What’s in a name? What are Last Tree Laws?


What’s in a name? What are Last Tree Laws?

Last Tree Laws reflects the importance of saving the trees, entire environment and humanity before the last tree falls by working to change laws and develop legislation. A lack of democracy, corruption, and poverty is, after all, a cause of environmental degradation and clear cutting: trees need healthy democracies.

The Lorax is a children’s book written by Dr. Seuss which neatly explains the significance of the last tree to humanity. In the story, the Lorax is a little creature that speaks on behalf of trees, even as the Once-ler ignores him and continues to cut down the trees for profits until not a tree is left but for a seed. The seed is all that is left behind in a world that is now dark, sad, and dreary from pollution, where before it was lush and bright from trees and sunlight. A child is given the seed, and told that nothing will get better unless “Someone like you cares a whole awful lot.”

This shows individual choices, from businesses to consumers and children, determine our path and create our environment. Only great passion and effort can effect global change.

A second connection is to the saying that, “When the last tree has been cut down, the last fish caught, the last river poisoned, only then will we realize that we cannot eat money.” This points to the risks of starvation and death when our connection to the environment is ignored and sensible protections swept away by the illusions of greed. The illusion of economic wealth versus true wealth is key. Destroying Truffula trees leaves the Once-ler with a lonely future, pollution, and poverty. True wealth is in clean water, soil, plants, and sunlight, all of which as necessary to our life as air. Caring for our environment allows sustenance and beauty to coexist.

Details in too many proposed or existing Massachusetts laws favor special interests and personal gain, instead of support the people and our environment. For a livable world we need more Last Tree Laws.

Safer Utilities Amendment


Scroll down for sample amendments to limit the smart grid.

Why? As far back as 2014, warnings were filed with the DPU that people were getting very sick from the ‘smart’ grid – such as Dr. Robert Pontius Gilmore who was one of four members appointed by Clark University to examine the technologies; Dr. William Rea, MD; physicist Dr. William Bruno; BLEC; MACI — alongside sad stories from residents. But the DPU has refused to bend, mandating the grid and current bill H. 3309 includes a provision to mandate the ‘smart’ grid across the state and require ratepayers cover all costs.

We need to stop, even if money is to be made by a few and even if there are federal grants. The modern utility grid is a liability risk due to danger: wireless emissions, power quality, fire hazards, cybersecurity, etc. Cybersecurity is getting harder to control, so electromechanical operation is safer. Ukraine lost control of its grid once thanks to a Russian cyberattack. If the same happened in the USA, our grid could be down for a year not only because of labor, but because we would lack parts. Denial exists because the grid is a cash cow, and the utilities use ratepayer funds to market the mess as green.

Below is a sample amendment for H. 3309. This is not the only possibility, but a start.


I. Require healthy, hardened, safe infrastructure and end ‘smart’ grid mandate

[Mr.] [Ms.] moves to amend the bill H. 3309 by striking out “advanced metering infrastructure” in line 11 and inserting in place thereof the following new text:-

“safe, reliable, cybersecure, hardened, climate-change ready infrastructure of good power quality and minimal electromagnetic emissions”

[Mr.] [Ms.] moves to amend the bill H. 3309 by striking out “submit a plan for implementation of advanced metering infrastructure” in line 32 to 33 and inserting in place thereof the following new text:-

“submit a plan for implementation of safe, reliable, cybersecure, hardened, climate-change ready infrastructure that provides ratepayers good power quality of minimal electromagnetic emissions at reasonable cost”

[Mr.] [Ms.] moves to amend the bill H. 3309 by striking out “advanced metering” in line 49 and inserting in place thereof the following new text:-

“safe, reliable”

Protect privacy and remove strange transfer of all ‘detailed’ customer data to new energy supplier:

[Mr.] [Ms.] moves to amend the bill H. 3309 by striking out “access to detailed” in line 32 and inserting in place thereof the following new text:-

“access only to necessary”

[Mr.] [Ms.] moves to amend the bill H. 3309 by adding the following paragraph:-

“i. Distribution, utility, and non-utility companies and associated entities, including providers of software and other equipment, shall collect and share only the minimum of data necessary to supply and improve services and shall not sell or transfer data for any other purpose, except in the case of a court-ordered warrant for a specific individual.”

Eliminate fees for opting out of the ‘smart’ or AMI grid

[Mr.] [Ms.] moves to amend the bill H. 3309 by striking out “charge such a customer any reasonable and necessary fees for delivering non-advanced metering service” in lines 18 to 19 and inserting in place thereof the following new text:-

“shall not charge the customer a fee”


Agent Provocateurs and Efficacy


By Kirstin Beatty, with thanks to Sigrid Schmalzer for the sickle cell details

Updated 21 July 2021, 6 April 2022


Some people wrongly believe the Black Panthers were anti-white and violent (they promoted self defense), but setting that aside a moment, notice what can be learned from their experience.

One successful project was that the Black Panthers provided sickle cell testing and highlighted how the health of African-Americans had been neglected, using the issue to advocate for free and better health care and better treatment of African Americans and rallying support.

As the Black Panthers gained publicity and support by highlighting the health care issue, the government stepped in and began to offer sickle cell testing — suddenly grants of money were provided to professionals, to the wealthy and white, while bypassing the Black Panthers.

The sickle cell testing provided by the government was welcome, but the Black Panthers also needed thanks and continuing support for their work, including for the fair point of needing decent health care and payment for their work.

The loss of sickle cell organizing and testing events hit the Black Panthers hard, as fewer events with testing for African-Americans meant less opportunity to share the message. Government action on sickle cell testing appeared on its face to have solved the problem, but African-Americans still lacked access to decent health care.

Instead of the government offering sincere support, the FBI had also infiltrated the Black Panther movement at every level to destroy it with agent provocateurs.

J. Edgar Hoover’s FBI infiltrated many different groups: socialists, communists, peace activists, etc., as part of a counter intelligence program or COINTELPRO.

As far as the Black Panthers, the COINTELPRO sought to sow violence between the Black Panthers and others, disrupt scheduling, promote paranoia, fuel jealousy, accuse innocents of being ‘informants’, tap phones, employ the KKK, plant disinformation in the media, falsely define Black Panthers as white racists, and kill and imprison members – the same members who professed the right to self defense which, ironically, is today often a right-wing, white-faced mantra which the Black Panthers were not.

This concerted attack is what destroyed the Black Panthers, which originally had wide-spread support among the African American community but was destroyed from the inside. In this context, the decision of the government to support sickle cell testing seems to have been designed to undermine a major source of the Black Panther’s membership growth.

Despite being painted as white racists, the Black Panthers in fact sought to fight racism through solidarity with people of all backgrounds. The FBI went after the Black Panthers not just because of their strong unifying platform, but because the Black Panthers were anti-capitalist, because capitalism or profit motives had fostered slavery.

How could things have been different?

I think first we need to recognize how important working together in unity can be. The FBI sought to create division among different groups to divide and conquer.

Secondly, in relation to the sickle cell testing, we also need to be careful we do not lose sight of the bigger picture. When we ask for one piece of the puzzle to be fixed, we need to simultaneously ask for the larger picture to be fixed. Both need to be front and center so neither is lost.

Maybe a little appeasement of the rich and powerful is necessary to avoid being shot or maimed. Whether appeasement is possible is questionable. Still, maybe planning solutions that everyone can support, even greedy planet-destroying pigs, is wise.

Considering how the Black Panthers were never paid for their work to make sickle cell testing mainstream, we need to pay back and thank those who fight for us all, ideally the ones who are sincere and not the agent provocateurs.

Too this day, the poor are left behind, and some ask why Americans don’t fight — some say because we accept competition over equity, and we fear our surveillance state.

All too often, the poor, the disabled, the marginalized bring up problems they experience and after they work long enough the government decides to pay a bunch of businesses to profit from the problem with half measures. People who worked on this issue and especially those who suffered deserve to be compensated, treated as leaders and invited find full solutions, never patronized as incompetent victims.

I believe we need to recognize that when we ask for meaningful change we are bound to have hidden opposition, and we need to stop saying that is impossible and instead look hard for where problems might be.

The Black Panthers were destroyed from the inside by paranoia generated by agents who had the intention of destroying trust, leadership and creating drama. This is so easy. The agent might play the victim, say the angry person has a bad temper, and undermine leadership, capability, and respect with a sneer and gossip.

Opposition does not have be sourced from the FBI or a big industry. Opposition can be local, sent by an opposing political party, local business, or just anyone.

I believe we need an all for one, one for all mentality where we support those who operate as a team rather than as a bullies. To do this, we need to recognize and stop when people  use drama and control to lead away from the goal. Those kinds of people need to stopped and not heralded.

I once found a list online of tactics to infiltrate movements, prepared by our government — perhaps it was for anti terrorism. These tactics can be used by anyone, and so it is important to know those tactics so you can call them when you see them.

In addition to those tactics listed above, the following struck a cord with me:

    • use charismatic leaders to infiltrate and takeover grassroots initiatives, e.g. capturing control of all decisions
    • steer movements away from effective goals
    • develop community with cliques, drama, and infighting
    • gain loyalty and steal volunteers by offering lucrative opportunities
    • capturing and not sharing intelligence or connections
    • faking communications (deep fakes could be used)

Agent provocateurs need not be advocates but may also be represented by paid industry marketing groups, scientific ‘consultants’, or nonprofits. Note that nonprofits may be shams – look at the lack of policing of 501(c)4 tax-exempt groups and of 501(c)3 ALEC.

Industry’s work to shape public perception is quite an evil, so anything is possible with advocacy – US Right to Know has documented how ‘experts’ have been paid off, just as one example.

In any case, how can you tell who is sowing discord and division? On a personal level, sometimes you can tell by whether effective choices or bizarre wrong turns are being supported. On a more abstract level, sometimes it is harder. I think to myself of how my ideas are stolen and peddled without thanks.  I feel no one knows, because I’m not a marketer.

Here are a few points to examine regarding advocates and advocacy organizations:

        • Openness or honesty regarding who runs the organization (online):
          • If concealed, is the concealment real, partial, and is there any reason?
          • If someone admits to or says he/she is leading an organization, then why is it not listed on the website?
          • Is relevant background information shared of leaders?
          • If you are contributing to the organization, then are you listed as doing so on the website or in materials?
        • For what does the group/ person advocate?
          • Aside from education, what kinds of political changes are being moved forward?
          • Is advocacy for the status quo or minimal change?
          • Does advocacy undermine the work of ‘competitors’ even when that work is good?
          • Are there clear policy statements?
          • Is the direction of advocacy unclear?
          • Is advocacy hidden from view, i.e. occurring behind the scenes so that you don’t know what is said?
          • Are mistakes admitted?
          • If the group provides or funds research, is the research needed? Is the research conducted following best practices to allow for satisfactory peer review?
          • If the group provides education, is the education free or at cost?
          • Check advocacy materials:
            • Are these accurate?
            • Do these align with your beliefs?
            • Are any of these for sale, and if so is the price reasonable or fair?
          • Is the group mailing list used for marketing?
        • Where do donations or where does the money go?
            • How much money does the organization have?
            • Is the money going towards marketing that appears to benefit personal sales?
            • If marketing occurs, is it transparent? Are connections to family, etc., and the group made clear?
            • Are donations going towards a specific project?
            • If there is a list of supporting organizations, is it clear whether those organizations receive any part of the donations?
            • Are affiliated businesses or nonprofits reaping profits – and if so, how is the money used by affiliates?
            • Are salaries being paid to those who don’t need it while volunteers who do need support go without funds?
        • Sharing is caring – in public and online:

          • Do they share information that is helpful to you?
          • Do they share relevant lawsuits or engaged in lawsuits?
              • Are the lawsuits shared effective?
          • Do they share relevant legislation or engaged in writing legislation?
                • Did you double-check the efficacy of legislation promoted?
          • Do they share information on lobbying via other avenues, such as federal agencies?
          • Does the organization reasonably reference other outside, useful resources?
          • If not, is there a decent reason such as ability only to focus on a few things (which are?)?
        • Membership:
          • Do you know other members in the organization?
          • Do you have the sense that you are being kept from contact with other members or placed in silos?
        • What is the organizations privacy policy?
          • How does the organization collect or share email addresses and contacts – and is this ethical?
        • Testimony:
          • Are you given an opportunity to sign onto testimony or platforms in support or automatically added without explicit consent?
          • Are requests for support of testimony or platform straightforward?
          • Is there a trustworthy review of emails sent on behalf of the organization to insure consistency with mission and with member intentions?
          • Is there oversight of communications?
          • Are there private meetings with legislators behind the scenes? What is being said and can this be verified?
        • Exaggeration of personal accomplishments, taking ownership of other’s work, and omission of other’s accomplishments:
            • Do they use a name which is similar to a larger, better-known organization (to steal its reputation)?
            • Is work original or does it build, with fair credit, on the work of others?
            • Does work plagiarize or mimic the work of others – copying other websites, articles, theories . . . ?
            • Is name-dropping used to suggest ownership of an activity or person?
            • Note the scale of any marketing or self-promotion – is anyone over-promoted, such as being the first subject of every sentence?
            • Note omission of thanks;
            • Note whether thanks is public to give honor – note BCC: email may not be trustworthy as “public;”
            • Note when giving thanks or credit if major players are omitted, focusing on non-competitors only;
            • Accomplishments – are these accomplishments simply by virtue of knowing someone and being there, i.e. what did the person actually do?
            • Make a list of actual accomplishments – evaluate for originality, practicality, and effectiveness;
            • For legislation, do they admit the original source of the idea or any support?
            • For lawsuits, do they share information on the proceedings and who is involved?
            • Is the resume based on paying contractors to do work and on expensive services, rather than work by the group?
        • Who does the organization or personality dismiss, attack, or critique, and is this justified?
            • If an individual is described as “angry” or otherwise emotional – is the individual in the loop to explain or reply?
              • Why is the individual “angry” or emotional? Is there a good reason?
            • If targeting the competence or work of another – is there a well-explained basis or is this just a prejudicial statement?
            • How does the organization, personality, or industry benefit from the attack?
            • How does the targeting impact the cause?
            • Does the personality or organization effectively isolate or break apart community and collaboration?
            • Is there any benefit to this behavior and to whom or what?
        • Deflecting Criticism:
          • Has the group deflected criticism through money, such as via (a) sales agreements, (b) offering jobs or well-paid bonuses, or (c) by virtue of access to expensive material goods or services?
          • Has the group deflected criticism by virtue of having many connections, or at least saying so?
          • Does the resume show marketing rather than substance?
        • Check reputation:
          • If a nonprofit, use these resources to check:
            • CharityNavigator dot org
            • Guidestar dot org
            • Give dot org (Take reviews with a grain of salt)
            • CharityCheck101 dot org (Not every organization will be listed, such as Last Tree Laws which is politically organized and not a nonprofit)
          • For any group, check connections via:
            • SourceWatch dot org (Background information on organizations such as ties to industry)
            • Check history of board members,
            • Check history of administrative teams,
            • Check primary donors,
            • Check affiliations,
            • Check product sales and licensing agreements (the latter is possible in big organizations),
            • Check openness or direct honesty regarding sales and affiliations,
        • If the organization appears to be doing little, can you contact the organization for information, assistance or advice? Is the organization paid to do its work? Is the organization underfunded and understaffed?

Just a few more random thoughts:

In the UK, a user-led disability services group was out-competed by big charities for contracts, which then asked the user-led group to do the work for ‘small pots of money.’ In the USA, addiction treatment centers often fail since treatment is too short, yet failure doesn’t hurt business and so some see relapse as profit. Just as we ask for representation of all kinds of people in jobs and on committees deciding public policy, I believe we need to do more to get people with disabilities in leadership roles providing disability services and so forth — what happened in the UK is patronizing and enriches a few at the expense of the many.

Also, Bill Gates is overrated and is also profiting off his ‘nonprofit’ foundation. The Bill Gates Foundation has been critiqued for supporting his child’s school and his stocks in pharma, education, and GMOs. While I can understand someone lacking money might use a nonprofit to raise money for his or her child’s school, Bill Gates has more than enough to pay taxes.  For examples, see:

              • The Nation‘s “Bill Gates gives to the rich, including himself” March 17, 2020, by Tim Schwab
              • The book No Such Thing as a Free Gift: The Gates Foundation and the Price of Philanthropy by Linsey McGoey
              • Vox dot com “The Media loves the Gates Foundation. These experts are more skeptical” by Julia Belluz 2015 June 10
              • ChildrensHealthDefense dot org “The Brave New World of Bill Gates and Big Telecom” 8 May 2020 by Robert F. Kennedy and Dafna Tachover

Also, regulations on nonprofits are way too lax. The American Cancer Society pays its executives exorbitant amounts – 2 million plus for one executive alongside numerous six-figure salaries – while maintaining reliance on many volunteers. One letter to the editor, by Vernon Hill  in the Carteret News-Times on 3 December 2009, states his organization sent the ACS 900K over three years, covering 37K of costs and tightening expenses at ACS request, while the ACS spent 45% on salaries but wouldn’t even cover event T-shirts and, to top it off, culled 140 staff positions that year.

The Cancer Prevention Coalition has called for a boycott of the American Cancer Society (ACS) for taking big donations from Big Pharma, Big Telecommunications, and Big Chemical, and ignoring environmental pollution as a cause of cancer.  Yet, many people support the ACS offhand, without thinking twice because of name recognition.

