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:
Engineering Expert to Rhode Island Governor's Disability Board
August 24, 2015
CONTACT: Patricia Burke firstname.lastname@example.org
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:
Liz Barris - Los Angeles
Please take 15 minutes to watch this excellent video re. cell towers. Cell towers are being put up everywhere across BC to support the smart meter program. These are dangerous and we should be fighting these just as hard (or even harder) as we're fighting the smart meters. We need to follow the money in Ottawa and in Victoria, just as the money is followed here.
The US is trying to roll out a federal cell tower system all over the country. The government and wireless industry are lying about the radiation emissions which can cause cancer, birth defects, neurological illnesses, etc. We MUST stop this wireless onslaught!
Firefighters in LA organize and are opposing cell towers.
Radio Ad states:
"This is fire captain Lew Currier. Los Angeles County is installing cell towers on 86 fire stations near you. The radiation generated by these seven story eye sores can cause debilitating health effects. Studies suggest nearby families could get sick too, yet the board of supervisors is erecting these toxic towers without public hearings or required studies. This time, be there for us, your firefighters. Call the Board of Supervisors at 213-974-1411. Tell them to stop the cell towers, NOW. This message is brought to you by Los Angeles County firefighters Local 1014.
For those who "tweet", consider supporting the firefighters efforts. This is happening NOW. You can help the firefighters by retweeting their messages. Their video, and tweets are powerful. It is rare for fire fighters to take such a strong political stand.
Please support their efforts! https://twitter.com/notoxictowers
Firefighters's Union Against Cell Tower Installation
Help Los Angeles Firefighters stop cell towers. (EMF SAFETY NETWORK)
Another major breach of security, with Blue Cross being hit again and millions of records stolen. Credit crd numbers, social security numbers, and even information about medical problems.
Of course BC Hydro and Fortis will tell us that they encrypt our data so we're safe . . .
law regarding children's exposure to wireless devices
05/02/2015 - Wi-Fi banned from nurseries in France
Power watch News
"In an unprecedented move, France has passed a law regarding children's exposure to wireless devices by entirely banning WiFi in nursery / daycare settings, and restricted in primary schools to only be enabled when actively being used for pupil education.
"Not only does this demonstrate an awareness and proactive approach to mitigate potential harm from radiofrequency electromagnetic fields, it also demonstrates the first national implementation of the precautionary principle with regard to managing the prevalence of wireless technology.
"Long-term researcher Dr Dariusz Leszczynski recently covered this issue and Finland's official reaction appears to be one of ambivalence: "we've already told people to limit their exposure in 2009, so we've done our bit" despite the use of wireless gadgets becoming obligatory in primary and nursery schools in the country. It's clear that without a legislative approach, people will not voluntarily choose to limit their exposure even if you explain that there might be reasons for them to do so.
Key points from the bill
Australia - Testing liability for health trends (NBN National Broadband Network)
"Two northern NSW resident action groups campaigning against NBN towers have sent blood sample results to NBN Co and its contractors in a bid to scare them off their rollout plans.
"The groups - the Friends of Condong Ridge, which opposes a tower at Clothiers Creek, and the OREAD Project in Kyogle shire - say they have taken a leaf from the book of anti-cell tower campaigners in Wales.
"Under the strategy, residents take a blood test before a cell tower is erected and send the results with a legal liability letter to the telco, its contractors and the land owner hosting the tower.
"The letter states that further pathology tests will be undertaken once the tower is in place, and threatens litigation if any trend is uncovered between the 'before' and 'after' tests. . . .
"Blood tests represent a dramatic escalation in the avenues of opposition at the disposal of residents groups, who have typically used grassroots political action and pressure on councils to stop or shift the location of tower projects. "Despite appearances, Bloom said his group was not against the rollout of fast internet.
"We're pro fast internet but we don't believe fixed wireless is a good technology," he said.
