The 4th Annual World Electrosensitivity Day is underway.
Help spread awareness, and make the invisible visible, by sharing our leaflet, this website, and information about EHS/microwave sickness.
see also http://coeursdehs.fr/june-16-2021-4th-world-electrosensitivity-day/
EHS Day 2021 leaflet
We are grateful to the French association, Cœurs d’EHS, for once again organising World Electrosensitivity Day.
This is the 4th Annual Electrosensitivity Day and will be held on 16th June 2021.
Let’s make the invisible visible!
Download leaflet to distribute EHS Day 2021
See http://coeursdehs.fr/june-16-2021-4th-world-electrosensitivity-day/ for more information, ideas, tips and posters to participate.
It is difficult to sit back or even to proceed in any way, in what has come to be known as a ‘normal’ way of living on our planet, without being aware of the now potential and more-or-less predicted demise of all living things and our planet.
This destruction extends from human activity with an obvious escalation since the 1980s as noted in many reports in this conversation. A few issues are constantly referred to in most reports on the subject of climate change i.e. carbon emissions and green house gases and the response promulgated is to stop using coal/kerosene/petrol and ‘move forward’ through progress into an electrical era i.e the use of man-made artificial electromagnetic/radiofrequency fields.
Issues that are unlikely to be discussed are the effects of an unregulated market economy based on consumerism, coupled with an endless drive for profit and accumulation of wealth. As a result of this ideology or at least combined with it is the undermining and downgrading of care for possible human/social and environmental impacts contained in policy decisions made. With regard to climate change these principles are manifested through the appropriation and exploitation of ecological habitats, the use of pesticides, fossil fuels, chemicals, nuclear power generation but most recently the unprecedented blanket use of artificial man-made electromagnetic radiation, mainly microwave radiofrequency (RF) radiation, wirelessly generated for communication and surveillance technologies (WiFi). It is the opening up of this issue that is the essence of this submission on climate change and hopefully will introduce some of the main points that appear to be currently avoided.
The safety guidelines used by most countries in respect of
Electromagnetic/Radiofrequency radiation are those produced by a non-governmental organisation The International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP). Their guidelines were drawn up in 1998 and are based on the belief that only thermal (heating) effects of RF are hazardous. However, since then numerous research studies by independent scientists have proven that non- thermal effects of RF can result in serious adverse health effects. Despite Governments being asked to establish public inquiries into reasons for the continued use of these guidelines, which do not protect people, no action has been taken to date.
References to the multiple serious negative health effects can be found in:
The BioInitiative Report (2012) (www.bioinitiative.org), which presents clear evidence of a variety of adverse health effects. It is based on evaluation of research papers.
The most recent and largest study undertaken to date is The National Toxicology Program, by the U.S. National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS) (https://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/whatwestudy/topics/cellphones/index.html). This report concludes with “clear evidence” of a link between mobile phone radiation and cancer as well as DNA damage, a conclusion mirrored in a report published by the Ramazzini Institute Italy (2018) on exposure to radiofrequency generated by mobile phone base stations. (https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0013935118300367#:~:text=The%20Ramazzini%20Institute%20)
This question has been answered succinctly by Bio Scientist Ulrich Warnke: “Today, [the] natural information and functional system of humans, animals and plants has been superimposed by an unprecedented dense and energetic mesh of artificial magnetic, electrical and electromagnetic fields, generated by numerous mobile radio and wireless communication technologies.” “Bees and other insects disappear, birds avoid certain areas and are disoriented in other locations. Humans suffer from functional disorders and diseases. And those that are hereditary are passed on to the next generation as existing defects.” (Bees, Birds and Mankind – Destroying Nature by ‘Electrosmog – Ulrich Warnke’ (bio-scientist with a team of highly respected professors and doctors, whose work document only reproducible facts). The English translated edition was published in 2009. https://ecfsapi.fcc.gov/file/7521097894.pdf
Our country is littered with distressed and dying trees – dieback in trees seems to be linked to the RF microwaves being emitted into our environment. Supporting research has been carried out and published in the journal Science of the Total Environment (572 (2016) 554 – 569) demonstrating and verifying the connection between unusual tree damage and RF/Wi-Fi (updated in 2019): https://www.baubiologie.de/downloads/wug/rf-radiation-injures-trees-2016.pdf
Furthermore, the E.U. Scientific Committee on Health, Environmental and Emerging Risks (SCHEER) published a statement on emerging health and environmental issues (2018). The section on Potential effects on wildlife of increases in electromagnetic radiation (page 14) ranks this as a Scale 3 i.e. urgent and severe, due to the interactions with other ecosystems and species and the possibility of unintended biological consequences. https://ec.europa.eu/health/sites/health/files/scientific_committees/scheer/docs/scheer_s_002.pdf
This issue also needs to take central stage in any discussion regarding health, eco-systems, environment and climate change. With the establishment of millions of millimetre/small cell towers for fifth generation networks and a similar escalation in the number of wireless devices (a dependence fuelled in the current pandemic), massive amounts of energy will be required for their operation and the disposal of e-waste is now an urgent matter.
