Letter from a concerned Kerry resident. It was sent before news that an exorbitant €9m was to be spent on pouches. While it is a positive in that it means students are engaging with their phones less, these particular Yondr pouches do not block RF signals and the students are allowed to keep them with them during the school day. So they are still being exposed to radiation from any smartphones that are still on, searching and trying to connect to wifi and data. The pouches are also easy to break open.
_______________________________________________________________
Letter to Norma Foley from [name withheld]
26 August 2024
Norma Foley TD, Minister for Education, Leinster House, Kildare Street, Dublin 2
Dear Minister Foley
I am a Kerry constituent and very concerned that your critically important decision to remove cell phones from secondary schools may be overturned as a result of misinformed media coverage and peer pressure from conflict-of-interest lobbyists acting for the telecom sector. While talk shows encourage heated debates over whether children need mobiles so that parents can reach them after school, zero discussion is happening regarding the serious and life-long effects of exposure to the radiofrequency radiation emitted by the digital devices being used by schoolchildren.
Minister, I urge you please to read the section entitled: ‘Children’s unique vulnerability to wireless radiation’, 1 in ‘Wireless technologies, non-ionizing electromagnetic fields and children: identifying and reducing health risks.’ One member of the international group of co-authors, Professor Tom Butler of UCC, has given evidence in an UK Judicial Review. 2
As a former satellite and microwave communications engineer, and currently a Cork academic 2 Professor Butler is uniquely placed having a scientific understanding of how wireless technologies work, as well as the cost to human health, especially to children and young people.
The US Environmental Health Trust 3 has also issued guidance on the vulnerability of children to wireless radiation. They note that children have smaller heads than adults so cellphone / wireless radiation can penetrate deeper into their brains because there is a shorter distance from the skull to the brain centre; thinner skulls offer less protection against radiation; disrupt brain development; and the higher water content in children’s brains and bodies conducts more radiation (just as electricity travels quicker through water). Children’s smaller bodies, shorter arms mean inevitably they hold a device (with multiple antennae such as a smart phone) closer to them exposing more body parts to higher dosages.
Also,
“Children have more active stem cells in their bodies. Research show that stem cells are often more reactive to low levels of microwave radiation than other cells. Stem cells are cells that differentiate into specialized cell types and make more cells. Thus, the critical cells responsible for our children’s development are the most impacted by wireless!” 3
The health risks associated with wireless devices have been assessed independently by the insurance industry the majority of who exclude cover for any ill health condition arising as a result of exposure to wireless devices and / or wireless infrastructure. 4
In the U.K. a group of doctors and scientists recognized the need to train fellow medical professionals in radiation knowledge and formed the ‘Physicians Health Initiative for Radiation and Environment’ (PHIRE).
PHIRE reported on the case of a 13-year-old British child unable to go to school following constant exposure to mobile phones and wi-fi because she became very sick. “Our daughter was put through misery that no child should have to endure.” 5
After 5 years battling their case through various hearings the child’s ‘Electrohypersensitivity’ was finally recognized and an Education Healthcare Plan (EHCP) was awarded in July 2022 enabling her to attend school with no mobile phones and no wifi in the classroom. 5
Your decision, Minister Foley, to ban mobile phones from schools could similarly protect Irish parents from the anguish of many years of discrimination fighting for the right to education for their electromagnetic sensitive children because Irish schoolchildren are not ‘exempt’ from suffering from this condition.
The Dutch Ministry of Health, and the Dutch Institute for Human Rights have acknowledged that EHS is a disability 6 and as such falls under the UN ‘Convention on the Rights of People with Disabilities.’
In 2019 a report by the European Economic & Social Committee (EESC), (advisers to the European Parliament and European Commission) was published called: ‘Digitalisation – Challenges for Europe’ 7a. Page 85 is devoted to ‘Electromagnetic hypersensitivity.’
The EESC estimate was that “between 3% and 5% of the population [of each EU country] are electro-sensitive, meaning that some 13 million Europeans may suffer from this syndrome.” A later report by the EESC noted that the numbers of EHS are rising. 7b [There is no published data that I am aware of which states how many of these citizens are children].