In Massachusetts, Rep. Peter Durant has put forward bill H. 3708, “An Act Limiting the Compensation of Executives in Nonprofit Organizations.” He has the right idea but the limits proposed seem too low: he proposes for a nonprofit with a budget of $249,999 a maximum CEO salary of $49,719. If this were a part-time job, that would be more than adequate, but as a full-time job that is on the border of or not quite enough to support a family without a second income or government charity.

In sum, good work needs support, but abuse of the system and agent provocateurs needs to be identified and halted.

Wired Broadband – Amendments


Even if you set aside thousands of studies showing wireless harms wildlife, wireless is a known security risk. We need legislators, in the very brief time available now, to propose the below amendments to wire broadband and telecommunications in nursing homes, soldier’s homes, schools, colleges, etc.

Any or all of these amendments could be proposed to any bill — please contact us at elm (lasttreelaws.com) if doing so.



Section 6B of Chapter 40J of the General Laws is hereby amended by striking ‘”Broadband”, high-speed internet access, including wireless internet access, and as may be further defined by the board’ and inserting thereof the following:-

“”Broadband”, only hard-wired and non-powerline internet access of a speed geographically appropriate to actual residential, government, and, where deemed beneficial to the Commonwealth including local interests, to commercial needs”

Section 6B subsection (d) of Chapter 40J of the General Laws is hereby amended by striking ”This broadband infrastructure shall include, but not be limited to, conduit, fiber and towers” and inserting thereof the following:-

“The broadband infrastructure investments shall include conduit and fiber, but shall not include wireless components except and exclusively for necessary emergency services of first responders”

Section 6B subsection (e) of Chapter 40J of the General Laws is hereby amended by striking ‘Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, the corporation shall have the power to develop, lease or otherwise acquire, own, hold, dispose of and encumber conduit, fiber, towers and other real and personal property related to broadband infrastructure that shall be necessary or convenient to the fulfillment of such purposes.’ and inserting thereof the following:-

“Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, the corporation shall have the power to develop, lease or otherwise acquire, own, hold, dispose of and encumber conduit, fiber, and other real and personal property related to broadband infrastructure that shall be necessary or convenient to the fulfillment of such purposes, with the caveat investments shall not be made in wireless properties or equipment except as necessary for emergency services by first responders, and if other wireless investments exist these shall be disposed of promptly through sale or through reconfiguration as wired property.”


Section 6B subsection (a) of Chapter 40J of the General Laws is hereby amended by inserting after the last sentence the following sentence:

”Safe broadband access”, broadband access which minimizes security risks and non-ionizing radiation, the latter through hard-wired connectivity using equipment with minimal leakage and with filtering to prevent any power quality disturbance.

Section 6B of Chapter 40J of the General Laws is hereby amended by striking the last sentence of subsection (b) “The first priority of the institute shall be to assess and improve conditions in the commonwealth’s communities that have no broadband access.” and inserting thereof the following:

“The first priority of the institute shall be to assess and improve safe broadband access, beginning in the commonwealth’s communities that lack or have little access.”

Section 6B subsection (b) of Chapter 40J of the General Laws is hereby amended by striking clause (i) “(i) assessing and improving broadband access conditions in communities that have no access or have limited or insufficient access to broadband;” and inserting thereof the following:-

“(i) assessing and improving safe broadband access conditions, beginning in communities that lack or have limited access to safe broadband;

Section 6B subsection (b) of Chapter 40J of the General Laws is hereby amended by inserting after the second word in clause (ii) the following word:-



Section 3 of Chapter 23A of the General Laws is hereby amended by striking the first sentence of subsection (a) “MOBD shall contain the following 4 divisions: business services, entrepreneurial and small business development, wireless and broadband development and manufacturing development.” and inserting in place the following subsection:-

“MOBD shall contain the following 4 divisions: business services, entrepreneurial and small business development, wired telecommunications and broadband development, and manufacturing development.”

Section 3 of Chapter 23A of the General Laws is hereby amended by replacing “wireless” in every instance occurring and inserting in place the following word:-

“wired, non-powerline”

Section 3 of Chapter 23A of the General Laws is hereby amended by replacing “cellular” in every instance occurring and inserting in place the following word:-


Section 3 of Chapter 23A of the General Laws is hereby amended by striking the words “, including, but not limited to, wireless technologies” in paragraph (12) of subsection (b).


Section 63 of Chapter 23A of the General Laws is hereby amended by inserting after the first sentence of subsection (b) the following sentence:-

“Broadband and telecommunications eligible public infrastructure projects authorized by clause (i) of subsection (a) located on public land or on public leasehold, right-of-way or easement must minimize non-ionizing radiation by design, including but not limited to non-powerline wired transmissions and careful choice of connectors.”


Section 19G of Chapter 78 of the General Laws is hereby amended by inserting after the first sentence the following sentence:-

“The board of library commissioners shall, subject to appropriation, also establish and administer a program of state assistance to cities and towns in the planning, design, construction and reconstruction of safer wired, non-powerline broadband and telecommunications services to be used by public library staff and patrons.”


Section 2 of Chapter 7D of the General Laws as appearing in the Official
2021 Edition is hereby amended by inserting after the second sentence the following sentence:-

“The executive office of information technology and security shall recommend and support throughout all executive offices and agencies safer broadband access, choosing hard-wired non-powerline connectivity, power quality filtration, and connectors and other equipment with minimal leakage of non-ionizing radiation.”

Section 3 of Chapter 7D of the General Laws is hereby amended by striking clause (xii) “(xii) adapt standards as necessary for individual agencies to comply with federal law; and” and inserting in place the following:-

“(xii) adapt standards as necessary for individual agencies to comply with state and federal law; and”


Chapter 15A of the General Laws as appearing in the Official 2021 Edition is amended by striking section 3A and inserting in place the following section:-

“Section 3A. (a) The secretary of education shall with the relevant boards, departments, administrators and agencies coordinate a plan to safely hard-wire public education facilities and support safer use of technology. The plan shall be referred to as safer edTech, or SET, and incorporate the following goals:

(1) establishing a hard-wired, non-powerline telecommunications and broadband system with minimal electromagnetic emissions within public schools, colleges, and university campuses;

(2) facilitating implementation of statewide training and educational materials for educators, relevant staff and administrators to clarify relevant laws, duties, and best technology practices for privacy and health;

(3) facilitating rapid adoption of interim best technology practices for privacy and health;

(4) facilitating the revision of statewide educational technology and data collection requirements in elementary, secondary, and higher education to foster health and privacy and minimize risks; and

(5) identifying relevant state and federal laws which interfere with best practices for privacy and health, including questionable requirements for technology use.

(b) For the purposes of this section, SET shall be broadly construed to include, but not be limited to, programs, courses, and capital expenditures including computer hardware and software, networks, television, fiber optics cable, calculators and video and audio tapes.

(c) Subject to appropriation, SET funds may provide grants to public universities, colleges, schools and school districts for the purposes of purchasing the equipment and other materials necessary for SET implementation. The secretary and the board of elementary and secondary education along with the board of higher education may establish such advisory groups or committees as deemed necessary for SET development and implementation, and shall insure members are independent of conflicts of interest regarding data collection, wireless connectivity, technology sales and other financial gain.

(d) The commissioner shall annually provide to the legislature a report on the status, progress, and financial needs of SET.”


Section 26 of Chapter 7D of the General Laws is hereby amended by inserting a new subsection (p) and re-lettering the previous subsection (p) as (q) as follows:-

“(p) to require new housing projects include reliable hard-wired, non-powerline broadband and telecommunications access designed to minimize electromagnetic exposures and loss of service; set policies to limit electromagnetic exposures in existing housing from all equipment and appliances; and where existing housing projects lack reliable and hard-wired access, support reconfiguration; and



Chapter 111 of the General Laws is hereby amended by inserting after section 72BB the following new section:-

“Section 72CC. (a) Each convalescent and nursing home, infirmary maintained in towns, rest home, charitable home for the aged, and intermediate care facility for the intellectually disabled shall limit electromagnetic exposures by safely hard-wiring broadband and telecommunications services, without the use of powerline connectivity, and by establishing policies to limit exposures from other sources.

(b) The department shall facilitate staff and administrative training and educational materials to support the provisions of this section.

(c) The department shall promulgate regulations under this section and may allow in such regulations extensions of time for certain homes and long-term care facilities which the department shall find to be in hardship if the provisions of this section are implemented forthwith.”

Section 72D of Chapter 111 of the General Laws is hereby amended by striking the first sentence and replacing it as follows:-

“Every nursing home, rest home, and long-term care facility shall provide hard-wired non-powerline telephone access for the use of the residents.”


Chapter 12C, as appearing in the General Laws of the 2021 Official Edition, is hereby amended by adding after section 14 the following section:-

Section 14A. (a) Irrespective of all other recommendations for a standard quality measure set as listed in section 14 of this chapter, with regard to every health care provider facility, medical group, and provider group the following shall be required state-wide assessments as part of the standard quality control sets.

(1) Safely hard-wire broadband and telecommunications services, without the use of powerline connectivity, to minimize electromagnetic exposures;

(2) Choose equipment, including connectors and filters, to minimize power quality disturbances and leakage of electromagnetic frequencies;

(3) Minimize use of medical devices and equipment which lead to radiation exposures when optional or accessory to the medical purpose;

(4) Set facility-wide policies and signage for adoption of best practices to reduce radiation exposures;

(5) Promote access to natural lighting and, where artificial lighting and computer screens are used, prefer lighting options least disruptive to circadian rhythms.

(b) The department shall promulgate regulations under this section and may allow in such regulations extensions of time for facilities which the department shall find to be in hardship if the provisions of this section are implemented forthwith.”


Chapter 115A is hereby amended by adding the following section:-

“The office of veterans’ homes and housing and also the trustees of Soldier’s Homes in Holyoke and in Massachusetts shall establish policies, recommendations and regulations to limit artificial electromagnetic exposures of a non-medical nature.

Minimum requirements shall include safely hard-wiring, without the use of powerline connectivity, telecommunications and broadband services; using filters and careful purchases to avoid power quality disturbances and wireless transmissions including leakage; and establishing policies to limit exposures from all other sources.”

Frequently Asked Questions

Frequently Asked Questions

Reprinted with permission, with extra italicized parts added by K. Beatty. Arthur Firstenberg, director of the Cellphone Task Force, prepared this Q&A (posted on the site under newsletters) with a focus on cellphones, to invite support for a petition to halt cellphone use at EchoEarth.org.

Wireless technology is any means of sending information or energy through space
without wires. It includes:

    • satellites, radar, radio, television, cell towers, cell phones, cordless phones, microwave ovens, oceanic ‘cell towers’
    • smart meters, WiFi, Bluetooth, fitness trackers, smart watches, baby monitors
    • wireless keyboards, mice, printers, headphones and speakers, wireless security systems, wireless car keys, wireless garage door openers, wireless battery chargers, remote controls, wireless microphones
    • RFID chips in credit cards and driver’s licenses, radio collars and chips in wildlife, cattle and pets, chips in home appliances
    • wireless hearing aids, assistive listening devices, medical alert pendants, chips in medical implants, wireless pacemakers
    • autonomous vehicles, drones, and robots
      numerous other radio-enabled devices that are proliferating in today’s world

Every one of these devices, without exception, emits radiation.

All frequencies of radio waves, microwaves, infrared radiation, visible light, lasers, sound waves, even nuclear radiation. Most home devices use microwaves.

By substituting radiation for wires, we are swimming in an ocean of artificial electromagnetic fields that interfere with life itself. We are in effect electrocuting ourselves, our children, our pets, the insects, birds, animals, microbes, trees and plants around us and all of living creation. We are killing our planet.

Ecosystems are suffering from adverse impacts on soil, microbial life, plant life, insects, and wildlife. Soil nitrogen can fall from either electrical transmission cables or wireless. Plant life struggles to germinate, shows physiological changes, loses medicinal value and storage length.

Survival of honeybees is now only possible through the intervention of beekeepers who use queen bees that would normally be left to die by nature. As explained in a 2007 brochure review by Dr. Warnke, wireless causes bees to disappear. Synergistic effects are possible. A 2021 study combining mobile radiation with pesticides saw survival of only 25% in one year and plummeting bee health,, while a 2018 study noted certain 5G frequencies could also cause dielectric heating of bees.

A 2021 research review on flora and wildlife impacts published in Reviews on Environmental Health, that counts former U.S. Fish and Wildlife senior biologist Albert Manville and local Berkshire-Litchfield Environmental Council director Blake Levitt among authors, cites more than 1,200 scientific references which find at very low intensities adverse impacts on wildlife, such as birds struggling to build nests, mate, and reproduce (Levitt et al., 2021a, Levitt et al., 2021b, Levitt et al., 2021c). Part 2, supplement 3, includes a table of biological effects available through a FCC docket.

Oceans are a new frontier including sonar, optical, laser, and radiofrequency communications to support military, mining, research, and travel, with floating and underwater transmissions to support underwater vehicles, torpedoes, robots, etc. Sonar noise alone is known to impair hunting and orientation of life undersea.

No. The effects are rapid. Heart rate changes immediately. Blood sugar rises in minutes. Having wireless devices on in your house interferes with your sleep and your memory. Using a cell phone destroys brain cells in minutes to hours, and can cause a stroke or a heart attack. Studies show that even cancer can develop within months of first exposure. When a cell tower is turned on, birds leave the area immediately. Insects disappear. Even slugs and snails vanish. Most of this takes no time at all.

Some scientific references to physiological changes can be found here from pages 6 to 38. PowerWatch.org.uk has an extensive library with documents summarizing research on wireless radiofequencies and health risks: https://www.powerwatch.org.uk/library/

First, cancer is not the only problem caused by wireless.

However, cancer can develop slowly and exist in the body for years, unnoticed, for example as lymphomas that may contribute to exhaustion. Lymphomas are strongly associated with electromagnetic exposures.

Former director of the U.S. Environmental Toxicology Program, Dr. Chris Portier, prepared a 176-page report with 443 references for a tumor court case concluding: “to a reasonable degree of scientific certainty, the probability that RF [wireless] exposure causes gliomas and neuromas [tumors] is high.”

Avoiding wireless is wise because tumors can take 10 to 25 years or longer to manifest. However, aggressive cancers like glioblastomas, which are a type of glioma tumor, can also suddenly appear and end life a year, months, or weeks later. Gliomas are on the rise, as admitted in Denmark, although countries appear to have trouble collecting accurate data.

Notably, colorectal and thyroid cancers, areas near cellphones, are also surging. In 2019 the leading cause of death ages 5 to 14 was cancer, and in all ages cancer was the second leading cause of death, following heart disease.

Heart disease is also tied to exposures, such as through blood coagulation and hidden heart tumors. Heart tumors (schwannomas) were found in two important studies, one at the Ramazzini Institute using ambient radiation and the other using strong nonthermal exposures at the U.S. Toxicological Program.

Almost all the radiation we receive from the universe is the light and heat from the sun, not microwave radiation. The microwave radiation a person receives from an average cell tower is millions of times stronger than all the microwave radiation from the sun and stars. The microwave radiation a person’s brain receives from their cell phone is billions of times stronger than the microwave radiation from the sun and stars. And at any particular frequency it is trillions of times stronger than the microwave radiation he or she receives from the sun and stars at that frequency. And the faint microwaves from the sun and stars are not pulsed and modulated. It is the pulsations and modulation that cause much of the harm.

No. That is like saying arsenic is safe because oxygen and arsenic are both elements, or that cyanide is safe because water and cyanide are both chemicals. But oxygen and water are necessary for life, while arsenic and cyanide are deadly poisons. It is the same with electromagnetic radiation. Visible light is necessary for life. Microwave radiation is a deadly poison.

Electromagnetism is more complex and more fundamental than chemistry. Electromagnetism shapes the sun and stars. Electromagnetism animates life. Electromagnetism is behind chemistry. There is no “chemical force” in the universe. Outside of atomic nuclei, there is only gravity and electromagnetism.
Electromagnetism guides everything we see, including ourselves. Chemistry is an effect, not a cause.

That is looking at both wireless technology and life too simplistically.

Most wireless technology has only one goal: to transmit information to computers, information of great complexity and variety. It is not simple, constant radiation of one amplitude and one frequency: such radiation would carry no information. Instead, it is multiple large frequency bands, each divided into hundreds, thousands, and millions of individual frequencies of all different bandwidths, overlapping and interacting, pulsed at an enormous variety of intervals, in an enormous variety of shapes, patterns and durations, all over the world. Even a single signal from a single device has a variety of amplitudes, frequencies and pulsations, and is modulated in complex ways in order to carry all the information needed to be read by a cell phone or computer.

Life has to also carry an enormous, almost infinite complexity of information in its nervous systems and its meridians, and to store and process this information in its cells, organs and chakras, and in its DNA which is shared and circulated among trillions of individuals of 50 million different species, all connected to one another and to the earth, sky and universe in a grand circuit of energy and information.

The artificial cloud of energy and information is interfering with, overpowering and destroying the natural, living circuitry of energy and information. It cannot be otherwise.

Light is a nutrient. We absorb it with our eyes, and into our blood. It is necessary for health. It regulates our biorhythms. Green plants need it for photosynthesis. We absorb more of the pulsations and modulation frequencies when they are carried into our bodies by light than when they are carried into our bodies by microwaves. LiFi is more harmful to life than WiFi.