The UN-affiliated Global E-waste Monitor 2020 report informs us that 53.6 million metric tons of E- waste was generated globally in 2019, made up of discarded electronic devices.
Erik Ekudden, Senior VP, CTO and Head of Group Function Technology at Ericsson, has stated “Some communications service providers have even estimated a doubling of their energy consumption to meet increasing traffic demands while improving their network and rolling out 5G.” … “This is not sustainable from a cost or environmental perspective.” https://www.euractiv.com/section/energy/news/ericsson-5g-could-dramatically-increase-network- energy-consumption/
Also, the Journal of Cleaner Production published a paper on the Information and Communication Industry (ICT) Assessing ICT global emissions footprint: Trends to 2040 & recommendations (2018) predicting ICT has a global carbon footprint that is expected to grow from about one per cent in 2007 to 3.5 per cent by 2020 and reach 14 per cent by 2040 thereby ‘accounting for more than half of the current relative contribution of the whole transportation sector’ and estimated that by 2020 ‘the contribution of smart phones would surpass the individual contribution of desktops, laptops and displays.’ Every text message, phone call, video uploaded or downloaded requires a data centre to make this happen. Telecommunications networks and data centres therefore consume an enormous amount of energy, powered by electricity – mainly generated by fossil fuels. The predicted ‘increase from 159 to 495 Mt-CO2’ in a ten-year span’ surely needs to be recognized as an issue and principle threat to the exquisite balance of nature and the planet? https://www.ourwebofinconvenienttruths.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/ICT-Global-Emissions- Footprint-Online-version.pdf
The establishment of 5G is not confined to terra firma as telecom operators are currently in the process of surrounding the Earth with a network of thousands of satellites that will provide internet access on a global scale. An example of the numbers can be seen through applications e.g. SpaceX 42,000, Amazon 3,236, One Web (which went bankrupt) have now reduced applications from 49,000 to 7,088. These satellites are fifth generation antennas launched by rockets 50 to 100 at a time and are being located in the Earth’s ionosphere, a part of our atmosphere that controls the global electric energy that we have evolved with and depend upon as part of our life process. Thousands of the rockets have already been launched and numerous ground stations have been set up. Ireland has agreed to participate in this venture with SpaceX. The exponential rise of the subsequent ozone-destroying rocket exhaust, some of which use kerosene, will have a devastating effect on ozone and global temperatures. The carbon dioxide, water and soot being emitted, absorbs the sun’s heat and remains in the stratosphere for at least five years – the cumulative effect will contribute significantly to global warming. The antennas also need to be disposed of every five years, which will see a continuum of replacement and disposal.
Authors of the geophysical research report Potential Climate Impact of Black Carbon Emitted by Rockets (2010) refer to the effects of only 1,000 launches per year stating that it would ‘create a persistent layer of black carbon particles’ that could cause ‘significant changes in global atmospheric circulation and distributions of ozone and temperature.’ https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1029/2010GL044548
Great alarm is often expressed when the media inform us of melting ice caps and the impending disaster of such an occurrence. Science has revealed that if the ice caps are subjected to microwave RF radiation, it will melt quite rapidly – the suns electromagnetic waves, absorb into water and ice whereas man-made artificial electromagnetic fields such as RF microwaves pass through water and ice resulting in a subsequent rapid melting of the ice.
