Your source at the town and state level for action and thoughtful legislation to protect environmental health, justice, and civil rights.
- August Events
We are planning a remote event for very early August - stay tuned!
More information soon.
- Updates & Requests
- Updated web page request. Help stop or revise an industry-led commission on wireless today! Sign or do not sign, but share this petition/ ideas with legislators and friends to express problems and advocate alternative state legislation in Massachusetts. Time is running out to contact these committees. We erred in saying one bill would leave committee June 15th - a typo - it is July 15th. We need help as Covid19 means it is much hard to contact legislators who are now working remotely.
- Kennedy v. Markey Senate Race. A terrible sign is Markey's continued support for the devastating Telecommunications Act of 1996, which consolidated media nationally and established the FCC as all powerful, taking away some local zoning authority. Check Markey's official page and see how he continues to promote his authorship of this act. Read our blog post for more details on the candidates.
- Submit your questions to Biden.
- Ordinance. We've taken months to work on a cellular ordinance just for Massachusetts, that incorporates the best of every idea we can find. No ordinance can match your town's needs exactly, but please contact us if interested in seeing our draft - yes, still a draft. Please also consider donating to help support our legislative work as a thank you.
- New FCC Lawsuit from the League of California Cities et al. It's a petition for review, and they request that the 19-250 ruling be ruled unlawful and vacated.
- Boston. Once again, Boston was among those submitting damning testimony against recent FCC proposals. One proposal that was adopted June 9 is the 5G Upgrade Order, which allows cell tower infrastructure to grow without limits including permit review. Cell towers may grow 20 feet or 10%, whichever is more, for example.
- Congress divided on 5G Upgrade Order. The extraordinary 5G Upgrade Order, discussed above, received a letter of opposition and a letter of support from members of Congress. Rep. Joe Kennedy signed onto the letter of opposition to the order. See our politician scorecard for more on where politicians stand.
- Mailing List Issues. We keep having issues with our mailing list and email. We don't know if certain email services automatically block certain other email service providers to advance monopoly, but in some cases our email never arrives at all. We don't know how to fix this issue, and have tried different email providers and IP addresses. We will post updates here when possible. Please consider sharing your phone and emailing us - if we get an email from you then we usually find that we can successfully reply. We also allow comments on our blog posts which are posted after being previewed and approved. If you can't seem to get through, try posting a comment.
- Video question. Why don't we post video of testimony? Our concerns include:
- Privacy. We are concerned about what video means for privacy in a world with facial and voice recognition as well as deep fakes - technology that fakes the actions or voice of individuals.
- Energy. Video is incredibly energy-intensive.
- Wireless. Video is incredibly resource intensive - we need more infrastructure for video.
- Monopoly. We'd rather do less to support the economic inequality created by supporting online economies which may be addicting, censoring ideas, and shaping our opinions and beliefs in ways contrary to a healthy culture and life.
- Question. Is this right?
- Know what you are supporting & question what you are told.
- Problem guidance. When signing onto shared testimony or using templates, be careful as some groups have failed to fully explain legislation or be critical of legislation that was put forward by ALEC or connected to other industry groups. As seen in our petition (see no.1), a commission can be dangerous and, besides, delays any action most likely for years. But besides commissions, other types of legislation that has been put forward has been problematic and yet have been promoted minus any caveat.
- Email or testimony distribution. In addition, some groups have collected email addresses & testimony through shared testimony email lists, then shared the testimony and email addresses later with other legislators/officials as evidence of support as proof of support for personal preferences, which seemed far more considerate of business interests than most people would support. Generally, please avoid giving your testimony to people other than intended and to long email lists of unknowns because:
- Spokespersons may copy and bring along your testimony to express support for views you may find wrong.
- The wrong people, such as connected to industry, may get and forward sensitive information: email address, name, disability, bank or legal problems, or other private information.