The 2019 report also noted:
“In addition to health problems, this [exposure to electromagnetic fields] can result in limited access to many public or private facilities, especially in buildings where devices have been installed for transmitting wireless technology.” 5a
… “These people may sometimes suffer the incomprehension and scepticism of doctors who do not deal with this syndrome professionally and therefore fail to offer proper diagnosis and treatment.” 5a
“The EU should assist currently affected groups and limit exposure fields in light of the recommendations set out in this opinion, especially with respect to recognising this exposure as a cause of functional disability and environmental illness.” 7a
Perhaps this is a pertinent time to reflect on the ‘Precautionary Principle’ that is supposed to be an indelible part of the European framework protecting all EU citizens from harms not yet causally recognized or indeed, causally recognized but challenged by some with conflicts-of-interest who could no longer continue their operations without cost-incurring adjustments.
It is time also to act on the Council of Europe’s Recommendations to member states issued in 2011 which as yet have been totally ignored by Ireland.
Resolution 1815 8 on ‘The potential dangers of electromagnetic fields and their effect on the environment’ 5 specifically states with regards to children that member states should:
8.3.1 develop within different ministries (education, environment and health) targeted information campaigns aimed at teachers, parents and children to alert them to the specific risks of early, ill-considered and prolonged use of mobiles and other devices emitting microwaves;
8.3.2 for children in general, and particularly in schools and classrooms, give preference to wired Internet connections, and strictly regulate the use of mobile phones by schoolchildren on school premises; 8
and concerning “relay antenna base stations” infrastructure supporting wireless technologies in schools:
8.4.4 “determine the sites of any new GSM, UMTS, WiFi or WIMAX antennae not solely according to the operators’ interests but in consultation with local and regional government authorities, local residents and associations of concerned citizens.” 8
Wireless infrastructure must not be allowed to be put up on school roofs, in school yards or close to a school.
Under point 5, the Council of Europe (CoE) Resolution also states:
“Given the context of growing exposure of the population, in particular, that of vulnerable groups such as young people and children, there could be extremely high human and economic costs if early warnings are neglected.”8
A “vulnerable” group also identified by the Council of Europe is “electrosensitive people”. They advised member states to:
8.1.4 “pay particular attention to “electrosensitive” people who suffer from a syndrome of Intolerance to Electromagnetic Fields and introduce special measures to protect them, including the creation of wave-free areas not covered by the wireless network.” 8
While children remain the focus of your intentions to remove mobile phones from the classroom, I should also like to point out that many teachers have also become “electrohypersensitive” and that this is likely a direct cause of the loss of many teachers to the profession.
In 2012 a British school-teacher was successful in a claim in the Social Entitlement Tribunal as a result of disablement resulting from exposure to electromagnetic fields radiation and was awarded Employment & Support Allowance (ESA) under Regulation 29. The Judge stated that:
“were it not for EMR the appellant would lead a normal life with little or no functional impairment.” Further considerations by the Tribunal “included the fact that the appellant would be unable to work in any ‘normal’ working environment indoors or outside – anywhere there was Wi-Fi, mobile phones or mobile phone masts … the jobs where this could be done were few and far between and even then, such jobs would almost inevitably entail use of computer Wi-Fi which the appellant could not tolerate. Taken together the prospects of the appellant being able to ‘work’ … were effectively nil.” 9
The teacher was later awarded an early retirement pension on ill health grounds by way of ‘Total incapacity’ after Wi-Fi was installed at the school.” 9
Minister, this is a tiny snapshot of what is going on. Exposure to radiofrequency / microwave radiation in the environment has been demonstrated by thousands of peer-reviewed research paper. Effects noted of particular relevance to children in the classroom include:
“Symptoms of retarded memory, learning, cognition, attention, and behavioural problems have been reported in numerous studies and are similarly manifested in autism and attention deficit hyperactivity disorders, as a result of EMF and RFR exposures where both epigenetic drivers and genetic (DNA) damage are likely contributors.” 13
I hope that this information will help support your decision to remove mobile phones from the classroom and that it has opened your eyes to the life changes that are impacting between 3% and 5% or more of the population. Those percentages equate to between 150,000 and 250,000 people in Ireland. 10
Is it not time for government parties to insist on a serious cross-department analysis of this growing and home-grown
EHS ‘humanitarian crisis,” 11 and to insist that the Department of Health take back responsibility from the Department of
the Environment, Climate and Communications for health policy relating to electromagnetic fields12 ; it is an in-your-face conflict-of-interest that can no longer be ignored.
Yours sincerely
[Name withheld]
Encl Illustration showing the comparative absorption of mobile phone radiation by the brains of a 5-year old child, a 10-year old child and an adult.