Council of Europe, Parliamentary Assembly, Resolution 1815 (2011) – The potential dangers of electromagnetic fields and their effect on the environment expresses regret that, ‘despite calls for … precautionary principle and despite all the recommendations, declarations and a number of statutory and legislative advances, there is still a lack of reaction to known or emerging environmental and health risks and virtually systematic delays in adopting and implementing effective preventive measures.’
https://assembly.coe.int/nw/xml/XRef/Xref-XML2HTML-en.asp?fileid=17994
In the December 2018 issue of the medical journal The Lancet, comment was made by the independent Oceania Radiofrequency Scientific Advisory Association ‘Planetary Electromagnetic Pollution: It is Time to Assess its Impact’ based upon the evaluation of 2,266 peer-reviewed studies on the effects of EMF/RF on biological systems of humans, animals and plants and concluded that 68.2% have been proven to be true, without doubt.
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanplh/article/PIIS2542-5196(18)30221-3/fulltext
What we need is honesty, transparency re policy decisions, knowledge and awareness.
The Government needs to focus on environmentally sustainable infrastructure such as fibre optics/shielded wired systems and ensure that these are placed immediately in schools to reduce wireless exposure to children.
The densification of antenna for fourth generation LTE and fifth generation networks and the amount of energy needed to power these constitutes a long-term disaster for public safety, our climate and planet. Climate policy must take into account a full assessment of the potential impact of this densification along with the growing evidence regarding adverse health effects, effects on ecological habitats and wildlife as well as the extraction, production, transportation, and disposal of materials used for wireless technologies and the overall climate impact.
Guidelines on electromagnetic/RF wireless radiation should be biologically based and relate to current findings in independent scientific research.
An independent interdisciplinary committee should be set up to review the available science, identify gaps in information and knowledge, set priorities and hold a public inquiry into the current guidelines.
A public awareness campaign related e.g. to information within the Council of Europe Resolution 1815 (as mentioned above) should be set up along with information on protection/minimising health effects in all its forms (physical, social and emotional) from RF/WiFi and all technology on children.
The Precautionary Principle should be adopted.
Stop treating RF wireless radiation as if it is not there.
Start regulating the out-of-control telecommunication industry.
Thanking you for this opportunity, Ethna Monks, member of es-ireland.com
JOURNAL OF CANCER SCIENCE AND CLINICAL THERAPEUTICS 2021
Citation: Lennart Hardell, Mona Nilsson, Tarmo Koppel, Michael Carlberg. Aspects on the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP) 2020 Guidelines on Radiofrequency Radiation. Journal of Cancer Science and Clinical Therapeutics 5 (2021): 250-285.
Abstract
The International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP) published 2020 updated guidelines on radiofrequency (RF) radiation in the frequency range 100 kHz to 300 GHz. Harmful effects on human health and the environment at levels below the guidelines are downplayed although evidence is steadily increasing. Only thermal (heating) effects are acknowledged and therefore form the basis for the guidelines. Despite the increasing scientific evidence of non-thermal effects, the new ICNIRP guidelines are not lower compared with the previous levels. Expert groups from the WHO, the EU Commission and Sweden are to a large extent made up of members from ICNIRP, with no representative from the many scientists who are critical of the ICNIRP standpoint.
EU; WHO; ICNIRP; 5G; Microwave radiation
………
7. Conclusion
ICNIRP’s conclusion [48] on cancer risks is: “In summary, no effects of radiofrequency EMFs on the induction or development of cancer have been substantiated.” This conclusion is not correct and is contradicted by scientific evidence. Abundant and convincing evidence of increased cancer risks and other negative health effects are today available. The ICNIRP 2020 guidelines allow exposure at levels known to be harmful. In the interest of public health, the ICNIRP 2020 guidelines should be immediately replaced by truly protective guidelines produced by independent scientists.
READ FULL ARTICLE HERE https://www.fortunejournals.com/articles/aspects-on-the-international-commission-on-nonionizing-radiation-protection-icnirp-2020-guidelines-on-radiofrequency-radiation.html
Professor Yuri Grigoriev, who was a member and former chair of the Russian National Committee of Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection, died on 6th April 2021, aged 95.
Professor Grigoriev had worked on the issue of EMF and adverse health effects since 2003.
