosensitivity. School nurse reports similar symptoms in other children in the same classrooms.
Case 4:15-CV-40116 Document 1 Filed 08/12/15
New York Times on same side as Industry in the radiation debate
"The lead paragraph of the New York Times article published today, "Cellphone Ordinance Puts Berkeley at Forefront of Radiation Debate," reveals the paper's bias:
"Leave it to Berkeley: This city, which has led the nation in passing all manner of laws favored by the left, has done it again. This time, the city passed a measure -- not actually backed by science -- requiring cellphone stores to warn customers that the products could be hazardous to their health, presumably by emitting dangerous levels of cancer-causing radiation." The article overlooks the fact that the Berkeley ordinance is simply a consumer disclosure law which brings to the consumer's attention safety information that the Federal Communications Commission requires cell phone manufacturers provide to consumers. Few consumers ever see these warnings because manufacturers hide them in the user manual or in some instances in the smart phone.
"Despite the article's allegation, Berkeley is not the first city to adopt a cell phone "right to know" law. The Berkeley ordinance is more conservative than the cell phone "right to know" ordinance that San Francisco adopted in 2010.
"The Berkeley ordinance was written by Harvard Law Professor Lawrence Lessig and Yale Law Professor and Dean Robert Post to withstand legal challenges from the CTIA--The Wireless Association because this industry association threatened the City with a law suit even before the ordinance was drafted.
"San Francisco adopted a more far-reaching ordinance in 2010. The San Francisco ordinance required cell phone retailers to issue a fact sheet that mentions potential cancer-causing radiation from exposure to cell phone radiation. In contrast, the Berkeley safety notice does not mention cancer or any other health effects.
"The San Francisco ordinance was adopted on a 10-1 vote by the Board of Supervisors. Mayor Gavin Newsom, now the Lieutenant Governor of California, "called the vote a major victory for cell phone shoppers' right to know."
"When the CTIA-The Wireless Association sued challenging the constitutionality of the ordinance, Deputy City Attorney Vince Chhabria represented the City of San Francisco. Mr. Chhabria, now a Federal District Judge, strongly believed that the ordinance was constitutional.
"The case was heard by Federal District Judge William Alsup. Judge Alsup ruled that the ordinance was intrusive as it required cell phone retailers to label cell phones, post a warning in their stores, and provide consumers with a fact sheet. However, the Judge decided it was legal to require cell phone retailers to provide customers with a fact sheet as long as the facts were not controversial.
"Judge Alsup negotiated with lawyers from the CTIA and the City of San Francisco about the language for a revised fact sheet. . .
"Following is the language from the revised fact sheet which the Judge approved: . . .
May 18th 2015 - 5th Paris Appeal Congress, Royal Academy of Medicine, Belgium - European Cancer and Environment Research Institute
A FOCUS ON ELECTROHYPERSENSITIVITY (EHS) AND MULTIPLE CHEMICAL SENSITIVITY (MCS)
Congress Organisation Committee:
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.