Some scientific references to physiological changes can be found here from pages 6 to 38. PowerWatch.org.uk has an extensive library with documents summarizing research on wireless radiofequencies and health risks: https://www.powerwatch.org.uk/library/

Cell phones and cell towers emit the same radiation; size has nothing to do with it. The main difference is that a cell tower emits as many signals simultaneously as there are cell phones communicating with it at that time, whereas a cell phone only emits one voice channel and one data channel. A cell tower therefore emits stronger radiation than a cell phone, but by the time it reaches your body, its radiation is
much weaker than the radiation from a cell phone that you hold in your hand, near your body. And a cell phone emits signals that a cell tower does not: Bluetooth, WiFi, GPS and other signals.
The radiation from a cell phone travels just as far as the radiation from a cell tower.

The radiation from a cell phone will reach all people, animals, birds, insects and plants in line of sight with it, no matter how far away. It will reach a cell tower 90 miles away. It will reach a satellite 22,300 miles away. It will reach Mars 200 million miles away. With 15 billion mobile devices on the Earth, we are polluting not just our homes, our neighborhoods and our planet, but the entire solar system.

Your cell phone is damaging your health whether you are aware of it or not. It is damaging your blood-brain barrier -- the barrier that keeps bacteria, viruses and toxic chemicals out of your brain tissue; the barrier that maintains the inside of your head at a constant pressure, preventing you from having a stroke. Since brain tissue has no pain receptors, plenty of damage can occur without pain. Instead, it will cause memory loss, difficulty concentrating, anxiety, depression, sleep disorders and so forth. In rats, damage to the blood-brain barrier can be detected after just a two-minute exposure to a cell phone. After a two-hour exposure the damage is permanent. There is no reason for it to be different in humans.

The radiation from your cell phone is also slowing your metabolism -- your ability to digest sugars, fats and proteins. This causes either obesity or weight loss, depending on your genetic makeup. It also causes diabetes, heart disease and cancer. Wireless technology is the cause of more obesity, diabetes, heart disease and cancer than any other factor.

The people who are aware of the damage in real time are the people who can feel it in their nervous system or their heart. That is maybe one-third of the population. It feels to them like they are being electrocuted. And they are, but so is everyone else. The few who have heard of such a thing call themselves “electrosensitive.” Those who have not heard of it think they are suffering from anxiety, or that they have a neurological or cardiac disorder.

The first peer-reviewed paper proposing and documenting evidence that pulsed radiofrequency radiation likely was responsible for the so-called “Havana Syndrome” was published by Dr. Beatrice Golomb. She was invited to brief the state department-funded Standing Committee of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine, whose report released in December 2020 agreed with her conclusion.

With a solid background in neurobiology, physics, and medicine as well as an impressive research career including work with RAND and the defense department, Dr. Beatrice Golomb is a credible authority who in 2014 testified, based on scientific evidence, that society has a duty to reverse electromagnetic exposures to curtail suffering and prevent increasing cases of sensitivity.

Many studies include wireless warnings like ‘'may cause hazardous effects to the brain’ (2015) and recommend limiting exposures.

‘Dr. Henry Lai, professor emeritus of bioengineering at the UWA, found that of 261 wireless peer-reviewed studies published from 2007-2020, 91% had found significant free radical effects — when an excess of free radicals contributes to aging and disease — and of 336 wireless peer-reviewed studies 73% had found significant neurological effects.

Dr. Lai has transparently published the abstracts of those studies online at the Bioinitiative.org. . . .

. . . Findings in Dr. Lai’s abstracts are difficult to dispute, since many are animal or cell studies showing significant structural or chemical changes that have serious consequences. Findings of astrogliosis, potential gliosis, reduced neurotransmitters, and rising GFAP levels in four studies are, for example, associated with central nervous system damage and diseases such as Parkinson’s, Alzheimer’s, multiple sclerosis, amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, mood disorders, and stroke, all of which have been trending, with earlier onset, sharply upward long before COVID-19.’ Quote from Hampshire Gazette column.

In 2014, a diagnosis of a 29-year-old father with Alzheimer’s coupled with rage and confusion mirrored trends of a 373% increase in ages 30-44 just from 2013 to 2017. This is far from normal in prior decades.

Skyrocketing learning disabilities and behavioral disorder rates among youth are so great the evidence is before all of our eyes. This is far from normal before the intense adoption of cellphones and WiFi circa late 1990s and 2005.

WifiinSchools.org.uk lists studies showing ‘cognition inhibition’ and damage to health.

The WHO Russian National Committee for Radiation Protection in 2008 released a strong statement including these words: ‘For the first time in history, we face a situation when most children and teenagers in the world are continually exposed [to mobile phones] . . . Potential risk for the children’s health is very high . . . health hazards are likely . . . in the nearest future: disruption of memory, decline of attention , diminishing learning and cognitive abilities, increased irritability, sleep problems, increase in sensitivity to stress, increased epileptic readiness.

Expected (possible) remote health risks: brain tumors, tumors of acoustical and vestibular nerves (in
the age of 25-30 years), Alzheimer’s disease, “got dementia”, depressive syndrome, and the other types of degeneration of the nervous structures of the brain (in the age of 50 to 60).’

Both are digital and both emit pulsed, modulated microwave radiation. And despite what many people think, flip phones can emit as much radiation, or more, than smartphones. But safety is not determined by power level. Damage to the blood-brain barrier is greatest at the lowest power level, at least in laboratory rats. The bandwidth is more important than power level. Smartphones use more bandwidth
than flip phones.

The bottom line is that cell phones have been killing people since they were invented. In each city in the United States where 2G “flip phone” service was turned on for the first time in 1996 or 1997, mortality rose immediately, on the day it was turned on in each city. And the overall health of the population was damaged permanently. At least ten thousand Americans died from the radiation within three months after 2G “flip phone” service was turned on in various cities in 1996 and 1997. Whether more people died from their new phones or from the new cell towers is impossible to know: the radiation comes from both.

About 20 years ago someone started promoting the idea of the “near field plume” which was supposed to extend out six inches from a cell phone, and that if you held your phone more than six inches from your head, you were safe. That is a complete fiction. There is no such thing as a near field “plume.” It does not exist.

The region very near to a source of radiation, where the electric field and the magnetic field are separate and complex, is called the near field. The space very far from the source, where the electric and magnetic fields are tied together and diminish with distance, is called the far field. The near and far fields blend into one another. There is no dividing line where one stops and the other begins. And it is
certainly not true that the radiation stops at six inches. If that were true, the radiation would never reach a cell tower and the phone would not work. And if it were true of a cell phone, it would also be true of a cell tower, which emits the same radiation. Then a cell tower would be safe if you stood more than six inches away from one. How absurd!

And your body is a conductor, so if you are holding the phone in your hand, no matter how far away from your head, the microwaves are conducted into your hand and throughout your body, and your arm is an extension of the phone and is part of the radiating antenna.

If you put the phone on a table in front of you and do not hold it, then the microwaves are just irradiating you and not being conducted into you. But since for some types of harm, for example damage to the blood-brain barrier, the damage increases with distance, that does not protect you either.

No. It is the informational content, not power level, that causes the harm. A cell phone exposes the brain to microwave radiation at roughly 10 milliwatts per square centimeter. At power levels one trillion times lower than that, microwave radiation has been shown to affect ovulation, the immune system, plant growth, human brain waves, and the structure of DNA.

No. We already had 10,000 studies by 1980. Today we have at least 30,000 studies. There are more studies showing harm from microwaves and radio frequency radiation than from any other pollutants except tobacco smoke and mercury.

For as long as wireless technology has been around. At Marconi’s first public demonstration of radio in Salisbury Plain in 1896, spectators described various nerve sensations they experienced. When Marconi turned on the first French radio station in Wimereux, one man who lived nearby “burst in with a revolver” because the waves were causing him sharp internal pains. On the evening of January 22, 1901, when Marconi fired up a new, more powerful transmitter on the Isle of Wight, Queen Victoria, in residence on the island, had a stroke and died. Within a few years, 90 percent of the bees on the island had disappeared. Marconi himself suffered from recurring fevers from the time he began experimenting with radio and for the rest of his life. He suffered nine heart attacks, the last one killing him at age 63. Even prior to Marconi, in the early 1890s, Jacques-Arsène d’Arsonval published the results of experiments on humans and animals showing that high frequencies affect blood pressure and profoundly alter metabolism.

Note: Firstenberg has written The Invisible Rainbow: A History of Electricity and Life, which includes citations for many historical anecdotes.

No. Smart or wireless devices hog energy, resources, and even damage electronics.

State and federal grants conceal the costs of the smart grid with taxpayer money. IT and utility interests lobby for these grants at your expense, often marketing smart utilities as ‘green’. Smart meters allow utilities to change pricing based on any condition, and have been tied to high time-of-use billing harmful to the poor and exorbitant prices or false energy readings. Smart meters also allow utilities to pay less for alternative energy through digital calculations. Massachusetts utility shareholder profits have been rising since the advent of smart meters.

National Grid’s 2021 proposed plans include a private communications network, which few municipalities can afford. Nationally, meter installations alone can range from $300 to over a $1000. Over a 20-year period, National Grid projects customer bills will be 1.63% of current prices. This expected increase does not include all costs, for National Grid expects 727.92 million in savings, resulting in total costs of only 480.67 million for its 1.3 million customers. Cross your fingers.

Wireless is much more energy intensive than wired connections, may even be 69 times more energy intensive, so it is the opposite of green.

The smart grid also increases energy and resource consumption with numerous wireless transmitters, from ‘smart’ meters, to relays, cell towers, field devices, computers, and by supporting connections to home devices from thermometers to coffee machines (IOT).

Utilities may say smart meters allow the energy use to be reduced remotely, but completely ignore that the infrastructure continually uses more energy to remotely track data and control energy use.

Utilities may say smart meters save energy by allowing consumers to track energy use, but studies show people never act on this data.

Marketing smart cities and utilities as green is just that: marketing. Utilities omit that smart meters can cause many issues, like household wiring problems, fires, and damage to electronics. Your data can be sold for a profit – but this has little to do with saving the planet.

An economics professor and former energy advisor, after reviewing a British smart meter plan, has called the project ‘astonishingly expensive’ and said civil servants ‘cooked the books’ to conceal a €4 billion dollar expense with imagined and inadequate energy savings.

They all use cell phones like the rest of the world and are as much in denial about them as everyone else. The denial, which runs deep in society, goes back to the beginning of the development of electricity in the 1700s.

Today, modern electricity is contaminated with extra frequencies that run along the wires and emit. These result when we plug devices into the grid that do not use the same type of frequency as the electrical wiring. Alternative energy, digital devices, and energy-saving devices all add different frequencies to the lines. This contamination is called poor power quality quality and can introduce radio static and shorten the life of electrical devices.

Poor power quality can be eliminated with proper design, such as use of quality filters, but regulations must force the issue.
An easy-to-understand book about this topic is titled Dirty Electricity, by Dr. Samuel Milham. In the 1990’s the Swedish Union of Clerical and Technical Employees in Industry (SiF) also studied electromagnetic and chemical sensitivity, publishing many easy-to-understand reports for 'No Risk' that are saved online at EMFacts.com/NoRisk.

A cell phone leaks radiation from all of its resonant circuitry, even if it is turned off, as long as the battery is in it. So does a modem or router that has WiFi, as long as it is plugged in. I have measured radiation coming out of modems in which the WiFi was disabled. I can always tell when someone is carrying a cell phone because I can feel the radiation, even if it is turned off and hidden in their pocket, even from across a room. I have never been wrong.

For whatever reason you have a cell phone -- any kind of cell phone -- all of the world’s cell towers have to be there in order for it to work when you want it to. No matter how rarely you use the phone, all the cell towers have to be there. If you use it “only in emergencies,” that is even worse, because you are likely to be using it in remote places where there are no cell towers and service is not good. Every call you make from a location where there are no towers is recorded as a request for service, and your provider will eventually put up a cell tower there in response to those calls.

It does not protect you because it is still emitting radiation. It does not protect others because when you are not at home you need all the cell towers to be there and you are irradiating everyone around you simply by carrying the phone around.

Unless people get rid of their cell phones, there will soon be no landlines left anywhere. The existence of landlines depends on demand. The existence of cell phones depends on demand. No one is doing this to us. We are doing it to ourselves.

Note: In some states, like California, residents may demand a corded land line.

Fiber enables 5G. 5G antennas are connected to each other and to the Internet by fiber optic cables. Wireless companies are spending hundreds of billions of dollars laying fiber all over the world for 5G. When a fiber company or a city lays fiber optic cables, wireless companies pay for the right to use it. After the fiber is laid, they stick antennas into it and broadcast 5G.

5G can use much higher frequencies (millimeter waves). But the biggest difference is that 5G towers and 5G mobile devices aim narrowly focused beams at each other instead of sending the radiation in all directions. If you are holding a 5G phone in your hand, the nearest 5G tower is tracking you and aiming a beam of radiation directly at your body. This is called phased array technology and it results in greater penetration of the radiation into your body, even at millimeter wave frequencies, than previous wireless technologies. 5G towers also send radiation in all directions because they are constantly scanning the environment looking for devices to connect with.

No. 5G can use millimeter waves. There are also crowd-control weapons that use millimeter waves. But the weapons are a thousand times more powerful and they are not modulated and carry no information. They are different technologies that were developed by different people for different purposes.

There are many companies today that prey on the gullibility of people who are desperate to protect themselves from an assault that is coming from everywhere. They sell “protective” chips to put on your cell phone or computer, pendants and bracelets that will “neutralize” or “harmonize” the radiation, devices to plug into your wall that will “protect” an area hundreds or thousands of square feet around your house. Some advertise that they are “quantum” devices, or are based on “scalar” technology or “torsion” fields, which are sexy words that sound scientific but mean nothing. You cannot “neutralize” or “harmonize” radiation. These devices, without exception, are ineffective and most will harm you.
Many of these devices emit a 7.83 Hz signal which is supposed to duplicate the first Schumann resonance of the Earth. These are point sources that cannot duplicate a natural frequency that bathes us from all sides. They make some people feel good for a couple of weeks, and they can be addictive, just like the frequencies from a cell phone or computer can be addictive, but they will harm you.

The alternative is wires. Wired phones. Wired computers. There is no need to reinvent the wheel, wires are what we had before wireless and are superior in every way. Wires carry the same voices, but clearer. The same information, but more securely. And the information is contained in the wires, instead of being broadcast all over the earth in a cloud of radiation. Wireless is convenient, but for the sake of convenience we are killing ourselves in real time and destroying our planet. Setting and enforcing power quality regulations for electricity and manufacturing is necessary, too, for safer wiring.

Printable version: FAQ_Firstenberg

For more information, please see the resources page.

Amendments for Bill S.186 (Investigation of Electromagnetic Impacts)

If not amended a whitewash is likely, but Massachusetts bill S.186 to investigate electromagnetic exposures from technology could be redesigned to promote transparency & better representation, as suggested below — it is still possible for a whitewash, but less likely

This issue must be swiftly addressed to curtail further harm — see these FAQs or resources.

The following are 6 proposed S.186 amendments, for which feedback is welcome (esp. #V, VI). These could be submitted as one amendment with a complete text or in parts as presented below:

I. Correct language and scope: [Mr.] [Ms.] moves to amend the bill S. 186 by striking out lines 2 and 3 and inserting in place thereof the following new text:-

“special commission to research the environmental and public health impact of non-ionizing radiation generated by technologies and, if any harm exists, propose potential solutions.”

Why? This is amended to remove electromagnetic radiation, which refers to all kinds of radiation including ionizing like X-rays; to remove RFR as this is to narrow; to use non-ionizing radiation since this includes new technologies like LiFi; eliminate ‘consumer protection’ in favor of solutions; and add environmental health.

II. Insure transparency as follows: [Mr.] [Ms.] moves to amend the bill S.186 by inserting before line 35 the following new paragraph:-

“The commission’s meeting notes, meeting transcripts, other communications, meeting attendance, votes of each member that votes, and member conflicts of interest shall be recorded and made available to the public. Records shall be freely available and immediately accessible for public viewing online as well as included in any commission report(s), with the exception, if more than one report is submitted, that meeting notes, attendance, and communications may be split among reports according to relevant time period.”

III. Illuminate transparency of conflicts of interest to insure recusal from voting as follows: [Mr.] [Ms.] moves to amend the bill S.186 by inserting between line 34 and 35 the following new paragraphs:-

“All commission members with conflicts of interest due to industry or employment shall be prohibited from participating as voting members, but shall be called non-voting members. Any commission member deemed a non-voting member shall recuse himself or herself from any commission votes to decide or influence the the outcome of commission reports and commission decisions, and shall instead serve only to assist the commission. Chairmanship, legislative and policy decisions for reports to the Commonwealth shall be decided by vote only of all members with voting status. Only members deemed voting members may author commission reports.

Certain members of the commission shall automatically be stipulated as non-voting members who attend to assist but may not vote. Non-voting members shall include any member appointed whose livelihood with conflicts of interest, but who nevertheless is a required appointment according to the list of defined members, such as any member appointed by virtue of government position but who has conflicts of interest.

In contrast, all other voting members of the commission must be free of conflicts of interest, and for this reason any nominee shall recuse himself or herself from nomination if conflicts of interest exist or provide evidence of elimination of conflicts of interest before appointment, such as placement of a relevant investment portfolio into a blind trust.

Conflicts of interest of a commission member shall be defined as a current investment portfolio in or a history or present livelihood depending upon the telecommunications, energy, IT, or utility industry, as well as to related industries such as to the medical device industry. Conflicts of interest of a member shall extend to the member’s family, including the member’s spouse and relatives within the second degree of consanguinity and affinity.

All commission members, both voting and non-voting members, must file a statement detailing any relevant conflicts of interest and continue to do so in the two years following the commission’s final report. These statements must be filed with the Secretary of State promptly during the commission period and in the two years following closure of the commission, and must be freely and immediately accessible to the public online.”