- Dismissal of good legislation. During the 2019-2020 legislative session our legislation has not been supported by a group spokesperson who insisted our legislation hadn't a chance or was not sponsored. That was wrong to say and seems to have served to diminish our support. Dr. Tim Schoechle, a telecommunications policy expert, has commended our legislative proposals. Besides which, some of our legislation was sponsored.
- Email waste. Also, be careful of sending a deluge of email testimonies to our state legislators and government officials. Signing onto shared testimony and speaking privately one-to-one with your personal legislators appears more helpful to being heard - we know first-hand some legislators do not read emails due to the number incoming!
- Co-opting voices and advocacy. More than anything, be careful of a spokesperson speaking privately on behalf of the group when the terms of discussion are not public and agreed upon by the group. Be careful of groups where members are used to advance sales, celebrity, and take ideas without sharing them with credit or for the public good. Be careful of use of emailed or written testimonies as a generic binder of support for any one person, who can then claim the testimony means something different than intended or as desired by that individual.
- Collaboration failure. We have shared events of other groups and stopped for now due to lack of fair, sincere quid pro quo and support. We believe in team work, but not at our expense or that of others. Many people work on this issue for free and work hard - failure to provide generous recognition and support increases the pain of doing so and pushes away volunteers.
- Public conference. Hopefully obvious, but be careful of sharing any sensitive information on a public phone conference or social media. Industry can just as easily join open forums to prepare defensive strategies.
- Donations. There are costs we have due to avoiding, where possible, "free" services with issues such data collection. We would like some regular donations from the community to help cover basic costs. Please donate!
- What work are you doing for environmental health? Human rights?? Ballot measure?
We are working on legislation to systematically improve environmental health and human rights.
For example, the Precautionary Principle is a concept, adopted in Europe, that when reasonable questions of risk exist about an activity or product, then a halt must occur until questions are answered satisfactorily. With the Precautionary Principle, consumers and courts do not have to wait for deaths and other harm to take action, but can demand reasonable assurance of safety.
We are not just examining principles like the Precautionary Principle, but working on the concrete and systematic mechanisms to strengthen our rights and environmental health.
However, we do not wish to share too many details yet. You can see from our other legislation (MA legislation) that we are serious, but our ballot measure is still being analyzed and edited.
We need to clarify that as a ballot measure group concerned about environmental health and justice, we are also working on and crafting legislation around electromagnetic pollution such as wireless. We are uncertain whether public sentiment supports electromagnetic regulation so far as to make a ballot measure feasible, but are considering legislation development in this area and promotion of public understanding on this topic for future measures or in case public support exists.
Please consider donating in support!
All donations go towards legislation development, outreach, and a MA ballot measure, although other states may utilize our original legislative work. We need the money, as we are not independently wealthy.
Our donations and expenses for the 2019 are available online through the Massachusetts Office of Campaign and Finance or the web page OCPF dot us/Filers.
- What are you doing to regulate technology? Reverse wireless? Do you have fact sheets or resources?
We believe all politics are local and so work at the state level as well as on ordinances. However, even state legislatures are hard to sway, which is why we are also organized in Massachusetts as a ballot measure group.
Our fight for technology regulations isn't just about the environment or technology, but social justice. Our legislation is designed to help everyone, avoiding promotion of products, individuals, or businesses.
Among our best work is critical analysis of legislation and preparing original legislation, put forward in Massachusetts, such as including but not limited to:
- registration of cell tower ownership;
- eliminating mandate on screen time in K-12 public schools;
- school online privacy protections;
- school education on problems with technology (privacy, environmental costs, etc.)
- patient education on digital addiction and electromagnetic issues;
- in-depth analysis of ALEC-funded bills and identification of industry groups.
Additional work includes:
- Analyzing ordinances, laws, and developing many ideas to assist with ordinance development in other states;
- Working on an ordinance to restrict 5G infrastructure specific to MA; (contact us if you would like to share our current draft with your town);
- Sharing current MA legislation (Kirstin has done this online since 2013, initially via a Meetup site Healing Earth Refuge);
- Beginning work on CT legislation, by request;
- Educational events;
- Sharing information on lawsuits and on other organizations and events (even though this competes with our donor pool - we've had to limit this to due lack of fair quid pro quo);
- Sharing ordinance and other information online (we haven't had a chance to post all of this information);
- Researching, creating and sharing resources.