“A man of integrity and compassion who was steadfast in his desire to protect humankind from EMF risks” – EMF Scientist Appeal
A tribute to Professor Grigoriev from Microwave News https://microwavenews.com/news-center/yuri-grigoriev
Professor Yuri Grigoriev calls for order and the world needs to listen http://www.folkets-stralevern.no/nyheter/professor-yuri-grigoriev-calls-for-order-and-the-world-needs-to-listen/
Russian National Committee on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection and EMF RF standards. New conditions of EMF RF exposure and guarantee of the health to population. https://www.radiationresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/021235_grigoriev.pdf
Decision of Russian National Committee on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection “CHILDREN AND MOBILE PHONES: THE HEALTH OF THE FOLLOWING GENERATIONS IS IN DANGER https://www.who.int/peh-emf/project/mapnatreps/RUSSIA%20report%202008.pdf
We were saddened to hear of the death of Con Colbert, who died on 31st March 2021.
Con was a founding member of Irish Electromagnetic Radiation Victims Network (IERVN) which was set up in 1999, a group who came together due to all suffering ill health effects from EMF radiation from mobile phone masts or other sources
For many years, Con was active in helping and offering support to fellow sufferers and also in raising awareness of this issue whenever and wherever he could, contacting and trying to educate politicians, doctors and health professionals.
Con was usually the first port of call for people who had discovered their ill health and symptoms were due to EMF radiation, many not knowing where to turn and feeling completely alone. Somehow people found Con – he offered help, support, encouragement and kindness, and would put fellow sufferers in contact with each other.
He was the group’s spokesperson at two Oireachtas Committee meetings on the Health Effects of Electromagnetic Radiation in 2006 and 2012.
He was involved with, and liaised with the Irish Doctors Environmental Association who gave public presentations on the dangers of EMF Radiation.
Con was a gentleman.
We offer our sincere condolences to his family.
Ar dheis Dé go raibh a anam
Abstract: Concomitant with the ever-expanding use of electrical appliances and mobile communication systems, public and occupational exposure to electromagnetic fields (EMF) in the extremely-low-frequency and radiofrequency range has become a widely debated environmental risk factor for health.
Radiofrequency (RF) EMF and extremely-low-frequency (ELF) MF have been classified as possibly carcinogenic to humans (Group 2B) by the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC).
The production of reactive oxygen species (ROS), potentially leading to cellular or systemic oxidative stress, was frequently found to be influenced by EMF exposure in animals and cells.
In this review, we summarize key experimental findings on oxidative stress related to EMF exposure from animal and cell studies of the last decade.
The observations are discussed in the context of molecular mechanisms and functionalities relevant to health such as neurological function, genome stability, immune response, and reproduction.
Most animal and many cell studies showed increased oxidative stress caused by RF-EMF and ELF-MF. In order to estimate the risk for human health by manmade exposure, experimental studies in humans and epidemiological studies need to be considered as well.
Open access article. https://www.mdpi.com/1422-0067/22/7/3772/htm
Keywords: oxidative stress; ROS; electromagnetic field; extremely low frequency; radiofrequency; environment and public health; environmental exposure; animal study; cultured cells
SOURCE ARTICLE – Joel M. Moskowitz, Ph.D. -SAFER EMR
Christopher J. Portier, Ph.D., former director of the National Center for Environmental Health at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR), and a scientific advisor for the World Health Organization (WHO), recently completed an expert report on brain tumor risk from exposure to radio frequency (RF) radiation used in cellphone technology.
After completing a comprehensive review of the scientific literature, Dr. Portier concluded:
In 2011, Dr. Portier was selected to represent the CDC on an expert working group convened by the WHO International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) to review the carcinogenicity of RF radiation. Based upon recommendations of the expert panel, the IARC declared RF radiation “possibly carcinogenic to humans” (Group 2B) and the following year issued a monograph summarizing the evidence. Because the preponderance of the peer-reviewed research published since 2011 supports the need to upgrade this classification, the IARC has prioritized a new review to be conducted by 2024.
Dr. Portier’s 176-page expert report including 443 references was prepared for the plaintiffs in a major product liability lawsuit, Murray et al. v Motorola, Inc. et al., filed in the Superior Court for the District of Columbia against the telecommunications industry. The report appears as Exhibit 3 in a recent filing with the Court.
Christopher J. Portier. Expert Report. Exhibit C. Murray et al. v. Motorola, Inc. et al. Superior Court for the District of Columbia. March 1, 2021. pp. 1-176. http://bit.ly/PortierExpertReport.