IV. Address the problem of environmental and public health simply and holistically, rather than carving out any special treatments: [Mr.] [Ms.] moves to amend the bill (Senate, No. 186) by striking out lines 20 through 34 and inserting in place thereof the following new text:-

“Through public hearings, invited speakers, and literature review, the commission shall conduct an investigation including but not limited to the following topics:

(a) identify past and present factors which may obscure relevant scientific findings, including but not limited to study conditions and methodology (such as but not limited to frequency pulsing and polarization), sources of funding, economic interests, FCC regulations, historic events, and industry compliance;

(b) utilize the knowledge gleaned from subsection (a) to further critically evaluate scientific research, conclusions, and hearing testimony;

(c) based on research, identify:

    1. gaps in knowledge;
    2. common and potential exposures in the past as compared to the present and expected future;
    3. known, likely, and potential impacts of existing and future exposures, particularly in relation:
      • i. to the reproductive, neurological, and immune systems; and
      • ii. to agriculture, ecosystems, and the continued viability of the human race;

d. if legitimate concerns exist to justify limiting exposures, then:

    1.  identify potential guidelines or solutions for safer technology, including with respect to telecommunications, utilities, IT, and building wiring and technology use
    2. identify recommended action steps in the short- and long-term to limit harm from exposures in the arena of private and public buildings, transportation, utilities, workplaces, education, emergency services, medical care, medical devices, building wiring, manufacturing, and government services.
    3. identify solutions to limit negative economic impacts upon the general populace and small businesses, including with regard to retirement funds, funding safer technology, and reports of disability or disease caused by exposures.”

Here are the reasons for replacement:

    • (i) we know it will cost industry and investors – wastes time to examine costs;
    • (ii) better to outline how the state can freely and apolitically and through established government systems educate consumers than to rely on private sources for education;
    • (iii) this investigation requires industry research be examined but does so without caveat as if it’s equal to non-industry research;
    • (iv) this is basically the same as the previous clause;
    • (v) the point of this is not clear;
    • (vi) creating detailed guidelines for quality research may be beyond the scope and expertise of this commission and should not be a requirement;
    • (vii) – at this point it is probably best just to start over and the point is not clear – “examining the impacts of premarket safety testing procedures for wireless technology”;
    • (viii) – at this point it is probably best just to start over and it is not necessary to state – “reviewing national and international regulatory best practices that address the impact of EMR and RFR radiation on technology, consumer protection, and public health”

V. Remove excessive extraneous parties and telecommunication representation as follows: [NOTE ** THIS SECTION, ESPECIALLY IF PART VI IS REVISED, COULD BE FURTHER EDITED**]

[Mr.] [Ms.] moves to amend the bill (Senate, No. 186) by striking out lines 10 through 19 and inserting in place thereof the following new text:-

“Society, ideally a neurology or cardiac specialist; a scientist nominated by the Environmental Health Trust; and a non-voting member with ten years of work experience in the field shall be appointed by the governor, who shall be an engineer with expertise in wireless network engineering, technology, and knowledge of non-ionizing radiation.”

Why? Deleting a telecommunications representative, telecommunications lawyer, and wireless medical device expert is possible because the telecommunications commissioner is on the committee and can invite these persons or provide information when useful. Non-industry is added. Neurologists and cardiac specialists work with frequencies (EKG, EEG) which should be helpful for understanding some of the research literature.

In addition, some changes are being removed to prevent the governor from having too much control of the commissions make up due to controlling not only executive branch nominations but substantial other commission nominations.

VI. Add these parties to the commission, nominated by the respective organizations and not the governor or the executive commissioners to distribute responsibility and influence:


[Mr.] [Ms.] moves to amend the bill S.186 by striking line 9 and inserting the following new text:-

“Regulation or his designee; one of whom shall be a telecommunications worker nominated by the Communications Workers of America; one of whom shall be a nominee of the Massachusetts Coalition of Police; . . . . . ; one of whom shall be a member of the Massachusetts Medical”

Including big organizations is another way to shine a light and bring pressure to bear on the issue. At the bottom of this blog page on investigative commissions, some more ideas were listed for groups in a draft amendment previously created.

Stop 5G Legislation Now Mass!


Please call your legislator and ask that a word be put in for H. 105 – 114 and against S. 54 & H. 124 with the Joint Committee of Advanced IT (chairs Finegold & Campbell) — and to find out the status of these bills. Committees finalize decisions 2 February.

If possible, send an original letter to the editor before 25 January to a newspaper (suggestions here) supporting H. 105 – 114 & against wireless expansion generally.

S. 54 is sponsored by the committee chairs and a member, who may have been deceived by industry of 5G safety. The bill would:

    • Require a rollout of 5G by 2024
    • Penalize municipalities 10% of the previous tax year’s receipts if:
      • Reported by industry as blocking 5G
      • Found guilty by the DPU (which tends to favor industry

Maybe the MA  joint committee on advanced IT will stop this and other 5G & IT expansion bills, since it heard testimony on 13 October for H. 105-114 to limit:

  • wireless dangers
  • privacy concerns in schools (H. 106)
  • excess screen time in public schools (H. 107)

For more on bills H. 105-114, please see the MA legislation page and look at the bars for wireless and schools.

H. 124 is a bill to create a task force for industry and legislators to work together to support 5G.

End Water Fluoridation


The following letter is testimony for a legislative hearing – please call in support!

Many residents have sought to remove fluoride from municipal water supplies after examining the research.

In Wilmington, the Director of Public Health in 2000 recommended ending fluoridation after researching the subject. In Natick, a study committee of individuals defined as “qualified” “unbiased” and “scientifically trained” recommended the same. Cities and towns such as Topsfield, Gloucester, Rockport, Newburyport, Cambridge, Concord, Amesbury, Methuen, Worcester, Greenfield and others have also attempted to end water fluoridation.

Natick: http://www.fluoridation.com/natick.htm

Wilmington: https://www.fluoridealert.org/wp-content/uploads/wilmington.erickson.2000.pdf

Despite public interest, Massachusetts state law fails to allow either municipalities or residents a path to opt out of fluoridation, instead allowing only a referendum 90 days after any Board of Health increase in fluoride.

Instead of an opt out, the Commonwealth subsidizes a coalition that promotes fluoride and that enjoys conferences, prestige, and marketing. Municipalities pay as well. Opting into fluoridation costs Holyoke, for example, about $30,000 a year. More than half of the state, including Boston, has fluoridated water.

State-funded Better Oral Health Massachusetts Commission: http://massoralhealth.org/community-water-fluoridation/

MA statistics: https://www.mass.gov/doc/massachusetts-communities-receiving-communities-water-fluoridation/download

Worse, in 2020 the US National Toxicology Program released a report finding that fluoride is a cognitive hazard. Children deserve protection, in particular infants and the unborn who are most vulnerable.

Other populations of special concern include individuals with kidney disease.

While the National Toxicology Program (NTP) focused on neurotoxicity, other reviews are under consideration, such as on cancer and endocrine disruption.

Linda S. Birnbaum, former director of the NTP: https://fluoridealert.org/wp-content/uploads/tsca.supplement.appendix-e.11-4-20.pdf

NTP Report: http://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/ntp/about_ntp/bsc/2015/december/meetingmaterial/fluoride_508.pdf

The American Dental Association (ADA) continues to support and market fluoride to its members and the public, likely because the ADA receives numerous annual product certification fees for the ADA seal. Industry also has a strong financial incentive, as fluoride sold for water fluoridation would otherwise need to be disposed of as a toxic chemical. Fluoride added to water supplies is the same as that emitted by coal-fired plants, incinerators, aluminum production, and cigarette smoke as noted in an EPA fact sheet — it is not a natural product.

ADA seal products: https://www.mouthhealthy.org/en/ada-seal-products.

EPA fact sheet: https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2016-10/documents/hydrogen-fluoride.pdf

Several nonprofits, such as the Fluoride Action Network and Food and Water Watch, have gone to trial to get the EPA to acknowledge fluoride as a neurotoxin. As Dr. Michael Connett testified: “We have 4 high quality cohort studies. Each has found associations between early life exposures to fluoride and lowered IQ…by around 5 IQ points. The effect size rivals the neurotoxic effects of lead.”

During the trial, the judge appeared to support the plaintiffs, noting that the standard of evidence is of high quality and asking whether the EPA could conduct a proper review and, if not, noting the judge has the power to rule against the EPA.

The EPA did not call its own scientists to testify, instead calling Exponent consultants with limited expertise. EPA scientists have in the past complained that their findings on fluoride have been diminished and politicized, such as in senior vice-president of an EPA union described in 2000 testimony to the US Senate.

EPA testimony: https://fluoridealert.org/fan-tv/hirzy/

Trial review and documents: https://fluoridealert.org/issues/tsca-fluoride-trial/

The passage of fluoridated water into wild streams is even an issue for fish, such as a study by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration reports. An Ottawa review of several studies concludes fluoride may have various environmental effects such as altering soil microbial populations or reducing egg laying reproduction.

NOAA study: https://www.fluoridealert.org/wp-content/pesticides/fluoride.salmon.noaa.1993.htm

Ottawa review: https://fluoridealert.org/wp-content/uploads/canada.cadth-report.feb_.2019.pdf

Fluorosis, caused by years of fluoridated water or excess exposure, results in brittle bones.

According to state statistics, towns with a long history of water fluoridation have a much higher rate of hip fractures. For example, Amherst, fluoridated since 1987, has a rate of 671 while Colrain, which is not fluoridated, has a rate of 147 per 100,000 of elderly (over age 60).

State statistics similarly show worse rates for fluoridated communities with respect to asthma ER visits, mental or physical disability, and deaths from diabetes or heart conditions.

Questions remain regarding whether fluoride is useful at all. Data from the National Institute of Dental Research (NIDR) of the United States Public Health Service (USPHS) of 39,207 school children showed zero relationship between cavities and water fluoridation.

Review of data: http://www.icnr.com/articles/national-fluoride-tooth-decay-study.html

Initial studies, on which claims rely, were poorly done. 97% of Europe does not use water fluoridation, yet the Europeans are not complaining of losing teeth.

Europe: http://fluoridealert.org/content/europe-statements/

If any dental benefit exists, this is accomplished by topical application, not by ingestion. Insistence on water fluoridation is therefore not only harmful, but odd.

Aside: This remaining petition still needs signatures to show support.



7 studies indicate formula-fed infants and fetuses are most vulnerable to fluoride toxicity. The most recent 2019 Canadian study found formula-fed infants had an IQ drop. https://fluoridealert.org/issues/tsca-fluoride-trial/the-mother-offspring-studies/

With increased serum F in the mother, there is an inclination towards pre term delivery, low birth weight and poor APGAR count. http://fluoridealert.org/studytracker/15518/

Passing through placental barriers, the fluorine exposure of pregnant rats can have a certain effect on the learning and memory capabilities of baby rats, and it may be related to SOD activity and MDA content in the brain. http://fluoridealert.org/studytracker/16621/

This pilot study in a community with stable lifetime fluoride exposures supports the notion that fluoride in drinking water may produce developmental neurotoxicity, and that the dose-dependence underlying this relationship needs to be characterized in detail. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25446012 (The Mayo Clinic warns against fluoridated water for babies).

Thyroid significantly changed in children exposed to fluoride: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24455464

These results indicate that high iodine and high fluorine exert severe damage to human body. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7859263

Thus, fully formula-fed infants consuming mother milk substitutes prepared with optimally fluoridated water may be at increased risk of dental fluorosis. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21554919

IQ drop: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18038039

It was found that excessive use of the fluoride toothpaste doubled the fluorosis risk, whereas when fluoride supplements (tablets, drops) were given the risk was about 20 times higher than without a fluoride supplement. . . [And also fluoridated water is rejected and recommended to be ended ASAP because of “preventive, toxicological, psychological and didactic reasons.”] http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11791200

Conclusions related to fluoride and heart trouble in children: Endemic fluorosis is a risk factor for decrease in calcium and FT4 levels, increase in sodium levels and QT prolongation. These findings might be related with some cardiovascular system dysfunctions such as arrhythmias or syncope. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21342861

(Mice pups neurologically damaged): Fluoride exposure significantly increased its accumulation, lipid peroxidation and decreased the activities of catalase, superoxide dismutase, glutathione peroxidase, glutathione-S-transferase and glutathione levels in discrete regions of the central nervous system (CNS) of pups indicating oxidative stress and inhibited antioxidant defense. The results implied the vulnerability of developing CNS to fluoride toxicity. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21341542

This study discusses fluoride as a risk factor for anemia in pregnancy and low-birth weight babies: http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/releases/199829.php It mentions how B-12 is suppressed by fluoride.

A recent study found fluoride passes through amniotic fluid to the fetus: https://ehjournal.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12940-020-00581-2

Natural sources of fluoride are endemic in India, which has thus spent money to research reduction and upon toxic effects. Here is one study on children, fluoride, and thyroid showing impacts: http://www.fluoridealert.org/wp-content/uploads/susheela-2005.pdf

IMMUNE/CHEMICAL CHANGES — inflammation, apoptosis, etc.:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24907160 (changes in blood count)

Fluoride damages organs: “Taken together, our results provide compelling evidence that ER stress and inflammation would be novel and significant mechanisms responsible for fluoride-induced disturbance of spermatogenesis and germ cell loss in addition to oxidative stress.” http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23707774



http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1640574 (Utah)

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8827156 (USA)

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10675073 (England, 1 ppm)

Patients with skeletal fluorosis compared to fluoridated sheep, who had “a significant decrease in both cortical and trabecular bones.” Also, “reminiscent of those found in osteoporotic patients with treatment-induced fluorosis. Mechanical testing revealed a significant decrease in the bending strength, concurrent with the clinical observation of fragility fractures in sheep within an area of environmental fluoride exposure.”


Previous researchers have found fluoride causes fluorosis, which shows as white or brown spots on teeth. Skeletal fluorosis causes arthritic symptoms within 5 years of drinking fluoridated water, according to calculations presented in the journal Fluoride in 1997, issue 30, page 4 (discussion), and worsen with continued consumption.


Here is a review on cancers and a drop-down menu for other illnesses including prenatal problems: http://fluoridealert.org/issues/health/cancer/


This very recent, large-scale study utilizes English thyroid statistics and strongly confirms thyroid impacts, with hypothyroidism resulting (England mandates this reporting, and so the statistics have accuracy): https://fluoridealert.org/wp-content/uploads/peckham-2015.pdf


Vulvar Pagets disease: recovery without surgery following change to very low-fluoride spring and well water


Failure of fluoride varnishes: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24481085

Why I Changed my Mind About Water Fluoridation pp. 29-44 | DOI: 10.1353/pbm.1997.0017 — John Colquhoun (John C. was the principal dental officer for Auckland, New Zealand’s largest city, and later studies fluoridation world-wide.) https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/9394474/

After studying dental health world-wide, John Colquhoun, D.D.S., Ph.D., stated he’d erred in assuming fluoride improved teeth because, while world-wide dental health improved, it had comparatively worsened in fluoridated communities.


The following statistics seem to have vanished, but formerly were online through the MA government website:

MA TOWN HIP FRACTURE STATISTICS for ages 60+ per 100,000:

3 towns in W. MA fluoridate. About 140 towns in Mass. fluoridate in total, many big cities.

855 Holyoke (fluoridated since 1970–note poor nutrition increases fluoride/toxin absorption–likely poor nutrition common in Holyoke)

671 Amherst (F. since 1987)

646 Longmeadow (F. since 1989)


491 Easthampton (non-fluoridated)

442 Springfield (non-fluoridated)

147 Colrain (non-fluoridated rural town, away from industrial pollution, which includes fluoride)

DEATH RATES FROM DIABETES: Decades-long fluoridated Holyoke worse than non-fluoridated Springfield, Chicopee, and rest of state.

DEATH RATES FROM HEART DISEASE: Same comment as above.

ASTHMA ER VISITS: Fluoridated Holyoke three times as bad as most of western MA, excepting Springfield at just about same level. 1.7%–Springfield ER same, just about.

555 OF AGE 65-74 have PHYSICAL DISABILITY (Worse than rest of MA–21.6% vs. 17.5 for state)

168 OF AGE 65-74 have MENTAL DISABILITY (6.5% Holyokers vs. 4.9% state)

Safe MA Broadband & Electric

The following was written testimony provided, additional to spoken testimony. Please call in support!

Massachusetts needs to insure modern electricity and communications are safe.


Substantial evidence exists in the research record that radiofrequency emissions from electricity and wireless communications cause biological changes such as increased oxidation (ROS) leading to downstream effects including calcium release, mitochondrial, DNA, and neuronal damage.

Effects are found from exposures from wireless and near electricity. The FCC even recognized in [Order 19-126], which denied biological effects and was just overturned by court order, that electric fields can cause instant “neural stimulation effects” unrelated to heating and that current guidelines fail to provide protection (328).


Epidemiological studies of human subjects and animal studies bear out that these exposures lead to disease, pain, and behavioral changes. In California, a 5-year 2G antenna installation on a fire station led to cognitive impairment, headache, insomnia, irritability, depression, and edginess, which led to a brain scan of fire fighters confirming brain abnormalities. This study resulted in a California ban upon fire station antennas. The International Association of Fire Fighters (IAFF) has a lengthy policy statement opposing antenna installations on or near fire stations, listing as objection potential central nervous system, immune system, and metabolic disorders.

Although tied to poor health and judgment, wireless transmitters are often on top of hospitals, fire and police stations. New products and communications infrastructure continue to be developed for first responders without regard to reducing exposures to wireless or fields from electricity.