‘Electromagnetic Absorption in the human Head and Neck for Mobile Telephones at 835MHz and 1900MHz’, Gandhi O.P., Lazzi G., Furse C.M. (1996 vol. 44, p1884-1897)
References
1 ‘Wireless technologies, non-ionizing electromagnetic fields and children: identifying and reducing health risks, Devra Davis, Tom Butler et al, ‘Curr Probl Pediatr Adolesc Health Care’, Elsevier Inc 53:101374, (Feb 2023);
2 Professor Tom Butler, UCC, is Professor of Information Systems and Regulatory Technologies at University College Cork. He was Principal Investigator of Ireland’s Governance Risk and Compliance (GRC) Technology Centre (2013-2018).
Other reports by Professor Butler include:
- ‘On the Clear Evidence of the Risks to Children from Non-Ionizing Radio Frequency Radiation: The Case of Digital Technologies in the Home, Classroom and Society;”
- “There is an increasing body of evidence in peer-reviewed academic research that confirms governments and policy-makers (1) may be misled by the ICNIRP (Pockett, 2019); (2) are succumbing to pressures from industry and lobbyists (Michaels, 2008); or (3) are turning a blind eye to scientific and public concerns for economic reasons (Alster, 2015) – which in the UK relate to its digital transformation strategy, lucrative industry licenses, and significant tax revenues.”
And, see the section ‘How does Industry influence UK Policy and Public Opinion’ within the report, ‘A Review of the Health Risks of Radiofrequency Radiation Employed in 5G Technology and the Implications for UK Policymaking’, 27/05/2020, evidence presented in a Judicial Review;
- ‘Phone Radiation’
“…many scientists now believe, based on recent ‘clear evidence’, that radiofrequency radiation should be reclassified as a Group 2A probable or a Group 1 carcinogen along with cigarettes.”
On the demonstrated “association between everyday exposure to low-level rf from wireless devices and cellular oxidative stress … Oxidative stress is associated with many serious neurological and physical disorders, including for example, anxiety, learning disorders, ADHD, Alzheimers disease and skin cancer.”
… This is not the first time that Apple or other smartphone manufacturers have exceeded regulatory radiofrequency radiation thresholds … Not only are the telecommunications and IT industries gaming the regulations to enhance the performance of wireless devices, they have also been distorting the scientific evidence on the adverse health effects of exposure to low-level radiofrequency radiation since the 1970s.”
Letter to the Editor, Irish Examiner from Professor Tom Butler, 25 September 2023
www.es-ireland-com/2023/09/25/prof-butler-letter-to-the-Irish-examiner-phone-radiation
- Press Ombudsman upholds Professor Tom Butler’s complaint on Irish Times article on 5G, on grounds of Principle 1 (Truth and Accuracy) and Principle 2 (Distinguishing Fact and Comment). Posted on Feb 16 2020, www.electromagneticsenseireland.ie
3 Environmental Health Trust, ‘Children are more vulnerable to wireless’, https://ehtrust.org/?s=children+are+more+vulnerable+to+wireless
4 Insurance industry exclusion:
“The Electromagnetic Fields Exclusion (Exclusion 32) is a General Insurance Exclusion…The purpose of the exclusion is to exclude cover for illnesses caused by continuous long-term non-ionising radiation exposure ie. through mobile phone usage.” CFC Underwriting Ltd, the UK agent for Lloyd’s, London.
“US Mobile operators have been unable to get insurance to cover liabilities related to damages from long term exposure to radiofrequency emissions for over a decade.” Source: ‘~Electromagnetic Field Insurance Exclusion Are the Standard’, (p1) Environmental Health Trust, https://ehtrust.org/key-issues/electromagnetic-field-insurance-policy-exclusions/
5 “We believe this is the first case in the world where a government body is legally mandated to make low-EMF educational provisions to accommodate a child with EHS.”
The 13-year old said: “people fought for me, comforted me, and welcomed me… These people were my family, my friends, teachers and sometimes near strangers, and they didn’t just fight for me, but for anyone and everyone with EHS. They are the people we need more of, those with open minds and hearts.” She encouraged others not to give up because “People are becoming more aware of this condition, and even if right now it seems like nothing will ever change, it already is.”
PHIRE Press Release, “Education Health Care Plan (EHCP) awarded (July 2022) for UK child on the basis of Electromagnetic Hypesensitivity (EHS), August 2022 [“Note “Upper Tribunal” is High Court equivalent.”]
