Last Tree Laws

Last year, Last Tree Laws worked on writing a Precautionary Principle ballot measure but did not finish because of time needed to address some issues. Instead, we went forward to propose a commission to write such a law, but the proposal was too wide-ranging and is not as concrete as the former. We'd like to return to fixing the first proposal instead, as it is more workable and we have a better sense of how to move forward.

The other aspect of systematic change is supporting independent science. This is another component we are looking at either integrating or creating a separate piece of legislation.

We need to clarify that as a ballot measure group concerned about environmental health and justice, we are also considering future 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 for future measures.

Donate

All donations go towards legislation development and a MA ballot measure, although other states may utilize our original legislative work. Donations do help to cover expenses such as email or website, and occasionally gas for long distance travel or some informational materials. Our funds are very minimal and we need financial support to cover expenses. Our donations and expenses for the past year are available online through the Massachusetts Office of Campaign and Finance or the web page OCPF dot us/Filers.

Last Tree Laws is presently focused on legislative avenues:

• • Preparing original legislation (e.g. screen time, online privacy, 5G ban);
  • Sharing current MA legislation and requesting assistance to move, alter, or stop bills;
  • Beginning work on another state, Connecticut;
  • Sharing information on lawsuits, legislation, and news;
  • Sharing ordinance and other information for town actions;
  • Seeking support to directly pay a lawyer identified to review a strongly-worded ordinance to restrict 5G infrastructure.
  • Sharing updated wireless information.
  • Creating and sharing 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)

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:

• • • • For Medical Professionals: MD 5G Letter (2020)
      • Environmental Effects: Tree-Letter (2019)
      • Open Letter to Legislators: Reasons to Roll Back Wireless (2019)
  • • Additional resources:
      • Evidence Power Levels are Increasing
      • Tables of Strength Electromagnetic (Shared - Informal)
      • 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)

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)
  • 5G Crisis dot com or TelecomPowerGrab dot org

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.

If you are an academic, you are in luck as there is much more information available. 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. 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 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. The Environmental Health Trust puts some funds towards research, and other organizations, such as listed in the medical letter, put money towards as well.

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.

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. 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 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.

In addition, research exists showing alteration of bacteria populations and increase of antibiotic resistance. These changes suggest wireless may change the ecology at the micro-level.

Could 5G cause climate change or deplete resources?

Aside from effects on wildlife, agriculture, ecology, & pollinators, 5G depletes resources and maximizes climate change.

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 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.