Before continuing, please consider chipping in to help continue our legislative work and keep our online presence. We need funds!
Although we haven't had time to re-post all of our work, here are some of our resources:
- For Medical Professionals: MD 5G Letter (2020)
- Environmental Effects: Tree-Letter (2019)
- Open Letter to Legislators: Reasons to Roll Back Wireless (2019)
- Evidence Power Levels are Increasing
- Tables of Strength Electromagnetic (Shared)
- Reasons to stop 5G and small cell towers
- Energy Costs of Wireless vs Hardwired
- Slideshow: Reproduction, Wireless, and Electricity (Shared)
- Slideshow Notes: Reproduction, Wireless, and Electricity Notes (Shared)
- Is wireless dangerous?
Yes, random exposure is dangerous. Yes, wireless is everywhere. Often the best you can do is try to reduce power density, and this is not easy nor a complete solution.
Scientists have NEVER found a safe level of exposure. If exposure is greater, effects often increase - but serious effects can occur at lower power density.
The International EMF Appeal, submitted in 2015 and presently signed by 250 scientists, states:
Effects include increased cancer risk, cellular stress, increase in harmful free radicals, genetic damages, structural and functional changes of the reproductive system, learning and memory deficits, neurological disorders, and negative impacts on general well-being in humans. Damage goes well beyond the human race, as there is growing evidence of harmful effects to both plant and animal life.
This was written in 2015 - evidence has just continued to accrue showing danger: antibiotic resistance, reduced immunity, altered gene expression, mitochondria damage, etc.
Still, scientists and politicians seem confused by old dogma or ignorance, perhaps since education for scientists and doctors often ignores electromagnetic radiation and fails to include a full range of relevant studies: physics, chemistry, biology, ecology, and electrical engineering. Spokespersons for the National Toxicological Program (NTP) dismissed the findings of "clear evidence of cancer" to the press by saying the exposures were abnormal. In fact, in the NTP study exposures were not only legal, but far from abnormal. The truth is, our legal, ordinary exposures are in the NTP danger zone and beyond. Our cellphones, as shown by the Chicago Tribune and by others, even emit at levels beyond the weak but legal FCC guidelines. More information on the NTP study may be found on Dr. Joel Moskowitz's site SaferEMR dot com as well as other sites listed as research sources.
Confusion is also generated by "experts" and media affiliated with industry. The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) identified wireless as a potential carcinogen (2B) in 2011. Since then, many of the original members of the IARC committee have called for a stronger classification due to existing research and growing understanding. IARC is part of the World Health Organization (WHO). Yet, a few "experts" with industry affiliations maintain the EMF Project inside another arm of the WHO. The EMF Project, headed by an electrical engineer, sends out fact sheets devoid of authors which claim the WHO denies any threats from wireless exposures.
The industry recycles a few experts to deny risks, and sponsors media and legislators heavily. At MintPress dot com, Derrick Broze recently summed up lobbying and 5G news deals between Big Telecom, the New York Times and Washington Post in his 11 May 2020 article "How Big Wireless Lobbied Governments to Build 5G For Citizen Data Collection and Surveillance."
We have a few additional resources, including relevant letters prepared with support of MDs or scientists:
- Additional resources:
- Where can I find more research and information on the carcinogenity of wireless?
We barely have time to post information! However, most people can find reliable information on websites including:
- Environmental Health Trust
- Powerwatch dot org/UK
- American Academy of Environmental Medicine (see policy statements)
- PhireMedical dot org (UK - MD website)
- MDsafetech dot org (USA - MD website)
- Microwave News (decades-long news site)
Some resources on reducing exposures can be found at the Environmental Health Trust and Powerwatch UK. In addition, other resources include:
- BuildingBiologyInstitute dot net (see directory for Electromagnetic Radiation Specialists, fact sheets, videos, & articles)
- CreateHealthyHomes dot com (see tips for hard-wiring iPhone & iPad)
- EIwellspring dot org
- EMFwise dot com (see easy to read tips for earthing, shielding, etc.);
- Electricalpollution dot com (printable list under solutions)
- Electricsense dot com (though we're not fond of the recommended Cornet meter's accuracy);
- ahappyhabitat dot com (for the adventurous & technically minded).