[H.114] An Act studying technology impacts on police, firefighters, and emergency and security personnel attempts to rectify this problem through a commission including first responders to examine health and societal impacts.


A review commissioned by the German government of 878 Russian studies conducted from the 1960 through 1997 based on thousands of Russian workers in electric utilities and radio stations, who had to be verified as healthy to apply and have at least one heath check per year by an industrial hygienist and occupational health care professional. Exposures were only during the day from 2 to 8 hours. Initially the body may even positively adapt, but symptoms after 5 years exposure included sleep disorders, impaired memory, hyperactivity of the thyroid, fatigue, heightened stress response (excitability), digestive complaints, weakened immunity, cardiovascular and EEG changes. After 10 years, symptoms worsen and were classified firmly as a disease with physical and mental decline.

Studies continue to show chronic exposure induce behavioral changes including anxiety, irritation, depression, paranoia, hostility, and edginess, as well as trouble with concentration, memory, and learning. These behavioral changes are supported by research demonstrating often clearly pathological shifts in thyroid hormones, cortisol, testosterone, enzymes, reactive oxygen species (ROS), EEG, down- or up-regulation of processes, cells, DNA, blood-brain barrier, and mitochondria. In some instances, changes may be hereditary, such as to DNA or mitochondria, or cause nausea, such as ROS oxidation, or lead to early and intense onset of disease.

[H.108 An Act supporting patients and residents suffering from environmental pollutants and modern technologies, e.g. wireless is necessary to insure medical training and guide patients towards safer technology.


Mental illness is rising faster among young adults age 18 to 25 than among adults – mental illness rates were 19% in 2008 and 26% by 2018 (according to the National Institute for Health Care Management) — a fourth of young adults with mental illness before the pandemic.

From 2001 through 2004, 1 in 3 teens had an anxiety disorder.

Numerous academics have linked the sudden rise in adolescent mental distress, learning trouble, and social problems to the rise in digital media use, often blaming the addictive, anti-social nature and negative messaging of modern technology. Given that exposures to wireless and constant proximity to electrical devices is new and constant for youth, and given that science has found profound biochemical changes from these exposures, these exposures must be a major contributing factor to mental illness.

Children and smaller youth absorb more radiation and are growing, and thus suffer from greater effect including feeling unwell. The research literature additionally reports headaches, nausea, dizziness increase with dose response.

We need to limit youth screen time and support to [H.106], An Act regulating screen time in early and K-12 education, since health impacts occur not only from wireless, but from fields near electricity.

Two bills are proposed to limit school wireless and electrical exposures. H. 105 is the better choice.

H. 115, An Act relative to best management practices for wireless in schools and public institutions of higher education, HAS 4 PROBLEMS:

1. One, as it states guidance is “for the purchase and installation of wireless internet service” **H. 115 continues wireless**.
2. Two, the bill is only about internet service, although cellphones, burglar alarms, and other sources of exposures exist.
3. Three, the bill proposes a top-down review of best practices, which is far too easy for industry to influence and is a delay.
4. Four, the bill does not make clear whether local communities will be allowed or encouraged to adopt guidelines and practices safer than that proposed.

[H.105], An Act reducing non-ionizing radiation such as wireless from early to higher education, is a better choice.

* One, H. 105 **requires that every public school and university reduce exposures as within its means, thus immediately requiring local action**.
* Two, public records of progress are required and subject to review, insuring attention.
* Three, it prioritizes hard-wired broadband.
* Four, it requires that any antenna in operation be set to minimum power density.
* Five, boards and departments are also to review how to reduce exposures, but only with experts independent of industry.
* Six, early education is included in the review.
* Seven, it **prohibits further construction of cell towers** on public education grounds.
* Eight, it adds student environmental health to the mission of the education department.

Because data collection interests are another pressure advancing technology marketing, bills which protect privacy should also be supported, such as ***[H.107](https://malegislature.gov/Bills/192/H107)  An Act regulating privacy and technology in education*** and Senator Mark Montigny’s ***[S.220](https://malegislature.gov/Bills/192/S220)  An Act to protect personal biometric data***.


Even if Massachusetts invests in hard-wired communications, fiberoptic can still be used to install wireless infrastructure. Video-streaming, which is not an FCC mandate, appears to be driving demand.

The Commonwealth must quickly ban all close proximity and 5G installations, due to public harm from intense exposures, and must begin to roll back all other wireless communications excepting that needed by First Responders.

The recent DC federal court decision finding the FCC guidelines provides strong grounds to challenge any federal mandate. Regardless, the Commonwealth must take a stand, just as it did with marijuana. ***[H.110](https://malegislature.gov/Bills/192/H110)  An Act halting 5G high frequencies and close proximity antennas ***begins this process, requiring full and public disclosure of antenna ownership and location.

Section 4 allows that a lessee of property to a mobile services provider may break the contract, since such installations are harmful.

***[H.113](https://malegislature.gov/Bills/192/H113)  An Act requiring wireless insurance*** insures wireless providers carry quality insurance or place funds in escrow. Insurance providers have an incentive for quality control, although none seem to offer wireless insurance. Lawyers report that wireless providers use variations of the corporation name, such as Verizon, to insure risks are held by a corporation without assets, and that further the insurance agreements are weak or nonexistent.

Requiring wireless insurance is an act that would deter dangerous installations.


***[H.112] An Act hard-wiring state offices and investing in hard-wired communications:***

* Requires the Massachusetts educational commissioner to develop a plan to hard-wire educational institutions.
* Prohibits construction of wireless facilities near playgrounds.
* Allows the Board of Library Commissioners to provide libraries grants to reduce exposures.
* Revises existing law to require only wired investments or use of wired broadband by:
1. Massworks, the Massachusetts Broadband Institute, the executive office of information technology, the director of wireless & telecommunications.
* Where relevant, privacy, reliability, security, and affordability are also added to safety as goals, the latter prioritized.
* Section 11 requires an annual public audit by the department of all common carriers, which includes all utilities.

Section 11 is of particular interest because telecommunication companies have been rigging accounts to pay for wireless with funds intended for wired services. This has led to the deterioration of or lack of investment in wired services. A decision by the DC circuit means states are free to go over and recover those funds (Irregulators v. FCC). New York has had a public audit and, as a result, the rigged accounts were discovered.

Safe and worthwhile communications needs to be identified. The proposal for the Massachusetts Broadband is meant to help redirect the Commonwealth, although more needs to be done.


While fixing wireless seems as simple as using wires, fixing the problem with electricity is more complex. Our digital and energy-saving devices do not use 60 hertz electricity. Converting these connections to 60 hertz is not a clean process, for it results in many other frequencies being added to the electrical lines. Harmonics such as 120 hertz and other frequencies end up riding upon the electrical lines along with frequency surges. Utilities are supposed to only have 60 hertz on the electrical lines and, if so, this is called *good power quality*. In contrast, *poor power quality* leaks energy, damages electronics, and harms human health.

Fields from electrical lines extend about 5 feet from wiring, and in the last 2 decades have become increasingly contaminated thanks to utility and manufacturing negligence. The increases in pulses, surges, frequencies, and field strength in modern electricity must be reversed. Presently, utilities have only shown an interest in fixing power quality for businesses with sensitive electronic equipment, such as in hospitals.

An additional problem results when too much electricity runs along utility wires. A solution would be to build more infrastructure to carry it, but often instead the extra electricity runs down the pole into the ground to create what is called ground current. This is harmful, especially if there is lightning which could cause electrocution. The failure of utilities to address the ground current and power quality problems is rooted in the desire to save money, but at what cost?


[H.111] An Act requiring better power quality and reduced radiation from utility infrastructure sets a safety standard for utilities based on guidance of the Building Biology Institute and recommendations of research scientist Dr. Neil Cherry [(d)2], requires utility providers remedy problems and keep public records of inspections, and allows the attorney general to enforce provisions. In addition, the bill protects privacy by limiting utility providers right to collect data only to that necessary for utility operations.


[H.109] An Act improving non-ionizing radiation regulation and monitoring provides for inspectors to check the safety of utility electricity and monitor wireless exposures. It renames the Massachusetts radiation department an agency (which is not necessary), and sets duties including:

* maintain a registry of non-ionizing radiation specialists and hiring several to provide monitoring, advice, and complete other duties;
* hire 5 non-ionizing radiation specialists to assist residents, provide, state and municipal advice, and for other duties;
* set regulations and warnings based on exposures;
* license and register products based on emissions, and allowing product certifications based on the Building Biology guidelines;
* allow any citizen to hire a licensed technical expert to measure exposures on *qui tam basis* and to bring a case for personal injury before an administrative court;
* provide that the administrative court tribunal includes a judge, a non-ionizing radiation specialist, and a member of the jury;
* prepare an emergency plan for non-ionizing radiation (e.g. an EMP or hacking event which strengthens transmissions intensely); and
* creating a searchable antenna database requiring registration of ownership.


***Please HALT [H.124] An Act relative to a 5G technology task force promotes 5G.*** This bill was pushed through last session mistakenly by an advocate who told others the bill was helpful or could be fixed by the sponsor. Just like session, the bill promotes 5G and is at odds with technology safety.

***Please be careful with [H.143] An Act internet access on private ways.*** This bill allows abutting property owners with right of ingress or egress the right to install ‘internet’ which could very well include powerful antennas placed by utilities. The changes also appear to say internet service is a utility.

Thank you.


* FCC Order 19-126, page 328 “neural” effects: https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/FCC-19-126A1.pdf
* Court order overturning FCC decision in 19-226 to reconsider exposure guidelines based on science: https://childrenshealthdefense.org/wp-content/uploads/chd-v-fcc-we-won-decision.pdf
* International Association of Fire Fighters (IAFF) cell tower policy statement: https://www.iaff.org/cell-tower-radiation/
* Russian studies: Visit https://kompetenzinitiative.com/brochures/ and click English brochures and scroll down to Dr. Karl Hecht’s summary of elektrosmog health implications
* Biochemical shifts: Visit Physicians for Safe Technology for relevant research – examples include:
* **Frequent cellular phone use modifies hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis response to a cellular phone call after mental stress in healthy children and adolescents: A pilot study.** *Sci Total Environ*. 2015;536:182-188.
* **How does long term exposure to base stations and mobile phones affect human hormone profiles?** *Clin Biochem*. 2012;45(1-2):157-161. doi:10.1016/j.clinbiochem.2011.11.006
* **Effects of exposure to GSM mobile phone base station signals on salivary cortisol, alpha-amylase, and immunoglobulin A.** *Biomed Environ Sci*. 2010;23(3):199-207. doi:10.1016/S0895-3988(10)60053-0
* **8-oxoG DNA glycosylase-1 inhibition sensitizes Neuro-2a cells to oxidative DNA base damage induced by 900 MHz radiofrequency electromagnetic radiation.** *Cell Physiol Biochem*. 2015;37(3):1075-1088. doi:10.1159/000430233
* **Effect of 900 MHz Electromagnetic Radiation on the Induction of ROS in Human Peripheral Blood Mononuclear Cells.** *J Biomed Phys Eng*. 2015;5(3):105-114. Published 2015 Sep 1.
* Parmar K, Tandon R, Kumar N, Garg RK. **Variations in electroencephalography with mobile phone usage in medical students.** *Neurol India*. 2019;67(1):235-241. doi:10.4103/0028-3886.253610
* **Nonthermal GSM RF and ELF EMF effects upon rat BBB permeability. (2011)** Nittby H et al. (2011) The Environmentalist. **31**, pages140–148(2011) [https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10669-011-9307-z  ](https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10669-011-9307-z)    <https://www.emf-portal.org/en/article/19140>
* **Effects of radiofrequency electromagnetic field exposure on neuronal differentiation and mitochondrial function in SH-SY5Y cells.** *Toxicol In Vitro*. 2019;61:104609. doi:10.1016/j.tiv.2019.104609
* **2450 MHz EMR exposure causes cognition deficit with mitochondrial dysfunction & activation of intrinsic pathway of apoptosis in rats.** (2018) Gupta SK et al. J Biosciences. June 2018, Vol 43, pg 263. <https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12038-018-9744-7>
* Prenatal studies (the harshest time for exposure): Visit Physicians for Safe Technology at https://mdsafetech.org/prenatal-effects/ – studies include the following:
* **Maternal exposure to a continuous 900-MHz electromagnetic field provokes neuronal loss and pathological changes in cerebellum of 32-day-old female rat offspring.  (2016)** Odacı E. J Chem Neuroanat. 2016 Sep;75(Pt B):105-10. <https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26391347>
* **Effects of prenatal exposure to WIFI signal (2.45GHz) on postnatal development and and behavior in rat: Influence of maternal restraint**. Othman H et al. **(2017)** [Behav Brain Res.](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28288806)2017 Mar 10;326:291-302. <https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28288806>
* **Exposure to Magnetic Field Non-Ionizing Radiation and the Risk of Miscarriage: A Prospective Cohort Study. (2017)** Li et al. Sci Rep. 2017 Dec 13;7(1):17541. <https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5727515/>
* **Maternal exposure to magnetic fields during pregnancy in relation to the risk of asthma in offspring. (2011)** [Li DK](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Li%20DK%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=21810627)1, [Chen H](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Chen%20H%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=21810627), [Odouli R](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Odouli%20R%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=21810627). [Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med.](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21810627)2011 Oct;165(10):945-50. <https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21810627>
* **Prenatal and early postnatal exposure to radiofrequency waves (900 MHz) adversely affects passive avoidance learning and memory.** *Toxicol Ind Health*. 2020;36(12):1024-1030. doi:10.1177/0748233720973143
* R. D. Morris, L. L. Morgan and D. Davis. **Children Absorb Higher Doses of Radio Frequency Electromagnetic Radiation From Mobile Phones Than Adults.** *IEEE Access*, vol. 3, pp. 2379-2387, 2015, doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2015.2478701.
* Studies on behavior, memory, and learning: Please visit Physicians for Safe Technology at https://mdsafetech.org/science/behavior/ – studies include:
* **The effect of chronic exposure to extremely low-frequency electromagnetic fields on sleep quality, stress, depression  and anxiety.** *Electromagn Biol Med*. 2019;38(1):96-101. doi:10.1080/15368378.2018.1545665
* **Mobile Phone Base Station Tower Settings Adjacent to School Buildings: Impact on Students’ Cognitive Health**. Meo SA et al. American Journal of Men’s Health. December 7, 2018. <https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1557988318816914>
* **Cell phone use and behavioural problems in young children.  (2012) Divan HA et al**. J Epidemiol Community Health. 2012 Jun;66(6):524-9. <http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21138897>
* **Chronic exposure to ELF fields may induce depression. (1988)** Wilson BW. Bioelectromagnetics. 1988;9(2):195-205. <https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3288221>
* Review of numerous studies indicating behavioral changes including hostility and paranoia:
* **Microwave frequency Electromagnetic Fields (EMF’s) produce widespread neuropsychiatric effects including depression.** (2015)  Pall. M.  Journal of Chemical Neuroanatomy. Aug 21, 2015. <http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0891061815000599>
* National Institute for Health Care Management graphic: https://nihcm.org/publications/youth-mental-health-trends-and-outlook — selected relevant citations:
* SAMHSA, 2018 National Survey on Drug Use and Health. Table 10.1B – Any Mental Illness in Past Year among Persons Aged 18 or Older, by Demographic Characteristics: Percentages, 2008-2018 https://www.samhsa.gov/data/release/2018-national-survey-drug-use-and-health-nsduh-releases
* “Lifetime prevalence and age-of-onset distributions of DSM-IV disorders in the National Comorbidity Survey Replication,” Arch Gen Psychiatry, 2005 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15939837/
* U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, National Institute of Mental Health. (2017). Any Anxiety Disorder. https://www.nimh.nih.gov/health/statistics/any-anxiety-disorder
* Screen time research:
* **Age, Period, and Cohort Trends in Mood Disorder and Suicide-Related Outcomes in a Nationally Representative Dataset, 2005-2017**, by Jean Twenge, PhD, San Diego State University; Thomas Joiner, PhD, and Mary Duffy, BA, Florida State University; Bell Cooper, PhD, Lynn University; and Sara Binau, Pomona College. *Journal of Abnormal Psychology*, published online March 14, 2019.
* Feeling Unwell:
* **Mobile phone use, school electromagnetic field levels and related symptoms: a cross-sectional survey among 2150 high school students in Izmir.** *Environ Health*. 2017;16(1):51. Published 2017 Jun 2. doi:10.1186/s12940-017-0257-x
* **Mobile Phone Base Stations Health Effects** [ Shahab A. Alazawi](https://www.iasj.net/iasj/search?query=au:”Shahab A. Alazawi”) *[Diyala Journal of Medicine ](https://www.iasj.net/iasj/journal/166/issues)*[2011, Volume 1, Issue 1](https://www.iasj.net/iasj/issue/873), Pages 44-52 https://www.emf-portal.org/en/article/26456
* First Responders:
* A copy of **Barrie Trower’s police report** is available at http://www.tetrawatch.net/tetra/trower.php – clear explanation
* Huang LY, Hu HY, Wang ZT, et al. **Association of Occupational Factors and Dementia or Cognitive Impairment: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.** *J Alzheimers Dis*. 2020;78(1):217-227. doi:10.3233/JAD-200605
* Schulte PA, Burnett CA, Boeniger MF, Johnson J. **Neurodegenerative diseases: occupational occurrence and potential risk factors, 1982 through 1991**. *Am J Public Health*. 1996;86(9):1281-1288. doi:10.2105/ajph.86.9.1281
* Baste V, Moen BE, Oftedal G, Strand LA, Bjørge L, Mild KH. **Pregnancy outcomes after paternal radiofrequency field exposure aboard fast patrol boats**. *J Occup Environ Med*. 2012;54(4):431-438. doi:10.1097/JOM.0b013e3182445003
* Mjøen G, Saetre DO, Lie RT, et al. **Paternal occupational exposure to radiofrequency electromagnetic fields and risk of adverse pregnancy outcome.** *Eur J Epidemiol*. 2006;21(7):529-535. doi:10.1007/s10654-006-9030-0
* Hardell L, Carlberg M. **Mobile phone and cordless phone use and the risk for glioma – Analysis of pooled case-control studies in Sweden**, 1997-2003 and 2007-2009. *Pathophysiology*. 2015;22(1):1-13. doi:10.1016/j.pathophys.2014.10.001
* Peleg M, Nativ O, Richter ED. **Radio frequency radiation-related cancer: assessing causation in the occupational/military setting.** *Environ Res*. 2018;163:123-133. doi:10.1016/j.envres.2018.01.003
* Richter E, Berman T, Ben-Michael E, Laster R, Westin JB. **Cancer in radar technicians exposed to radiofrequency/microwave radiation: sentinel episodes**. *Int J Occup Environ Health*. 2000;6(3):187-193. doi:10.1179/oeh.2000.6.3.187
* Summary of measured radiofrequency electric and magnetic fields (10 kHz to 30 GHz) in the general and work environment
* Finkelstein MM. **Cancer incidence among Ontario police officers.** *Am J Ind Med*. 1998;34(2):157-162. doi:10.1002/(sici)1097-0274(199808)34:2<157::aid-ajim8>3.0.co;2-u
* Davis RL, Mostofi FK. **Cluster of testicular cancer in police officers exposed to hand-held radar.** *Am J Ind Med*. 1993;24(2):231-233. doi:10.1002/ajim.4700240209
* Theisen K, Slater R, Hale N. **Taser-Related Testicular Trauma.** *Urology*. 2016;88:e5. doi:10.1016/j.urology.2015.11.011
* Mehl LE. **Electrical injury from Tasering and miscarriage.** *Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand*. 1992;71(2):118-123. doi:10.3109/00016349209007967
* Ground current: [https://www.ecs.csun.edu/\\\~bruno](https://www.ecs.csun.edu/%5C\~bruno/MultiGroundedNeutralFinal_4-17-7.pdf)
* 5G: An Open Letter to Medical Professionals Advocating for Safer Technology for Societal Health (January 1, 2020) Endorsed by Physicians for Safe Technology https://lasttreelaws.com/letter-to-medical-professionals/
* [/MultiGroundedNeutralFinal_4-17-7.pdf](https://www.ecs.csun.edu/%5C\~bruno/MultiGroundedNeutralFinal_4-17-7.pdf) or <https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/>