6 Source: ‘Step by step recognition of EHS in the Netherlands,’ written on 5 March 2024, posted in ‘Europe News.’ Stichting EHS is a member of the Dutch association of disability organizations. https://esc-info.eu/en/step-by-step-recognition-of-ehs-in-the-netherlands/
7a European Economic & Social Committee, ‘Digitalisation – Challenges for Europe’‘ Section: Social Impact of Digitalisation, Electromagnetic Hypersensitivity (p85)
7b 4.13 Electromagnetic hypersensitivity or electromagnetic intolerance is an illness which has been recognised by the European Parliament [1], the EESC [2] and the Council of Europe [3]. It affects a number of people, and with the roll-out of 5G (which needs a much denser electronic netork) it is to be expected that this condition may affect more.
[1] European Parliament resolution of 2 April 2009* on health concerns associated with electromagnetic fields (2008/2211(IN) 28. https://www.europarl.europea.eu/doceo/document/TA-6-2009-0216_EN.html?redirect
[3] Resolution 1815 (2011) final version, Art. 8.1.4 http://assembly.coe.int/nw/xml/XRef-XML2HTML-en.asp?fileid=17994
From ‘The societal and ecological impact of the 5G ecosystem’, European Economic & Social Committee, Opinion (Adopted at Plenary 20/10/21), Rapporteur: Dumitru FORNEA, TEN 746 EESC-2021-02341-00-00-AC-TRA EN(1)
NOTE: The EU Parliament voted by 522 votes to 16 that the ICNIRP guidelines were obsolete and out of date.” Sept 4 2008 & called on member states to “recognize persons that suffer from EHS as being disabled so as to grant them adequate protection as well as equal opportunities.”
8 Parliamentary Assembly Council of Europe, Resolution 1815, ‘The potential dangers of electromagnetic fields and their effect on the environment,’ text adopted on 27 May 2011. (see 7b)
9 Physicians’ Health Initiative for Radiation and Environment’ (PHIRE), Further detail re: Press Release 15th June 2022, ‘Early ill-health retirement’ and ‘Employment Support Allowance’ awarded on the basis of Electromagnetic Hypersensitivity (EHS)
10 Press Statement Population and Migration Estimates April 2021,
Note: the French National Agency for Food, Environmental and Occupational Health and Safety (ANSES) estimated in its opinion and report of March 13, 2018 that 5% of the population is affected by EHS. This equates to approximately 3 million people.
Source: Press Release A.R.I.E.M. (Association pour la Recherche Internationale sur l’EHS et le MCS)
11 ‘Electromagnetic Hypersensitivity (EHS) is a humanitarian crisis that requires an urgent response,’ Statement by International Commission on the Biological Effects of Electromagnetic Fields’ (ICBE-EMF), July 2024.
12 “The Department of the Environment, Climate and Communications (DECC) is responsible for setting policy relating to the health effects of Non-Ionising Radiation (NIR) including electromagnetic fields.” www.gove.ie/decc
The DECC is also responsible “for national policy on electrical and mobile connectivity in Ireland.” [see ‘Policy & Legislative’, the WHO International EMF Project – Ireland Report of National EMF Activities in 2019/20, Environment Protection Agency, 2020]
13 Sage, C. and Burgio, E. (2017), Electromagnetic Fields, Pulsed Radiofrequency Radiation, and Epigenetics: How Wireless Technologies May Affect Childhood Development. Child Dev. doi:10.1111/cdev.12824
Legal
As per Article 168 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (p4), the primary responsibility for “protecting the population from the potential harmful effects of EMF [electromagnetic fields] falls to the governments of EU Member States.” Each country may adopt its own ‘safe’ exposure levels of emfs / radiofrequency radiation, and many have. However, Ireland continues to adhere to the I.C.N.I.R.P. Non-ionising radiation ‘standard’ which specifically excludes those with pacemakers and metal implants (dental & orthopaedic) as well as EHS people; and denies any biological harms or long-term health effects in the face of thousands of peer-reviewed research papers demonstrating to the contrary. A 98-page report commissioned by two members of the European Parliament found major conflicts of interest between I.C.N.I.R.P. and the telecoms and wireless industry from whom they are supposed to operate independently.