We cannot confirm that every suggestion is accurate, and note that this is a complicated subject. There are arguments, for example, against the value Greenwave and other filters. We would like to warn there are scams - MicrowaveNews dot com/scams has an older article on the topic.
Research abstracts are also available, and sometimes full research articles.
In addition to Pubmed, Aachen University, in Germany, has maintained a search portal that includes some extended research summaries online via the EMF-Portal dot org/en. Originally, the EMF-Portal was sponsored by telecommunication companies who decided around 2018 to stop sponsorship. GreenMedInfo dot com/anti-therapeutic-action/electromagnetic-field-harms has a left tab with symptoms which can be clicked for research lists. PowerWatch UK, mentioned above also has a search function and research listings.
The Bioinitiative Report online provides research summaries and reports by independent scientists. These are in areas of the scientists' specializations. The Bioinitiative dot org has a several charts on research findings from various power density exposures, and has or will post such a chart on immunity research. Dr. Joel Moskowitz, who maintains SaferEMR dot com, has maintained a list of all recent wireless research with abstracts and some extended information on the research online at his site.
There are also other pages by or about the work of scientists with information such as AndrewMarino dot com and NeilCherry dot NZ.
There is interesting research about markers of electromagnetic sensitivity. While this research can be reviewed, another point for research is the actual experiences and perceptions of those individuals. There are reports of suicides and isolation, and there are also many associations of sensitive persons. Some examples include:
- Electrosensitivity UK (es-uk dot info)
- WeAretheEvidence dot org
- EIwellspring dot org
- CellphoneTaskForce dot org
- ES-Ireland dot com
Doctors Robert Becker and Andrew Marino have described the political problems of acquiring research funding in detail, the former in his cult classic The Body Electric. Therefore, when possible, consider funding independent science and research, either directly or by funding expert speaking engagements. Many scientists seek research funds, such as Dr. Olle Johannsson who completed some early research regarding screen dermatitis effects and, of course, had to deal with the unpopularity of his findings. The Environmental Health Trust puts some funds towards research, and other organizations, such as listed in the medical letter above, put money towards research as well.
- Is 5G dangerous? Does it cause Covid19? Climate Change? Deplete resouces? Lead to a despotic, tyrannical state?
Is 5G dangerous?
Yes, 5G is dangerous. When research indicates higher exposure levels increase adverse effects, how can 5G be anything but dangerous? 5G increases exposures through:
- new wireless frequencies added on top of existing frequencies, which are already jam-packed;
- adding triple the amount of wireless frequencies compared to existing frequencies;
- cell tower antennas in residential zones and elsewhere in close proximity, on utility lines, light posts, etc.;
- millimeter waves which require high power and numerous antennas ideally in line of sight to work;
- special properties of millimeter waves which, even at legal exposure levels, concentrate in and heat skin;
- phased array antennas, which concentrate signals like a laser;
- AI tracking to direct the beam at cellphones, etc., thus directly by or at persons;
- satellites - hundreds of satellites are now in space to provide personal wireless services, operations set to begin, and tens of thousands are planned;
- design for the Internet of Things - 5G is meant to support artificial intelligence and connect to an exponential number of devices.
Could 5G cause Covid19?
There isn't any wireless research on viruses. There is research showing wireless harms immunity. Covid 19 likely has other origins, but wireless inflames responses and opens the cell membranes, allowing entry of toxins. In other words, wireless likely increases susceptibility and effect.