Recorded hearing with Kirstin speaking at c. 30:44. The hearing was on many other bill topics, but several people spoke in support of these bills, such as at 2:43:54 (a teacher) 2:59:57 (a mother, daughter, and legislator) and 54:34 (a doctor).

SIGN to End MA School Screen Time Mandate

The following letter was provided to legislators in a hearing. Please call in support before the February 2, 2022, deadline!

Through grade 12, our state standards require public school students utilize technology in nearly every subject in addition to media and computer science digital requirements.

Massachusetts has a Pre-K educational writing standard requiring pre-kindergarteners use digital tools to convey messages. Why demand technology use in Pre-K when students can barely spell?

Doctors even report early technology use is interfering with motor skills and the ability to hold a pencil.

A Stanford study reports 1 in 8 adults report difficulty remaining offline, showing compulsive attachment to cyberspace such as with chat rooms, blog entries, emails, etc. If adults have trouble, why are we habituating preschoolers?

Providing technology education makes sense if circumscribed to be age appropriate and taught in specialized courses on computer programming and useful software. However, cross-curriculum mandates and performance reviews on the basis of “innovative” or chronic use of technology take time away from other subject matter and undermine sensible technology programming and reasonable limits.

Two types of technology are entering our schools, one that replaces traditional learning with virtual education, and another that simply adds technology tools.

Limits are needed on all technology to protect students from problems attached to excessive technology use, such as addiction, obesity, depression,  cyber-bullying, marketing, and loss of privacy.

Limits are needed because virtual education is already highly attractive to communities because it can be cheap, well marketed, and effort and accountability can be outsourced. Accountability pressures are intense, including requirements for data and tying daily curriculum to hundreds of specific educational standards. Outside financial interests, including in data collection, mean that grants are provided with harmful strings (often to encourage more technology).

Programmed virtual education often lacks oversight and undermines local academic freedom, for often programs are set in stone and content only available to students.

The screen time bill (H. 106) sponsored by Representative Patricia Duffy (and prepared by Kirstin Beatty, director of Last Tree Laws) was put forward to encourage local school authorities to set screen time limits through a public hearing. A template is provided which can be adapted except for some baseline limits. Baseline limits for grades 10-12 are 120 minutes daily, for grade 8 are 90 minutes daily, and below grade 8 no more than 5 hours monthly. Exceptions are allowed in special cases, including for virtual schools.

These baseline limits exist to protect students from financial and other pressures pushing for screen time despite evidence of academic and social harm. For example, the Organisation for Co-Operation and Development, funded by 34 countries, in 2015 released a study finding that just viewing emails beyond once or twice a week negatively impacted reading skills. Ample research indicates technology is harmful to learning.

This is all the more heart-breaking when considering that the DC federal district court just ruled that federal wireless and RF exposure guidelines are arbitrary and fails to weigh current research, in particular with regard to children and pregnant women and including neurological effects.

By moving this legislation forward, the committee will make an important statement to the public and educational leaders that Massachusetts that our youth are too important to allow technology interests to take over our educational system.


Rights of the Child

Brodeur, J (2016 Nov 21) Media Education and the Convention on the Rights of the Child. Smart Media Education for the 21 st Century. Available online July 14 2019 at https://acmesmartmediaeducation.net/2016/11/21/media-education-and-the-convention-on-the-rights-of-the-child/

Motor Skills

Hill, A (2018 Feb 25) Children struggle to hold pencils due to too much tech, doctors say: children need opportunities to develop hand strength and dexterity needed to hold pencils. The Guardian. Available at

Coughland, S (2018 Oct 30) Surgery students `losing dexterity to stitch patients.` BBC News. Available July 14 2019 at


Paton, G (2014 Apr 15) Infants `Unable to use toy building blocks` due to IPad Addiction. The Telegraph. Available 2019 July 14 online at https://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/educationnews/10767878/Infants-unable-to-use-toy-building-blocks-due-to-iPad-addiction.html

CNBC (2018 Jan 8) Apple should address youth phone addiction, two large investors [Jane Partners and California State Teachers’ Retirement System] say.

Kardaras, N (2016 Aug 27) It’s ‘digital heroin’: How screens turn kids into psychotic junkies. NY Post. Available at https://nypost.com/2016/08/27/its-digital-heroin-how-screens-turn-kids-into-psychotic-junkies/

Stanford University Medical Center. (2006, October 17). Internet Addiction: Stanford Study Seeks To Define Whether
It’s A Problem. ScienceDaily. Retrieved June 12, 2019 from

Socioeconomic Faults

Bowles, N. (2016 Oct 26) The digital gap between rich and poor kids is not what we expected: America’s public schools are still promoting devices with screens—even offering digital-only preschools. The rich are banning screens from class altogether. The New York Times. Available July 14 at https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/26/style/digital-divide-screens-schools.html

Academic Problems

Woodworth L, Raymond M, Chirbas K, Gonzalez M, Negassi Y, Snow W, & Van Donge C. (2016 Apr 20) Online charter school study 2015 [Found brick-and-mortar schools do better than online]. CREDO.

Miron G, Gulosino C (2016 Apr 20) Virtual schools report 2016: directory and performance review. NEPC. Available at

Shapiro J (2015 Apr 30) 4 Fundamental Problems With Everything You Hear About The Future Of Education. Forbes. Available 10 October 2021 at https://www.forbes.com/sites/jordanshapiro/2015/04/30/4-fundamental-problems-with-everything-you-hear-about-the-future-of-education/?sh=62a725dc7ab9

Social Emotional Development

Ravitch, D (2015 Dec 7) District Adopts Federally-Endorsed Tech Product, and It Bores the Kids to Tears. Diane Ravitch’s Blog. Online July 14 2019 at https://dianeravitch.net/2015/12/07/district-adopts-federally-endorsed-tech-product-and-it-bores-the-kids-to-tears/

Council on Communications and Media Executive Committee, 2016-2017. Media Use in School-Aged Children and
Adolescents. American Academy of Pediatrics.

Nixon, CL (2014) Current perspectives: the impact of cyberbullying on adolescent health. Adolesc Health Med Ther. 5:143-158.

Margalit L (2016 Apr 17) What screen time can really do to kids’ brains: Too much at the worst possible age can have lifetime consequences. Psychology Today. Available online at https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/behind-online-


DC Court decision affirming FCC guidelines are ‘arbitrary and capricious’ – https://childrenshealthdefense.org/wp-content/uploads/chd-v-fcc-we-won-decision.pdf

Several research studies reviewing the wireless in schools are reviewed at the Environmental Health Trust online at: https://ehtrust.org/peer-reviewed-research-studies-on-wi-fi/

Deshmukh PS, Nasare N, Megha K, Banerjee BD, Ahmed RS, Singh D, Abegaonkar MP, Tripathi AK, Mediratta PK
(2015) Cognitive impairment and neurogenotoxic effects in rats exposed to low-intensity microwave radiation. Int J
Toxicol. 34 (3): 284-290. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25749756

Massachusetts EdTech

Digital Learning: Personalized Learning. Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education. Available
July 14 2019 at http://www.doe.mass.edu/odl/personalized.html

Note: Currently, mandates for technology use by teachers, administrators, and superintendents are enforced by state performance rubrics and also promoted by the resources or grants available through the state Massachusetts Personalized Learning Edtech Consortium (MAPLE) and the New England Secondary Schools Consortium (NESSC)].

Outside Interests

EdTechXGlobal Press Release. (2016 May 25) Global Report Predicts EdTech Spend to Reach $252bn by 2020. Cision PR Newswire. Available 2019 July 14 at https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/global-report-predicts-edtech-spend-to-reach-252bn-by-2020-580765301.html

Papallo J (2015) Report Estimates US EdTech at $8.38 billion. Education World. Available 2019 July 14 at

Strauss, V (2014 Mar 14) Netflix’s Reed Hastings has a big idea: Kill elected school boards. Washington Post. Available
July 14 2014 at https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/answer-sheet/wp/2014/03/14/netflixs-reed-hastings-has-a-big-

Press Release (2010 Apr 20) DreamBox Learning Acquired by Charter Fund in Partnership with Education

Philanthropist and Netflix CEO Reed Hastings: Agreement Includes $10 Million R&D Investment and Newly Appointed Board Members: Company Poised for Accelerated Growth as Leading Innovator of Effective E-Learning in the Classroom. Dreambox Learning. Available July 14 2019 at http://www.dreambox.com/press-release-20100420

Anonymous Guest Post (2016 Jan 26) 21st Century Learning? Or 21st Century Profiteering? [Conflict of interest of school adminsitrators] Educational Alchemy Blog by Morna McDermott. Available July 14 2019 at https://educationalchemy.com/2016/01/26/21st-century-learning-or-21st-century-profiteering/

Ravitch, D. Executive Salaries at K12, Inc. [Chairman and CEO made 4.2 million in 2014]. Diane Ravitch’s Blog. Available online July 14 2019 at https://dianeravitch.net/category/on-line-education/

Kharpal A (2016 Jun 30) A $19 trillion ‘digital revolution’ is coming and the US is lagging: Cisco’s Chambers. CNBC. Available online 2019 Jun 14 at https://www.cnbc.com/2016/06/30/a-19-trillion-digital-revolution-is-coming-and-the-us-is-lagging-cisco-john-chambers-viva-tech.html

Vaute V (2018 Oct 29) Recycling Is Not The Answer To The E-Waste Crisis. Forbes. Online 2019 July 14 at

Electric Vehicle (EV) Critique




Criticism jointly submitted to the Massachusetts Department of Public Utilities dockets 21-90, 21-91, and 21-92 on utility EV proposals on 14 September 2021  — available at MA DPU, but link may change after corrected copy is provided. Ken Gartner also provided a separate letter including more technical criticism.


Dear Secretary Marini:

All of the proposals from the above-captioned utility plans sound wonderful if one believes electric vehicles (EV) are the route to preventing climate disaster. However, sound environmental and public health reasons exist to stall these proposals for modification or elimination, in addition for privacy and property protection.


The following, with some slight variation, describes utility proposals, which are based upon published directives for electric vehicle infrastructure in D.P.U. 20-69-A, and the rate structure for demand charges regulated by Section 29 of Chapter 383 of the Acts of 2020 (the ‘Transportation Act”):

1. Financial support to provide:

    • In public sites and workplaces, Electric Vehicle Supply Equipment (EVSE) installations, for Level 2 (L2) chargers;
    • Direct Current Fast Charging (DCFC) in environmental justice communities or in public sites and workplaces;
    •  In properties with 1-4 units and multi-unit dwellings, EVSE and at-home charging enabling;]
    • EVSE installations in light duty fleet, including school buses;

2. Pilots to support electric fleet conversion in ‘environmental justice’ communities;
3. Workforce development and electrician training;
4. Demand charge alternative rate structure with a sliding scale, in accordance with the Transportation Act.


Of great import, in Environmental Health Trust v. Federal Communications Commission, No. 20-1025 (D.C, Cir. 2021) the court held that the FCC failed to provide a reasoned explanation for deciding its radiofrequency guidelines are safe. This decision, unusual in chastising the FCC’s inquiry decision, upends any claim of safety and reliance upon FCC guidelines, and now the FCC must again review and reconsider its guidelines.

Given this court decision, the Commonwealth, department, and utilities should stall investments into EV and EV infrastructure, in addition to the smart grid, in order to limit radiofrequencies.


Secondly, the scientific evidence that these exposures are harmful should be seriously evaluated, and appropriate action taken to limit exposures from existing infrastructure.

Relevant health studies can be found on the Aachen University EMF Portal or at PubMed, and in addition experts independent of industry can assist with review and considerations such as safer options.[1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10] The International EMF Scientist Appeal is a good starting point for identifying and contacting credible scientists and public health doctors independent of industry, while the Institute of Building Biology is another for identifying engineers and building biology consultants who have studied remediation.

While utilities and the department can adopt the ALARA principle, ‘As Low As Reasonably Achievable’, radiofrequency exposures from EV infrastructure and EVs, including electric fleets, require time and study for remediation and appropriate investment.[11 12] Hence, EV infrastructure should be delayed.

If utilities and the department proceed with electric cars and corresponding infrastructure, then powering these cars must be planned carefully. Utilities and the department can take steps to limit transients, harmonics, etc., on the power lines from EV, in addition to heavy loads that create strong fields, as well as wireless signals. Technical problems, such as ground current, ground faults, and fire hazards, which also need to be addressed, are discussed by Ken Gartner in his testimony to these dockets – he also suggests a permitting process for all EV chargers.

As a matter of transparency and accountability, utilities should provide public information on existing radiofrequency exposures, including power quality, as well as utility remediation efforts and potential hazards.


Poor power quality results when electrical lines carry extra frequencies ranging from less than 5 kHz to more than 500 kHz. Poor power quality may cause calcium to be deposited in the heart, thereby damaging the heart, or may cause other health issues.[17 18 19] EVs and EV infrastructure will compromise the power quality of electrical lines in areas serviced, including in targeted environmental justice communities, workplaces, and multi-unit dwellings.

A recent study discusses how Direct Current Fast Chargers will cause enormous power quality problems, but recommends a solution.[20] How much of a solution is this and is this tenable?

Another recent study found that magnetic fields are often dangerously high near Direct Current Fast Chargers.[21] If installed in environmental justice communities as planned, how is this an environmental justice? If these are installed near parks, where children rest and play, or adjacent to a bedroom how will the hazards be eliminated?

Future EV infrastructure may even include wireless charging, which will simultaneously lead to strong magnetic field exposures capable of disrupting medical devices.[22 23] EVs already have
wireless emissions embedded, requiring calculations of multiple sources of exposure in concert with utility equipment.[24]

Dr. Ron Kostoff, with a Ph.D. in Aerospace and Mechanical Engineering from Princeton University and who has worked for Bell Laboratories, Mitre Corporation, and the Department of Energy, has noted that he cannot find measurement devices to measure the ~24 GHz and ~77 GHz frequencies emitted as part of ‘safety’ sensors in modern vehicles, but he can find indications levels are directed at passengers and likely exceed thermal levels.[25]

Researchers at the University of Mainz measured brain activity of a driver who step-by-step turned on the car, the air conditioning, the cellphone connection, and the WLAN with alarming disruption evidenced.[26] Research repositories are ripe with evidence that these exposures are harmful, so why build infrastructure rife with these exposures?

Assumptions need to be challenged. For example, as part of ‘Equity pilots’ in environmental justice communities, Eversource proposes a car-sharing program that may cost more or less than $2,000,000 and also proposes to establish electric fleets such as for buses and community transport that may cost more or less that $3,000,000. [27] Establishing these programs in environmental justice communities ironically causes harm, misleading consumers, while simultaneously charging for the opportunity.