Landmark U.S. Judicial decision – FACTSHEET: US Environmental Health Trust et al.V. Federal Communications Commission; FCC’s Lack of Adequate Review for Wireless Radiation Exposure Limits. The Judges declared the exposure guidelines for non-ionising radiation levels approved by the FCC in 1996 to be obsolete and demanded the FCC explain why it had ignored thousands of peer-reviewed research papers demonstrating adverse health effects at levels below those they had approved including on children. www.environmentalhealthtrust.org
Appendix G, ‘Captured Agencies and Conflicts of interest,’ State of New Hampshire General Court, ‘Memorandum – Final Report on Commission to study the Environmental and Health Effects of Evolving 5G Technology, Representative Patrick Abrahmi, Chair, 1 Nov 2020
Further Reading
i. ‘Planetary electromagnetic pollution: it is time to assess its impact’, Priyanka Bandara, David O Carpenter, Comment, The Lancet, Vol 2 December 2018, www.thelancet.com/planetary-health ;
ii. ‘Children are more vulnerable to Wireless’, Environmental Health Trust, https://ehtrust.org/childrencellphoneradiationeffects/ – see ‘Scientific Evidence’;
iii. ‘ES and Children’, ES-UK Newsletter-Winter 2019-20 Vol 17 No 3, www.es-uk.info :
The French oncologist, Professor Dominique Belpomme, explained that “tablets, PCs and mobile phones change our brains: “They lower children’s IQ and also harm adults. A phone call of just two minutes can alter the natural activity of a child’s brain up to an hour after the phone call because the waves penetrate deep into the brain. I’ve seen newborns crying continuously in the presence of Wi-Fi because the EM waves caused them severe headaches.”
iv. For the impact of cell phone and cordless phone base radiation on more than 100 different proteins in areas of the brain central to thinking, memory and learning see: https://ehtrust.org/mobile-and-cordless-phone-radiation-alters-brain-proteins-may-be-key-to-cancer-and-dementia/
v. “The WHO /International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) classified all radiofrequency EMF (wifi, mobile phones, cordless phones, Bluetooth et al) as possibly carcinogenic to humans in 2011. The IARC has recently prioritised EMF radiation for review in the next five years (2020-2024)” (p6). Source: ‘Effects of 5G wireless communications on human health,’ EU Parliament Briefing, EPRS / European Parliamentary Research Service Author: Miroslava Karaboytcheva Members’ Research Service PE 646.172 – March 2020
The” ‘2B’ classification of RF/EMFs is defined as “A positive association has been observed between exposure to the agent and cancer for which a causal interpretation is considered credible.” Source: ‘Definition of Evidence used in IARC Monographs for studies in humans.’ WHO IARC
vi. Submission to The Joint Committee on Disability Matters, Houses of the Oireachtas – 12 November 2020, posted on December 3, 2020 by ES-Ireland
vii. The International Commission on Non-ionising Radiation Protection: Conflicts of interest, corporate capture and the push for 5G’, Michele Rivasi MEP and Klaus Buchner MEP. https://www.saferemr.com/2018/07/icnirps-exposure-guidelines-for-radio.html
viii. The International Declaration on the Human Rights of Children in the Digital Age Supplementing the 1959 U.N. Declaration on the Rights of the Childhttps://www.thechildrensdeclaration.org/the-declaration
ix. A Comet Assay test has shown that DNA fragmentation has occurred after 24 hours of continuous mobile phone exposure. The radiation received was the equivalent of 1600 chest x-rays.
Comet Assay Test, Prof Franz Adlkofer, cited in Physicians’ Health Initiative for Radiation & Environment at http://phiremedical.org/world-health-organisation-and-iarc
x. Department of Health Ireland- Chief Medical Officer (Press Release June 2011) “….research does show that using mobile phones affects brain activity. There is general consensus that children are more vulnerable to radiation from mobile phones than adults.” “…the Chief Medical Officer of the Department of Health and Children strongly advises that children and young people who do use mobile phones, should be encouraged to use mobile phones for “essential purposes only” All calls should be kept short as talking for long periods prolongs exposure to radiofrequency electromagnetic fields.” Department of Health Ireland
xi Film on EHS wins Award in Ireland
17-year old Olivia Louise Curto won second place at Fresh Films Ireland 2024 with her film ‘Freequencies’ which depicts the life of a ten-year-old boy who suffers with Electrohypersensitivity (EHS). https://es-ireland.com/?s=Freequencies
Electromagnetic Sense Ireland 