The report can be downloaded from: http://bit.ly/PortierExpertReport
FULL ARTICLE (Please share from here) https://www.saferemr.com/2021/03/expert-report-by-former-us-government.html?fbclid=IwAR2ct0RonulQpDUaFdsOXtNQ2a-fF-vUJF1igResI60enT2KaDh7HE3iZTk
Letter and petition will be delivered to Dr. Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus in April
PETITION TO ACCOMPANY LETTER BELOW. PLEASE SIGN AND SHARE WIDELY https://www.change.org/p/letter-to-the-who-for-lower-emf-exposure
To: Dr. Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus,
Director-General of the World Health Organization (WHO)
International Public call for Protection from
Non-ionizing Electromagnetic Field (EMF) Exposure
We write as experts in bioelectromagnetics with grave concerns about the public health and environmental impacts of exponentially increasing use of wireless radiating devices relying on radiofrequencey (RF) and extremely low frequency (ELF) electromagnetic field (EMF) throughout the world today. As the authors of more than a thousand relevant peer-reviewed publications on this topic and concerned citizens, we urge the WHO to convene an independent global Commission on wireless radiation and health, and recommend biologically-based EMF exposure limits.
The safety standards used for personal wireless devices such as smart telephones were originally formulated back in 1970’s before the advent of personal wireless devices when less than 0.1% of the civilian population lived close to RF transmitters of that period such as broadcast and TV antennas. Use of RF-radiating antennas on or close to an individual’s body came decades later with The development of the mobile telephones in 1990’s.
Today in the U.S., Australia, and much of the world, there are more phone numbers than people and over 90% of the world population is regularly exposed to unmeasured levels of RF radiation close to the body. For the first time in human history the rapidly developing brains of young children are irradiated on a regular basis for many hours a day. This exposure to RF radiation is likely to increase even further when the space-based internet from low orbit satellites is completely rolled out in the next 2-3 years.
Even though important consideration was originally given to all likely users of EMF including children, women and smaller adults in 1970s [1], safety compliance testing of new wireless devices has now been focused on models of large male adults using a head size of army recruits of weight 100 kg to determine the coupled electromagnetic energy. Several reports in the peer-reviewed scientific literature have shown a considerably higher incidence of coupled electromagnetic energy (EME) being deposited in the brains of children, smaller adults and women because of a closer placement of the cell phone radiating antenna to the brain [2,3] for these users.
Lastly, several long-term exposure studies conducted with laboratory animals have shown higher rates of cancer, DNA and other organ damage for EMF-exposed animals as compared to those that were not exposed [4-6].
Many expert scientists around the world have done research documenting significant biological and environmental effects of these man-made electromagnetic signals that can lead to pathological consequences and other diseases. These diseases include cancer and other risks that have been described in many reports [see publications a – g below] ; also additional reports such as the Bioinitiative Report, the REFLEX Project Report, the Interphone Project Report, the National Toxicology Program (NTP) Report [5,6], the Ramazzini Report, as well as results in high quality studies by scientists without conflicts of interest [7] . These effects can occur at levels well below the existing recommended RF-EMF exposure limits recommended by the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP) and endorsed by the WHO EMF project to avoid acute short-term heating. Several expert organizations have recently documented the fact that the ICNIRP constitutes a self-appointed, self-monitored group that only represents a minority scientific viewpoint.
Most recently, an expert panel advising the Swiss government concluded that low levels of EMF cause serious health problems, especially for children, the elderly, and those with existing diseases (https://ecfsapi.fcc.gov/file/10122280631517/Newsletter_BERENIS_Special_Issue_January_2021.pdf.) Following the outdated guidelines of ICNIRP could have grave consequences for humanity and the environment. [5-7].
In June 2001, the WHO/International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) classiffied extremely-low frequency magnetic fields as a Group 2B, possible human carcinogen that increases risk of childhood leukemia. Static/ELF magnetic fields are emitted by ubiquitous electrical appliances and powerlines. Low intensity static/ELF –EMF has been reported to cause biological effects that could be detrimental to health, e.g., oxidative stress, genetic, and neurological changes [8-10]. In addition, man made static/ELF-EMF could affect wildlife and possibly survival of many species.
In May 2011, the WHO/IARC classified all radiofrequency electromagnetic fields as “possibly carcinogenic to humans” (Group 2B).