Immune research is underfunded, but troubling. Research by Kolomytseva et al (2002) found 50% suppression of immune function in mice for 2-3 hours following a single 20-minute millimeter wave exposure at 45 GHz. Also see the KompetenzInitiative dot com/brochures for an excellent summary of wireless long-term effects on health. Immune research lists are also available at SaferEMR dot com and Bioinitiative dot org (scroll down main page).
5G would be expected to have greater effect on health just from greater exposure, but also because of resonance or near resonance with oxygen molecules, especially at 60 GHz which is used for wireless back-haul and other uses. Resonance would interfere with or alter normal chemical reactions.
In addition, research exists showing alteration of bacteria populations and increase of antibiotic resistance. While viruses are not bacteria, these changes suggest wireless may change the ecology in the micro-biome.
Could 5G cause climate change or deplete resources?
Author Katie Singer (dot com), in her book Web of Inconvenient Truths, documents a long list of mineral extraction pollution resulting from our wireless dependence - see her fantastic brochures online. Each generation of wireless has required more energy, and 5G is said to steal 60 times the amount of hard-wired connections. 5G supports exponential new uses for technology, from the Internet of Things to AI - which means exponential draw on energy.
According to Dr. Livio Guiliani, PhD, Director of Research for the Italian Health National Service and spokesperson for ICEMS (dot edu), we forget that wireless, like the sun, is non-ionizing radiation capable of warming. Dr. Guiliani is concerned the FCC's authorization to cover the world with satellites will mean heating of the air equivalent to the sun:
If they will succeed in covering more than 95% of lands, and if they will exceed only 30% more than IEEE and ICNIRP reference levels for microwaves with regards to ordinary people, we'll have a cover of almost all lands at 13 W/kg. Indeed reference level of IEEE and ICNIRP for people and microwaves is 10 W/Kg.
But 13 W/kg is 1% of the solar constant (1,3 kW/sqm).
Half of the solar constant is reflected, a quarter supply the cycle of water. The residual energy is absorbed by deserts and earth surface. Only 1% is exploited by biosphere.
They (FCC, Ellon Musk and Co.) want to pour on the earth the same quantity of energy that the sun releases to our biosphere.
While ONU debates around the greenhouse effect (which will keep a part of the released energy from satellites upon lands)...
We need interim exposure limits based on PP - 0,1 W/sqm as in some Countries of Europe and in Russia, or less - and interim quality standards based on ALARA - 1 mW/sqm, as in the Resolution of Salzburg (2000), or less- and interim limits for occasional exposures (not valid for earth cover from sky) deduced from the thermal threshold, having applied a safety factor equal to 100 (as in IRPA Guidelines 1989, instead 50 as in IEEE, 1992, or ICNIRP, 1998, standards), recognizing the thermal threshold at 2 W/Kg. Thus we could have occasional exposure limits like global exposure limits in China (or less, if we consider the thermal threshold for drugs-dependent people at 1 W/Kg as early Jones suggested; on the contrary today some researcher is encouraged to propose new higher thermal threshold in order to increase current limits: F Adibzadeh, M M Paulides, G C van Rhoon. SAR thresholds for electromagnetic exposure using functional thermal dose limits. Int J Hyperth 34 (8), 1248-1254, 2018). Otherwise electrosmog will be not only a health hazard but also an environmental and climate hazard!
Will 5G increase tyranny of the state?
5G increases the ability of dictators to conduct surveillance and minute controls. This can be seen in China, which has a surveillance system united with social credit points - perceived enemies of the state and their families are denied access to good schools, fun, travel, etc., via lockstep tracking.
5G also increases ability of stalkers, domestic abusers, and criminals to track or hack, the latter through a larger 5G attack surface and from increasing use for systems such as driverless cars.
The ability to conduct covert surveillance is possible just from use of WiFi. MocoSafeG recently shared a guide discussing how from a distance or outside a home researchers could identify keystrokes, location, words (lipreading), and number of persons. The technology for this is improving and can be expected to soon be accessible to many criminals. 5G, be emitting a strong signal, will make this type of covert surveillance easy.
Recent Blog Posts