"Bloom noted that when the fixed wireless contracts were awarded in 2011, fibre-to-the-node (FTTN) was not a rollout option as per the previous Labor Government's majority fibre-to-the-premise approach.
"However, Clothiers Creek has existing copper connections, and Bloom said he wanted to test their feasibility to carry internet services that could be much faster than fixed wireless. . . .
Wikipedia entry: "The National Broadband Network (NBN) is a national wholesale-only, open-access data network and is under development in Australia. It is based on the premise that fixed line and wireless broadband connections are sold to retail service providers (RSP), who then sell Internet access and other services to consumers.
The NBN was subject to political and industry debate for a number of years, before construction actually commenced. The 2013 Federal Election and subsequent change of government from Labor to the Liberal/National Coalition prompted a strategic review to be commissioned to determine the ideal infrastructure mix to deliver fast broadband across the country as quickly as possible. The review commenced in October 2013 and is due to report to government in December 2013. . .
A very important letter from Jerry Flynn
In case readers didn't already know this, here are some facts that every school board - No, every community on earth - should know about cell towers (and wireless technology in general). . . .
Readers might be surprised to learn that the biggest single donors to the WHO are: 1) Bill and Melinda Gates, and 2) the USA! Knowing this should help people view skeptically if not cynically any pronouncements from the WHO. Related items are below:
Russia - has a 2,000 METER 'no-man's land' around cell towers, within which no one is allowed to live or work! . . . France - a) banned Wi-Fi in kindergartens in 2015! In middle schools, Wi-Fi must be turned off when not in use. . . .
United Kingdom - Chief Medical Officers strongly recommend that children younger than 16 should NOT use cell phones! . . .
Taiwan - It is illegal for children under two (2) to use wireless technology! Parents can be fined! Parents have to ensure children under 18 use electronic products for a "reasonable length of time."
European Parliament - In 2008 urged tighter safety standards for cell phones and all wireless technology (DECT phones, Wi-Fi routers, etc.)
Russia - It's Russian National Committee on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (RNCIRP) issued a Press Release in 2008, entitled: "Children and Mobile Phones: The Health of Following Generations is at Risk!" It said children under 18 should not use cell phones!
India - Ministry of Telecommunications said children under 16 should not use cell phones!
Israel - Ministry of Health. Recommends youth to limit use of cell phones; don't use them in enclosed spaces; use wired ear pieces.
Finland - Government urges children to limit use of cell phones as long-term effects are not yet known.
ICEMS - International Commission on Electromagnetic Safety (one of the most respected group of international esteemed scientists from various countries) Says industry is wrong in saying there is no evidence that all wireless is dangerous. Urges people of all ages, but especially children, to limit use of cell phones and other wireless technologies.
United Kingdom - Education Professionals Union (Voice) (formerly the Professional Association of Teachers) - Calls for moratorium on new Wi-Fi installations in schools and withdrawal of existing Wi-Fi networks.
Association of Teachers and Lecturers - in 2009 called for a suspension of existing Wi-Fi networks as they were concerned by scientific reports linking wi-fi with impaired concentration, loss of short-term memory, chromosome damage and increased incidence of cancer!
Scotland - over 50% of councils in Scotland are now operating precautionary policies to prevent masts from being sited near schools, hospitals and residential areas.
Germany - a) Germany's Health Protection Agency urged removal of cordless phones; use cabled communications instead of Wi-Fi and Bluetooth. b) Frankfurt City and Bavarian Parliament - recommend against Wi-Fi in schools; c)
The Teachers' Union for Education and Knowledge told its members to resist roll-out of Wi-Fi on safety grounds.
Salzburg, Austria - Public Health Department warned that Wi-Fi should not be installed in schools or nurseries.
Austria - Austrian Medical Association is lobbying against deployment of Wi-Fi in schools.
Belgium - Banned children's cell phones. Cell phones must now bear label showing relative radiation emitted. . . .
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.