Several important appeals, resolutions and other documents were issued in the last few years by the scientific community warning public health authorities about the necessary reduction on EMF exposure limits and its associated risks. These include the Freiburg Appeal, the Salzburg Resolution, the Catania Resolution, the Benevento Resolution, the Venice Resolution, the Porto Alegre Resolution, the Copenhagen Resolution, American Academy of Pediatrics recommendations, Seletun Scientific Statement, International EMF Scientist Appeal , 5G Appeal, 2020 Consensus Statement of UK and International Medical and Scientific Experts and Practitioners on Health Effects of Non-Ionising Radiation (NIR), as well as many other important documents.
We concur that the present guidelines are obsolete and must be revised based on new research data. We advocate the prompt adoption of the Precautionary Principle in all applications of these technologies and services.
Therefore, the undersigned ask for the following actions from the WHO :
a.)National testing of 677 cell phones by ANFR France has revealed that the cell phones presently on the market exceed the safety limits of ICNIRP used in Europe by factors as large as 1.6-3.7 ; and by factors as large as eleven used by the FCC in U.S.A. [11,12].
b.) Such high rates of microwave absorption measured by ANFR in France have previously been reported to cause elevation of temperature in excess of 1 degree centigrade for parts of the brain close to radiating antennas of cell phones [13].
Peer-reviewed publications
[1] O.P. Gandhi, L.L. Morgan et al. “Exposure Limits: The underestimation of absorbed cell phone radiation, especially in children”, Electrom Biol Med, 31(1):34-51, 2012. doi: 10.3109/15368378.2011.622827.
[2] O.P.Gandhi, G.Lazzi and C.M.Furse, “Electromagnetic Absorption in the Human Head and Neck for Mobile Telephones at 835 and 1900 MHz”, IEEE Trans.MTT, vol.44 (10), pp.1884-1897, 1996.
[3] A.A.de Salles, G.Bulla and C.E.F.Rodriguez, “Electromagnetic Absorption in the Head of Adults and Children due to Mobile phone operation close to the Head”, Electromagn.Biol.Med., vol. 25(4), pp.349-360, 2006.
[4] C.K. Chou, A.W. Guy et al. “Long–term low-level microwave irradiation of rats”, Bioelectromagnetics, 13(6):469-496, 1992. doi :10.1002/bem.2250130605.
[5] S.L. Smith-Roe et al. “Evaluation of the genotoxicity of cell phone radiofrequency radiation in male and female rats and mice following subchronic exposure”, Environ Mol Mutagen, 61(2):276-290, 2020. doi: 10.1002/em.22343.
[6] National Toxicology Program. NTP Technical Report on the Toxicology and Carcinogenesis Studies of GSM- and CDMA-Modulated Cell Phone Radiofrequency Radiation at 900 MHz in Hsd :Sprague Dawley SD Rats (Whole-Body Exposure), NTP TR 595. 2018. Downloaded on 02/01/2021: https://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/ntp/htdocs/lt_rpts/tr595_508.pdf
[7] L. Hardell. “World Health Organization, radiofrequency radiation and health – a hard nut to crack (Review) “. Int J Oncol, 51(2):405-13, 2017. doi: 10.3892/ijo.2017.4046.
[8] H. Lai, “Exposure to static and extremely-low frequency electromagnetic fields and cellular free radicals. Electromagnetic Biology and Medicine 38:231-248, 2019.
[9] H. Lai , “Genetic effects of nonionizing electromagnetic fields”. Electromagnetic Biology and Medicine DOI: 10.1080/15368378.2021.1881866, 2021.
[10] H. Lai, Research summary- ELF-EMF/Static field neurological effects abstracts. In Sage, C and Carpenter, D. (eds) BioInitiative Report: “A Rationale for a Biologically-based Public Exposure Standard for Electromagnetic Fields (ELF and RF) “, https://bioinitiative.org, Updated 2020.
[11] Report provided by Dr. Marc Arazi of Phonegate Alerte, Paris, France:
https://data.anfr.fr/anfr/visualisation?id=ad8014ec-f631-450e-a259-799188714ef9
[12] O.P.Gandhi, “ Microwave Emissions from Cell Phones Exceed Safety Limits in Europe and the U.S. When Touching the Body”, IEEE ACCESS, vol.7 pp.47050-47052, 2019.