Many questions exist, and the department and utilities need to find answers and share these with the public. For example, what are the measurements of power quality, power frequency fields, and radio-frequencies from Electric Vehicle Supply Equipment and other types of installations? Are there wireless components within the infrastructure and, if so, can these be proven safe or eliminated? Are there hazard zones?[28] Can hazard zones be fenced? Is wildlife at risk? What is the cost of remediation? Are there differences between public, corporate, and occupational exposures?


Wireless, electromagnetic noise, and strong fields from electricity are known to disturb flora and fauna, such as by sickening trees, disorienting birds, and interfering with hunting and nesting.[29 30 31 32] Fostering wireless also threatens climate by contributing to global warming, because radiofrequencies contribute to heat.[33] Dielectric heating from wireless also harms insects like bees.[34 35]

The entire purpose of moving towards EVs is protecting our environment by reducing carbon emissions, but needs to be assured rather than assumed. EVs can have greater carbon emissions than gas-powered vehicles when relying fossil fuels.[36] The biomass industry is also agitating hard to be allowed into the federal renewable energy standard, yet consumes mature trees at a pace faster than regeneration, contributing to carbon emissions through hauling, fuel burning, and loss of carbon sinks.[37 38]

Modern EV infrastructure resource demands have not been factored into energy-use calculations.[39 40] For Level 2 chargers along streets alone, as expressed by Unitil, requirements include replacement of street pole, installation of underground electricity service, 3 pole-mounted transformers, a weather resistant cabinet, excavation, concrete footing, grading, utility meters, distribution panels, conduits, and breakers.[41 42] Loss of energy and equipment damage is a known effect of poor power quality, which results from EV infrastructure – this also needs to be factored into energy calculations. [43 44 45 46 47] Katie Singer has also referenced reports that EVs will require more energy consumption than gas-powered automobiles, while adding to E-waste and contaminating water – these reports deserve investigation.[48]

A cradle-to-grave environmental evaluation of electric vehicles and infrastructure is needed that is fully funded, independent of industry influence, and which evaluates energy footprint, resource consumption, service life, end-of-life removal costs, and environmental toxicity in addition to alternatives.

Independent evaluation is needed to compare electric cars to other investments, such as alternative fuels like hydrogen, different transportation systems, energy saving strategies, infrastructure efficiency, life-style adjustments, and urban planning impacts.[49 50 51 52] For example, quarantine led to significant carbon emission reductions in China. [53] Climate quarantines can cause disparate economic harm, but investments in alternative economies and urban planning can respectfully reduce automobile reliance.


EV infrastructure presents significant potential for property loss, and this needs to be factored into budget projections and comparisons to alternative solutions.

Poor power quality can damage property, causing equipment deterioration, shutdowns, and misoperation at home and work.[54 55 56 57] A 2008 in-depth European Power Quality study found industrial loss to be 4% of turnover rate, even exempting data centers, and in excess of 135 billion Euro within Europe.[58] A 2001 study found a 2-second power quality interuption cost industry $37.03/kW.[59]

Cyberattack on EV chargers could damage home or community power distribution, service, and hardware; hacks may disable or command a single vehicle or a fleet; access home WiFi or a mobile App, and steal data for identify theft. [60 61 62 63]

Who bears liability for dangerous and poor investments? Filings in the above-captioned and other D.P.U. dockets by numerous parties are warnings based upon peer-reviewed science, likelihood of lawsuit, and potential for a court ruling that makes smart grid investments obsolete.[64 65 66 67 68] Liability may exist for infringements on constitutional privacy, property rights, and health.


In light of the foregoing, EV costs and investments need to be reconsidered. Total EV infrastructure spending forecast is estimated as $469.7 million in total from National Grid and Eversource, while Unitil lists $1.01 million.[69] These investments should be set aside and remediated or reconsidered. Why not instead invest in a car-free future, like Barcelona?

Utilities have a conflict of interest which may explain their drive even when new technologies fail to live up to marketing expectations. Investor-owned utilities can earn a profit, a Return On Equity invested (ROE) into distribution infrastructure:

Utilities profit primarily by buying new equipment (“smart” meters, power lines, transformers), charging ratepayers interest on this investment and paying less taxes as the equipment depreciates over time. The higher the investment risk, the higher the rate of return. The rate of return decreases each year. Once the rate of return reaches zero, the utility operates and maintains the equipment with no profit.[70]

Eversource reported an increase of 34% in profits for 2021 – this is an enormous profit.[71]

The utility profit model needs to be redesigned to encourage saving money, energy, health, nature, and existing investments.

In sum, here are the final recommendations for the department and utilities:

• Stall EV infrastructure plans;
• Adopt the ALARA principle;
• Establish policies to regularly monitor and share with the public electromagnetic measurements from the grid, including before and after corrective measures.
• Based upon a full accounting, examine whether EV infrastructure and EVs saves or costs resources and energy;
• Examine how EV infrastructure can be modified to respect privacy and protect reliability and security;
• Identify if liability remains, for whom liability exists;
• If EV infrastructure is a net environmental positive and health can be protected, prepare an adjusted budget and timeline to reflect new expenditures to fix problems;
• If remediation is not possible or problematic, lobby the legislature to halt EVs and attendant infrastructure.

Signed 14 September 2021 by:

Kirstin Beatty
Director, Last Tree Laws
149 Central Pk Dr
Holyoke, MA 01040

Patricia Burke
Stop Smart Meters MA
Halt MA Smart Meters
Scientific Alliance for Education
8 Eden Street
Mills, MA

Leslie Saffer
Worcester Info Team for Health (WITH)
392 Mill Street
Worcester, MA 01602

Laura Josephs
7 Conway Dr. #2
Greenfield MA 01301

Virginia Bradley Hines, PA, LMHC
Director, The EMR Network
Member, Concord Safe Technology [MA]

Liberty Goodwin, Director
Toxics Information Project (TIP)
P.O. Box 40572, Providence, RI 02940

Alexia McKnight, DVM, DACVR
258 Heyburn Rd.
Chadds Ford, PA 19317

Nikki Florio
Founder/Director of Bee Heroic
7823 W 38th Ave.
Wheat Ridge Colorado 80033

Eugene J. Bazan, Ph.D.
Secretary, PA Smart Meter Work Group
PO Box 24
Lemont, PA 16851
Lisa Lovelady
Stop 5GJax
4249 Ortega Place,
Jacksonville, Florida 32210

Cynthia Franklin, Director
Consumers for Safe Cell Phones
829 Briar Rd.
Bellingham, WA 98225


1 Ozen S (2008 Jan) Low-Frequency Transient Electric and Magnetic Fields Coupling to Child Body. Radiation
Protection Dosimetry. Oxford University Press. 128(1):62-63
2 Milham S. Evidence that dirty electricity is causing the worldwide epidemics of obesity and diabetes. Electromagn Biol
Med. 2014 Jan;33(1):75-8. doi: 10.3109/15368378.2013.783853. Epub 2013 Jun 19. PMID: 23781992.
3 Neudorfer C, Chow CT, Boutet A, Loh A, Germann J, Elias GJ, Hutchison WD, Lozano AM. Kilohertz-frequency
stimulation of the nervous system: A review of underlying mechanisms. Brain Stimul. 2021 May-Jun;14(3):513-530.
doi: 10.1016/j.brs.2021.03.008. Epub 2021 Mar
4 Elferchichi M, Mercier J, Ammari M, Belguith H, Abdelmelek H, Sakly M, Lambert K. Subacute static magnetic field
exposure in rat induces a pseudoanemia status with increase in MCT4 and Glut4 proteins in glycolytic muscle. Environ
Sci Pollut Res Int. 2016 Jan;23(2):1265-73. doi: 10.1007/s11356-015-5336-3. Epub 2015 Sep 10. PMID: 26358208
5 Tenforde TS. Biological interactions and potential health effects of extremely-low-frequency magnetic fields from
power lines and other common sources. Annu Rev Public Health. 1992;13:173-96. doi:
10.1146/annurev.pu.13.050192.001133. PMID: 1599584.
6 Drzewiecka EM, Kozlowska W, Zmijewska A, Wydorski PJ, Franczak A. Electromagnetic Field (EMF) Radiation Alters
Estrogen Release from the Pig Myometrium during the Peri-Implantation Period. Int J Mol Sci. 2021 Mar
13;22(6):2920. doi: 10.3390/ijms22062920. PMID: 33805726; PMCID: PMC7999543.
7 Kiray A, Tayefi H, Kiray M, Bagriyanik HA, Pekcetin C, Ergur BU, Ozogul C. The effects of exposure to
electromagnetic field on rat myocardium. Toxicol Ind Health. 2013 Jun;29(5):418-25. doi: 10.1177/0748233711434957.
Epub 2012 Feb 9. PMID: 22323476.
8 Chung YH, Lee YJ, Lee HS, Chung SJ, Lim CH, Oh KW, Sohn UD, Park ES, Jeong JH. Extremely low frequency
magnetic field modulates the level of neurotransmitters. Korean J Physiol Pharmacol. 2015 Jan;19(1):15-20. doi:
10.4196/kjpp.2015.19.1.15. Epub 2014 Dec 31. PMID: 25605992; PMCID: PMC4297757
9 Huss A, Peters S, Vermeulen R. Occupational exposure to extremely low-frequency magnetic fields and the risk of ALS:
A systematic review and meta-analysis. Bioelectromagnetics. 2018 Feb;39(2):156-163. doi: 10.1002/bem.22104. Epub
2018 Jan 19. PMID: 29350413.
10 Belyaev I, Dean A, Eger H, Hubmann G, Jandrisovits R, Kern M, Kundi M, Moshammer H, Lercher P, Müller K,
Oberfeld G, Ohnsorge P, Pelzmann P, Scheingraber C, Thill R. EUROPAEM EMF Guideline 2016 for the prevention,
diagnosis and treatment of EMF-related health problems and illnesses. Rev Environ Health. 2016 Sep 1;31(3):363-97.
doi: 10.1515/reveh-2016-0011. PMID: 27454111.
11 Yang L, Lu M, Lin J, Li C, Zhang C, Lai Z, Wu T. Long-Term Monitoring of Extremely Low Frequency Magnetic
Fields in Electric Vehicles. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2019 Oct 7;16(19):3765. doi: 10.3390/ijerph16193765.
PMID: 31591344; PMCID: PMC6801816.
12 Niu D, Zhu F, Qiu R, Niu Q. Exposure to electromagnetic fields aboard high-speed electric multiple unit trains. J Biol
Regul Homeost Agents. 2016 Jul-Sep;30(3):727-731. PMID: 27655489
13 Markovskaya IV. The effect of low frequency electromagnetic radiation on the morphology of dental and periodontal
tissues (experimental investigation). Wiad Lek. 2019;72(5 cz 1):773-778. PMID: 31175771.
14 Kumari K, Koivisto H, Viluksela M, Paldanius KMA, Marttinen M, Hiltunen M, Naarala J, Tanila H, Juutilainen J.
Behavioral testing of mice exposed to intermediate frequency magnetic fields indicates mild memory impairment. PLoS
One. 2017 Dec 4;12(12):e0188880. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0188880. PMID: 29206232; PMCID: PMC5714647.
15 Samuel Milham (2012 Dec 6) Dirty Electricity: Electrification and the Diseases of Civilization. Second Edition.
iUniverse; 11.6.2012 edition
16 Brech A, Kubinyi G, Németh Z, Bakos J, Fiocchi S, Thuróczy G. Genotoxic effects of intermediate frequency magnetic
fields on blood leukocytes in vitro. Mutat Res. 2019 Sep;845:403060. doi: 10.1016/j.mrgentox.2019.05.016. Epub 2019
May 30. PMID: 31561904.
17 Shuvy M, Abedat S, Beeri R, Valitzki M, Stein Y, Meir K, Lotan C. Electromagnetic fields promote severe and unique
vascular calcification in an animal model of ectopic calcification. Exp Toxicol Pathol. 2014 Sep;66(7):345-50. doi:
10.1016/j.etp.2014.05.001. Epub 2014 May 29. PMID: 24882371.
18 Plaintiff opening brief for Environmental Health Trust v. Federal Communications Commission, No. 20-1025 (D.C, Cir.
2021) discuss how modulation, pulsation, and peak exposures appear most important to bioactivity, which relates to
power quality – the brief also neatly summarizes health effects noted from RF and EMF science that had been submitted
to the dockets in question.
19 Yadegari-Dehkordi S, Sadeghi HR, Attaran-Kakhki N, Shokouhi M, Sazgarnia A. Silver nanoparticles increase
cytotoxicity induced by intermediate frequency low voltages. Electromagn Biol Med. 2015;34(4):317-21. doi:
10.3109/15368378.2014.919590. Epub 2014 Jun 5. PMID: 24901460.
20 Milanés-Montero MI, Gallardo-Lozano J, Romero-Cadaval E, González-Romera E. Hall-effect based semi-fast AC on-
board charging equipment for electric vehicles. Sensors (Basel). 2011;11(10):9313-26. doi: 10.3390/s111009313. Epub
2011 Sep 28. PMID: 22163697; PMCID: PMC3231284.
21 Trentadue G, Pinto R, Salvetti M, Zanni M, Pliakostathis K, Scholz H, Martini G. Assessment of Low-Frequency
Magnetic Fields Emitted by DC Fast Charging Columns. Bioelectromagnetics. 2020 May;41(4):308-317. doi:
10.1002/bem.22254. Epub 2020 Feb 11. PMID: 32043629; PMCID: PMC7217217.
22 Tell RA, Kavet R, Bailey JR, Halliwell J. Very-low-frequency and low-frequency electric and magnetic fields associated
with electric shuttle bus wireless charging. Radiat Prot Dosimetry. 2014 Jan;158(2):123-34. doi: 10.1093/rpd/nct208.
Epub 2013 Sep 15. PMID: 24043876
23 M. Clemens, M. Zang, M. Alsayegh and B. Schmuelling, “High Resolution Modeling of Magnetic Field Exposure
Scenarios in the Vicinity of Inductive Wireless Power Transfer Systems.,” 2018 IEEE International Magnetics
Conference (INTERMAG), 2018, pp. 1-1, doi: 10.1109/INTMAG.2018.8508403.
24 Z. Psenakova, D. Gombárska and M. Smetana, “Electromagnetic Field Measurement inside the Car with Modern
Embedded Wireless Technologies,” 2020 IEEE 21st International Conference on Computational Problems of Electrical
Engineering (CPEE), 2020, pp. 1-4, doi: 10.1109/CPEE50798.2020.9238731.
25 Kostoff, Ron (2018 Sep 16) Dr. Ronald N. Kostoff on Automotive Radar and Electromagnetic Field Exposure in Cars.
Environmental Health Trust. Available 4 September 2021 at https://ehtrust.org/dr-ronald-n-kostoff-on-automotive-radar-
26 Jürgen Kupferschmid Unter Strom: Autoelektronik versetzt Gehirn in Stress und Muskulatur unter Spannung.
SalusMed. Available 3 September 2021 at https://salusmed.ch/unter-strom-autoelektronik-versetzt-gehirn-in-stress-und-
muskulatur-unter-spannung/ ~ note a version of this in English can be found at the Environmental Health Trust
27 14 July 2021. Direct Pre-filed testimony of Kevin Boughan D.P.U. 21-90 on behalf of NSTAR Electric Company d/b/a
Eversource EXHIBIT ES-KB-1 https://fileservice.eea.comacloud.net/FileService.Api/file/FileRoom/13758159
28 Hosseini M, Monazzam MR, Farhang Matin L, Khosroabadi H. Hazard zoning around electric substations of
petrochemical industries by stimulation of extremely low-frequency magnetic fields. Environ Monit Assess. 2015
May;187(5):258. doi: 10.1007/s10661-015-4449-y. Epub 2015 Apr 16. PMID: 25877640.
29 Shepherd et al., Extremely Low Frequency Electromagnetic Fields impair the Cognitive and Motor Abilities of Honey
Bees, Scientific Reports volume 8, Article number: 7932 (2018)
30 Waldmann-Selsam, C., et al. “Radiofrequency radiation injures trees around mobile phone base stations.” Science of the
Total Environment 572 (2016): 554-69.
31 Červený Jaroslav, Begall Sabine, Koubek Petr, Nováková Petra and Burda Hynek . (2011) Directional preference may
enhance hunting accuracy in foraging foxes. Biol. Lett.7355–357 http://doi.org/10.1098/rsbl.2010.1145
32 Levitt BB, Lai HC, Manville AM. Effects of non-ionizing electromagnetic fields on flora and fauna, part 1. Rising
ambient EMF levels in the environment. Rev Environ Health. 2021 May 27. doi: 10.1515/reveh-2021-0026. Epub ahead
of print. PMID: 34047144.
33 According to Dr. Livio Guiliani, PhD, Director of Research for the Italian Health National Service and spokesperson for
ICEMS (dot edu), in a 6 April 2020 CHE-EMF email discussion to prevent heating of climate “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.”
34 Thielens et al., “Exposure of Insects to Radio-Frequency Electromagnetic Fields from 2 to 120 GHz” Scientific Reports
volume 8, Article number: 3924 (2018)
35 Thielens, A., Greco, M.K., Verloock, L. et al. Radio-Frequency Electromagnetic Field Exposure of Western Honey
Bees. Sci Rep 10, 461 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-56948-0
36 Holzman DC. When it comes to electric vehicle emissions, location matters. Environ Health Perspect.
2012;120(6):A230-A231. doi:10.1289/ehp.120-a230a
37 Depro, Brooks M. Brian C. Murray, Ralph J. Alig, Alyssa Shanks. 2008. Public Land, Timber Harvests, and Climate
Mitigation: Quantifying Carbon Sequestration Potential on U.S. Public Timberlands. Forest Ecology and Management
255 (2008) 1122–1134 http://naldc.nal.usda.gov/download/21039/PDF
38 Hudiburg, Tara W., Beverly E. Law, William R Moomaw, Mark E. Harmon, and Jeffrey E. Stenzel. 2019. Meeting
GHG Reduction Targets Requires Accounting for All Forest Sector Emissions. Environ. Res. Lett. 14 (2019) 095005.
39 Elgowainy A, Han J, Ward J, Joseck F, Gohlke D, Lindauer A, Ramsden T, Biddy M, Alexander M, Barnhart S,
Sutherland I, Verduzco L, Wallington TJ. Current and Future United States Light-Duty Vehicle Pathways: Cradle-to-
Grave Lifecycle Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Economic Assessment. Environ Sci Technol. 2018 Feb 20;52(4):2392-
2399. doi: 10.1021/acs.est.7b06006. Epub 2018 Feb 8. PMID: 29298387.
40 Zhu L, Chen M. Research on Spent LiFePO4 Electric Vehicle Battery Disposal and Its Life Cycle Inventory Collection
in China. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020 Nov 27;17(23):8828. doi: 10.3390/ijerph17238828. PMID: 33261047;
PMCID: PMC7730360.
41 Unitil DPU 21-92 Exhibit CSVG-5 https://fileservice.eea.comacloud.net/FileService.Api/file/FileRoom/13758181
42 To support complex metering including for electric vehicle chargers, National Grid has even sought to build its own
personal communications network, including fiberoptic cable and wireless.
43 Ding Zejun, Zhu Yongqiang and Xu Yu, “Economic loss evaluation and selective treatment of power quality,” 2010 5th
International Conference on Critical Infrastructure (CRIS), 2010, pp. 1-4, doi: 10.1109/CRIS.2010.5617490.
44 IEC 61921 (2003). Power capacitors – Low voltage power factor correction banks.
45 A. Sharma, B.S. Rajpurohit, S.N. Singh, A review on economics of power quality: Impact, assessment and mitigation,
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Volume 88, 2018, Pages 363-372, ISSN 1364-0321,
46 M. Al-dabbagh , H Askarian , Rana Abdul , Jabbar Khan. (2001 Jan) Power quality and energy loss reduction in power
systems. Available 7 September 2021 at
47 Kola Sampangi Sambaiah, Thangavelu Jayabarathi (2020 Feb) Loss minimization techniques for optimal operation and
planning of distribution systems: A review of different methodologies. International Transactions on Electrical Energy
Systems. Volume30, Issue2. E12230 https://doi.org/10.1002/2050-7038.12230
48 Singer, Katie. (3 November 2020) Proposing Cradle-to-Grave Evaluations for All Vehicles. Wall St. International
Magazine. https://wsimag.com/science-and-technology/63818-proposing-cradle-to-grave-evaluations-for-all-vehicles
49 Stephens-Romero S, Carreras-Sospedra M, Brouwer J, Dabdub D, Samuelsen S. Determining air quality and
greenhouse gas impacts of hydrogen infrastructure and fuel cell vehicles. Environ Sci Technol. 2009 Dec
1;43(23):9022-9. doi: 10.1021/es901515y. PMID: 19943683
50 Frey HC, Zhai H, Rouphail NM. Regional on-road vehicle running emissions modeling and evaluation for conventional
and alternative vehicle technologies. Environ Sci Technol. 2009 Nov 1;43(21):8449-55. doi: 10.1021/es900535s. PMID:
51 Zhou C, Li S, Wang S. Examining the Impacts of Urban Form on Air Pollution in Developing Countries: A Case Study
of China’s Megacities. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2018 Jul 24;15(8):1565. doi: 10.3390/ijerph15081565. PMID:
30042324; PMCID: PMC6121357
52 Jones SJ. If electric cars are the answer, what was the question? Br Med Bull. 2019 Mar 1;129(1):13-23. doi:
10.1093/bmb/ldy044. PMID: 30615073.
53 Wang Q, Su M. A preliminary assessment of the impact of COVID-19 on environment – A case study of China. Sci Total
Environ. 2020 Aug 1;728:138915. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.138915. Epub 2020 Apr 22. PMID: 32348946; PMCID:
54 A. Sharma, B.S. Rajpurohit, S.N. Singh, A review on economics of power quality: Impact, assessment and mitigation,
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Volume 88, 2018, Pages 363-372, ISSN 1364-0321,
55 Shih-An Yin, Chun-Lien Su and Rung-Fang Chang, “Assessment of power quality cost for high-tech industry,” 2006
IEEE Power India Conference, 2006, pp. 6 pp.-, doi: 10.1109/POWERI.2006.1632616
56 Ding Zejun, Zhu Yongqiang and Xu Yu, “Economic loss evaluation and selective treatment of power quality,” 2010 5th
International Conference on Critical Infrastructure (CRIS), 2010, pp. 1-4, doi: 10.1109/CRIS.2010.5617490.
57 J. G. Dougherty and W. L. Stebbins, “Power quality: a utility and industry perspective,” 1997 IEEE Annual Textile,
Fiber and Film Industry Technical Conference, 1997, pp. 5. 10 pp.-, doi: 10.1109/TEXCON.1997.598528.
58 Targosz, Roman, Jonathan Manson. European Power Quality Survey Report. LPQI, 2008.
59 Y. Shih-An, S. Chun-Lien, C. Rung-Fang. Assessment of PQ cost for high-tech industry. Power India Conference, 2006
IEEE, 2006.
60 S. Acharya, Y. Dvorkin, H. Pandžić and R. Karri, “Cybersecurity of Smart Electric Vehicle Charging: A Power Grid
Perspective,” in IEEE Access, vol. 8, pp. 214434-214453, 2020, doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2020.3041074
61 Cyber Security Issues of Internet with Electric Vehicles. Pouted. Available 14 September 2021 at
62 Barney Carlson & Ken Rhode (2018 Sept 12) Cybersecurity of DC Fast Charging: Potential Impacts to the Electric
Grid. Idaho National Laboratory. INL/MIS-18-5128. Available 7 September 2021 at
63 Kim M, Park K, Yu S, Lee J, Park Y, Lee SW, Chung B. A Secure Charging System for Electric Vehicles Based on
Blockchain. Sensors (Basel). 2019 Jul 9;19(13):3028. doi: 10.3390/s19133028. PMID: 31324058; PMCID:
64 Ed Friedman v. Central Main Power Company. ORDER ON DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS. No. 2:20-cv-
00237-JDL (1 st Cir. 2021) Available at https://ehtrust.org/wp-content/uploads/R.-Doc.-26-Friedman-ADA-Order-
65 Emily Cohen (2020 Nov 11) Court ruling throws Pennsylvania smart-meter plan into turmoil. The Philadelphia Inquirer.
Available 7 September 2021 at https://www.inquirer.com/business/peco-puc-pennsylvania-commonwealth-court-smart-
66 Consolidated brain cancer from cellphone cases currently winding through courts including Michael Patrick Murray, et
al., v. Motorola, Inc., et al.,” Case No. 2001 CA 008479 B in the Superior Court for the District of Columbia
67 See dockets 13-83, 20-69, 16-28, 17-53, 21-80, 21-81,18-28, 21-82, 21-90, 12-76 ALL critical submissions and
attachments including but not limited to that of Dr. Lisa Nagy, joint comments, Ken Gartner, Einar Olsen, Helen
Walker, Kirstin Beatty, MACI , Dr. William Maykel and Patricia Burke , Dr. Beatrice Golomb, Reply comments by
Patricia Burke, Kirstin Beatty, Kirstin Beatty, Jean Lemiux, Dr. William Bruno, Sandra Chianfoni and Laura Catullo,
Exhibit 3 by Kirstin Beatty, Thea Fornier Wireless Technology Health Effects, Dr. Robert Gilmore Pontius Jr, PhD,
EMR Policy Institute, Dr. William Rea, Dr. Carpenter, EMR Policy Institute, and many more in all the dockets far too
numerous to list here.
68 Ken Gartner observes, in his 21-90 to 92 testimony that the utilities offer to sell EV charging installations to
municipalities and that municipalities not only are poorly suited to manage such installations but will will be left liable.
What also is the cost of removing and recycling such installations? Reference: Massachusetts Electric Company and
Nantucket Electric Company each d/b/a National Grid D.P.U. 21-91 Exhibit NG-EVPP-1 (July 14, 2021) pp. 50-51
69 See Notice of Public Hearing filed in each respective docket for the utilities.
70 Singer, Katie. (3 Feb 2020) Basic needs, electrified: What we expect from electricity. Wall St. International Magazine.
71 Crowley, B (21 Feb 2021) Strong Revenues in Connecticut Boost $1.2 Billion Profit for Eversource, CT Examiner.