[13] Q-X.Li and O.P.Gandhi, “ Thermal Implications of the New Relaxed IEEE RF Safety Standard for Head Exposures to Cellular Telephones at 835 and 1900 MHz”, IEEE Trans. MTT vol. 54 (7), pp.3146-3154, 2006.
Additional information can also be obtained from the following references [a-i]
[a] P. Bandara, D. Carpenter. “Planetary electromagnetic pollution: it is time to assess its impact“. Lancet Planet Health, 2(12):e512-e514, 2018. doi: 10.1016/S2542-5196(18)30221-3.
[b] D. Belpomme, L. Hardell, et al. “Thermal and non-thermal health effects of low intensity non-ionizing radiation: An international perspective“. Environ Pollut, 242(Pt A):643-658, 2018. doi: 10.1016/j.envpol.2018.07.019.
[c] L. Hardell and M. Carlberg, “Lost opportunities for cancer prevention: historical evidence on early warnings with emphasis on radiofrequency radiation”, Rev Environ Health, 2021, https://doi.org/10.1515/reveh-2020-0168.
[d] C. Fernández, A.A. de Salles, M.E. Sears, R.D. Morris, D.L. Davis, “Absorption of wireless radiation in the child versus adult brain and eye from cell phone conversation or virtual reality“, Environmental Research, Volume 167, Pages 694-699, 2018, ISSN 0013-9351, doi:0.1016/j.envres.2018.05.013.
[e] R. Kostoff, P. Heroux, et al. “Adverse health effects of 5G mobile networking technology under real-life conditions“, Toxicol Lett, 323:35-40, 2020. doi: 10.1016/j.toxlet.2020.01.020
[f ] A.B. Miller, L.L. Morgan, et al. “Cancer epidemiology update, following the 2011 IARC evaluation of radiofrequency electromagnetic fields (Monograph 102) “, Environ Res, 167:673-683, 2018. doi: 10.1016/j.envres.2018.06.043.
[g] “International Appeal: Scientists call for protection from non-ionizing electromagnetic field exposure“. Eur J Oncol, 20(3-4):180-182, 2015. Downloaded 02/01/2021: https://www.mattioli1885journals.com/index.php/EJOEH/article/view/4971
Signatures –
Experts
Supporters
PETITION TO ACCOMPANY LETTER. PLEASE SIGN AND SHARE WIDELY
Source Article https://www.lexology.com
Is Wi-Fi sickness a disability? The California Court of Appeal just said it is in Brown v. Los Angeles Unified School District (2d Dist., Div. Eight), Case No. B294240. In a case that tests the limits of California’s liberal pleading standard, the appellate court green-lighted a claim of a woman who asserted a disability of “electromagnetic hypersensitivity,” or, as the concurring justice put it, “Wi-Fi sickness.”
The trial court had sustained a demurrer, granting judgment for the employer, a school district. The appellate court revived the plaintiff’s claim for failure to provide a reasonable accommodation.
The court acknowledged that it is likely the first to recognize Wi-Fi sickness as a disability under laws against discrimination. In fact, the court discussed contrary federal court authority, distinguishing those cases by concluding that the definition of “disability” in California’s Fair Employment and Housing Act is broader than in the Americans with Disabilities Act.
Apart from the holding that Wi-Fi sickness is a disability under FEHA, California employers should take note of the facts alleged about the failure to provide a reasonable accommodation.
After the school district installed a new Wi-Fi system, the plaintiff teacher complained of headaches and other symptoms caused by exposure to the electromagnetic waves. The school district initially tried to accommodate the teacher by turning off the Wi-Fi in her classroom and an adjacent one. The teacher said that her symptoms persisted and asked for additional accommodations. By that point, the school district’s consultant had reported that the Wi-Fi and radio frequencies at the school “evidenced a safe and non-hazardous working environment.” Based on that report, the school district did not grant any further accommodation, and the teacher sued.
In his concurring opinion, Justice Wiley expressed reluctance “about giving any sort of green light to
this unprecedented and unorthodox disability claim.” But that’s exactly what the court did.
The decision serves as a reminder of just how easy it is to survive a pleading challenge in California.
Details of the Case: https://scholar.google.co.uk
Electromagnetic Sense Ireland 