Strong Revenues in Connecticut Boost $1.2 Billion Profit for Eversource

What’s with Agenda 21? UPDATED


What’s with Agenda 21?

by Kirstin Beatty – Updated 27 August 2021


I was curious what is with Agenda 21, tossed about as an evil by some, and examined complaints.

Honestly, my expectations were low. In the same way that governments state that continuing emissions at the current rate will lead to devastation yet continue enabling the same emissions, I expect similar, if less so, dissonant action from the United Nations.

First of all Agenda 21, now Agenda 30, is not mandatory or enforceable. Agenda 30 includes many laudable goals, such as recommendations to protect the rights of women and support environmental health for all.

Continuing with the positive, Agenda 30 seems to make some attempt to prevent big business from winning all contracts and owning everyone and everything. Small farmers, which have been decimated by the false promise of a green revolution and industrial agriculture, are to be protected from big business. Of course, protection may not exist in practice.

Secondly, the United Nations is an organization intended to share the thoughts of nations, or governments, rather than businesses. A one nation, one vote policy was intended to give even small, poor countries a say.

Isn’t discussion among nations helpful to preventing war? So, check, another positive.

Yet, in 2019, the United Nations made an accord with the World Economic Forum (WEF) to circumvent votes from each nation in favor of including business stakeholders in formulating decisions, as discussed in an article by Harris Gleckman on OpenDemocracy.net.

Ivan Wecke, in a recent article also posted at OpenDemocracy.net, discusses how the WEF chairman Klaus Schwab has promoted ‘stakeholder’ capitalism, intended to give corporations more power by setting aside democratic precepts of government so that corporations make decisions.

As with treaties and trade agreements, transnational corporations were welcomed to help craft the Agenda 30 vision, and Agenda 30 states that nations and ‘stakeholders’ (i.e. businesses) are to take apart in achieving the goals.

In other words, transnational businesses will have access to the U.N. plans most lack, and the time and wealth to ‘fix’ decisions with details against cheap solutions in favor of saleable investments. While U.N. plans are unenforceable, the plans are meant to guide countries and are influential.

To welcome transnational corporations into these discussions undermines the one nation vote policy and is a fundamental problem existing not only within the United Nations, but within U.S. local, state, and federal representative government, where businesses are often invited as ‘stakeholders’ into crafting laws and policies.

Even without being invited to help craft plans, transnational corporations can monopolize business opportunities and undermine competition. A more recent problem is that transnational corporations can frame the conversation and public attitudes towards these plans with technological propaganda and wealth. Advance notice of United Nation plans helps transnational companies revise, undermine, and outright oppose ideas shared by nation representatives.

With illusions created by wealth, transnational companies can sidestep real solutions and cause indirect harm, such was seen in the opioid crisis.

I haven’t read the entire document, but Agenda 30 emphasizes innovation, such as modern energy investments. Yet better, cheaper options may exist with older technology or with none at all. Yet, businesses are likely to argue otherwise due to conflicts of interest.

I’ve criticized the smart grid as costly and harmful for several years, but my criticisms have fallen on deaf ears in both business and government.

There is a positive statement advancing the concept of medicine for all, or of affordable medicine, which remains a dream in many countries, but nowhere does Agenda 30 address accountability for pharmaceutical companies regarding honest marketing and safer pharmaceuticals.

Covid-19 is a perfect example of how admirable goals can be circumvented. Vitamin C, D, antivirals, and any cheap treatment are not part of the conventional standard of care or of much consideration. Vaccines for all are being offered only at hefty prices and, with emergency authorization liability protections for indemnification through the U.S. PREP Act. Abroad, companies have refused to provide vaccines unless profits and indemnity are assured. In the USA, no payouts for any related adverse reactions have been made at all, despite 1,693 claims as of 2 August 2021. Any risk taken is a risk borne, apparently, only by the private consumer.

However, I can’t blame the United Nations alone, or transnational companies, for failing to consider pharmaceutical accountability. The United States has done little to halt conflicts of interests of government officers or to insure pharmaceutical accountability. The answer is to first set up laws in our own country to at least prevent conflicts of interests, such as the ballot measure proposed at Last Tree Laws.

As far as private property dispersal there is a vague statement that all should have equal access to ownership of property. Agenda 30 uses the words “access” to ownership, which suggests that the meaning is about preventing discrimination in ownership, such as the historic denial of home ownership to African Americans or in some countries to women and ethnic minorities.

Equal rights to economic resources is also discussed, which may involve rights to water as countries struggle over drought or rights to agricultural land for farmers. While a nice idea, this goal is likely to go ignored, especially since the United Nations cannot enforce any of  its recommendations. Israel and Palestine battle over land in a way that shows just how useful recommendations for sharing are heard.

The arguments against Agenda 30 based on giving away private property are specious.  If ‘property’ is ever shared freely by the wealthy, then it will be a cover for transferring liability or creating ‘sharecroppers’ of some kind.

As far as sharing wealth otherwise, Agenda 30 advocates for social protection measures and these, if business interests reign, may not necessarily equal high quality work, education, or housing. The idea is noble, but is for ‘coverage’ which, like insurance coverage, may come with conditions.

Presently, businesses are mandating medical treatment for Covid-19 — this sets a precedent to allow businesses to mandate any medical care for ‘societal good’ even if the concept of societal good can be manipulated and abused. At one time women were thrust tossed into mental hospitals on questionable psychological assessments, in order to limit their opinions or to acquire their property.

I also see a statement that private property cannot be an excuse to harm others through environmental devastation, with which I’m sure we can all agree. Do you want your neighbor or any business to be excused on the basis of personal property to place, on their property, a hazardous chemical dump next to your home?

In sum, the criticism of Agenda 30 across social media is largely about redistribution of private property, which is off base.

Is the criticism that Agenda 30 will mean loss of private property fabricated by corporate interests to divert attention from the positive goals of Agenda 30, including limits on corporate power, or to divert attention from the detrimental influence of business interests? The American Policy Center, at the forefront of Agenda 21 and UN criticism, has long campaigned against corporate regulation, including pharmaceuticals, and environmentalism under the guise of private property rights.

Criticism of Agenda 30 is also part of a campaign against the United Nations. Check the news, and you’ll see that there is a campaign against the United Nations as well – why, I’ve no idea. I may be against transnational companies participating, but not against the concept of the United Nations.

I see the criticism of Agenda 30 is often laced with the words communism and socialism. This seems like a trick to get people to automatically react badly to the words communism and socialism, when people should be able to discuss economic ideas calmly.

Socialism has been successful in cooperatively-owned businesses. In socialism, the means of producing or distributing goods is owned collectively, such as work cooperatives like Real Pickles. Socialism can also mean when the government owns the means of producing and distributing goods as exemplified in part by Medicare and Social Security. The U.S. military has been held up as a partly socialist system.

Socialism does not appear to be discussed in Agenda 30, and cooperatives are mentioned only as a business entity like any other — not with any preference.

There isn’t a country that is fully socialist, but several have adopted some socialist programs or policies. Denmark and Costa Rica seem to have done well with high taxes and universal health care as the National Geographic ran an article some years ago on how Denmark and Costa Rica have among the happiest people in the world.

There is not mention in Agenda 30 of providing universal health care, although universal coverage appears mentioned as part of ‘social protection’ — coverage comes with many more conditions than anything universally applied. Restructuring taxation is not mentioned either, except to restructure energy subsidies away from fossil fuels.

In contrast to socialism, communism has failed in many countries. Communism occurs when the community provides funds to the government for equal redistribution, but in practice governments have pocketed the money. Some have observed that communism could work on a small scale, such as within a tribal community.

The ideal of communism is nice, and deserves less hate.

Communism is often used as an insult because of its association with authoritarian governments but also, probably, since communism frightens the wealthy. At one time just being accused of being a communist destroyed careers of people who were not even communist as part of the ‘Red Scare’ propaganda. To weaponize the word communist or any other academic idea is dangerous as it supports aggression, censorship and undermines free discussion.

Associating Agenda 21 or 30 with communism is pushing it. The United Nations, full of capitalistic and some wealthy nations, is not going to become communist or, if so, not easily.

The use of communism and socialism as marketing campaign insult to Agenda 30 may be a marketing trick to create division and shut down discourse. Agenda 30 doesn’t, so far as I can see, have anything at all to do with socialism or communism. The criticism, if it is even a criticism, is way off base. I would say that is a marketing trick. If only criticisms exist of Agenda 30 as communism or socialism, which does not exist in the proposal so far as I can see, then critics must be dismissed and Agenda 30 must be a good thing. I would say the public is being misused to attack Agenda 30 on the wrong and imaginary basis, rather than on any real basis, and I wonder if leading critics are paid for by some party intent on sowing division and prejudices in the United States.

Or, I wonder if the criticism is simply to divert attention from more important avenues for change.

Last Tree Laws Massachusetts