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.

FOR FURTHER STUDY

RESEARCH RELATED TO CHILDREN

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/24456662
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22422340
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20536340
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24907160 (changes in blood count)
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22004959

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

BRITTLE BONES

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7560402

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.”
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24777741

ARTHRITIS

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.

CANCER

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

THYROID

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

SKIN RASH

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

QUESTIONING FLUORIDE

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.

COMMONWEALTH STATISTICS

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)

vs.

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.

RECORD SHOWS SUBSTANTIAL HARM

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).

FIRST RESPONDERS IN TROUBLE

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.

IMPACTS ON HEALTH & BEHAVIOR

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.

YOUTH IN TROUBLE

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***.

PROTECT MASSACHUSETTS

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.

WISER INVESTMENTS

***[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.

ELECTRICITY

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?

UTILITY SOLUTION #1

[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.

UTILITY & WIRELESS SOLUTION #2

[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.

PROBLEM BILLS

***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.

REFERENCES

* 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.

REFERENCES

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
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2018/feb/25/children-struggle-to-hold-pencils-due-to-too-much-tech-doctors-say

Coughland, S (2018 Oct 30) Surgery students `losing dexterity to stitch patients.` BBC News. Available July 14 2019 at
https://www.bbc.com/news/education-46019429

Addiction

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
www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2006/10/061017164435.htm

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
https://nepc.colorado.edu/publication/virtual-schools-annual-2016

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-
behavior/201604/what-screen-time-can-really-do-kids-brains

Health

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
https://www.educationworld.com/a_news/report-estimates-us-edtech-838-billion-210811064

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-
idea-kill-elected-school-boards/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.93092f5b1f2c

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
https://www.forbes.com/sites/vianneyvaute/2018/10/29/recycling-is-not-the-answer-to-the-e-waste-crisis/
#22b3fc137381

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.

PROPOSED ELECTRIC VEHICLE (EV) INFRASTRUCTURE

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.

RADIOFREQUENCY GUIDELINES LACK AUTHORITY

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.

EVALUATE & LIMIT RADIOFREQUENCY EXPOSURES

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.

HEALTH IMPACTS OF EV INFRASTRUCTURE

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?

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS OF EV INFRASTRUCTURE

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.

PROPERTY DAMAGE FROM EV INFRASTRUCTURE

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.

RECONSIDER EV INVESTMENTS

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

Endnotes:

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-
and-electromagnetic-field-exposure-in-cars/
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.
https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/ab28bb
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,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2018.02.011.
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
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/254582980_POWER_QUALITY_AND_ENERGY_LOSS_REDUCTION_IN
_POWER_SYSTEMS
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:
19924983.
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:
PMC7195154.
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,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2018.02.011.
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.
https://idoc.pub/documents/european-power-quality-survey-report-zpnxke9qwy4v
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
https://www.pouted.com/cyber-security-issues-of-internet-with-electric-vehicles/
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
https://avt.inl.gov/sites/default/files/pdf/presentations/INLCyberSecurityDCFC.pdf
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:
PMC6651179.
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-
Denying-CMP-MTD-3-31-21.pdf
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-
meter-decision-20201111.html
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.
https://wsimag.com/economy-and-politics/64758-what-we-expect-from-electricity
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.

Divide & Co-Opt

 

 

Divide & Co-Opt: $hit

By Kirstin Beatty

 

On every issue, there are powerful forces united against change. The liability or potential financial collapse of any business sector means that there are both personal (investments, job) and corporate interests in continuing the status quo, and so both individuals and corporations have an interest in undermining regulations and legal action.

I believe it is worthwhile to examine strategies to divide and rule, which may include:

    • relying on deep pockets and media to drown out other voices
    • encouraging wasteful spending, leaving little for useful purchase
    • promoting legislation or actions that distract or accomplish nothing or, worse, cause harm
    • lobbying for ideas and bills which drown out better options
    • sowing distrust
    • generating propaganda, like spreading truths among lies for confusion and argument
    • preventing alliances that could challenge the propaganda
    • co-opting movements, promoting only those willing to cooperate with a false leader

The biggest threat is outsize influence through outsize wealth. There needn’t be any planning at all for a single wealthy person to co-opt or destroy a movement, since wealth easily drowns out other ideas.

A wealthy person can easily smear anyone, as Juan Cole suggests with his GoogleSmear article. Wealth can easily manipulate trending articles and social expression through fake accounts, identify theft, paid influencers, and online harassment as evidenced in 2018 by Mexican political parties. Corporations are also using deceptive practices – propaganda. Marketing campaigns, press, bots, and trolls are paid, not volunteers.

The influence of wealth may be hard to recognize. Bill Gates was the driving force for school computers and the major funding source behind the Common Core. Whether or not you like school computers or the Core, this outsize influence is fundamentally undemocratic and bypasses parents and teachers except under the artifice of details, rather than the larger picture. Gates’ foundation has come under criticism as well for promoting corporate globalization in health and agriculture.

Stories making the news today show that corporations are willing to pay to undermine the voice of the People, not only with bots. The following stories are factual and should be taken as a reminder to learn from history and the recent past.

Examples where industry was caught causing trouble include (1) faking emails from citizens to the government; (2) using actors to load town meetings; (3) spying on local groups, such as PG&E spying in California; (4) paying for fake science and testimony (5) paying for fake independent news, smear campaigns, and disinformation (wireless, climate, Covid19, pesticides, autism, benzene, etc.) – marketing campaigns undermine what is fair in democracy by favoring wealthy interests & astroturfing.

Soon well-funded, realistic telephone AI may fake being local voters speaking on behalf of business interests.

Troublesome nonprofits may also be fronts for wealthy contributor and have fake membership, like Massachusetts Parents United as identified by Maurice Cunningham. Cunningham critiques Boston papers for failing to vet claims and funders.

Media fails to call out industry sponsorship or public relations ‘news’ while allowing targeting and baseless, bizarre, one-sided attacks – such as a NY Times article insulting science on wireless dangers as a propaganda tool of the Russians, coincidentally when a major Times stockholder holds a major telecommunication company and is considered ruthless, a criminal. Billionaires rule.

Shaming of questions and criticism prevents building local community, shared goals, and political movements, and impairs advocacy and corporate regulation. Such insults foster lies and fake conspiracies, shielding corporations from deep investigations of real conspiracies.

In closing, please see the MA legislation page for some recommended bills.

 

Warning about the Movement & Support

This is a message from director and ballot measure co-chair Kirstin Beatty:

I have two concerns.

The first one is fixed so we can celebrate – finally, we have a working mailing list for Last Tree Laws and just need to find and input email addresses!

The second is getting publicity and support for good bills, instead of bills that take a lot of time to fix. Last session another advocate promoted a bill for 5G, first saying it was helpful and then saying it could be fixed. This session I remain concerned about several bills.

So, I hope people will stop advocating for problematic bills and instead support those listed as ‘good’ on the MA legislation page.

However, since I expect these bills will move forward anyway, please help me to meet with the parties who have sponsored problematic bills to help push for corrections, who include as follows:

Please support the list of positive MA legislation, which offers concrete solutions for change!

Here are a few lobbying tips and tips for advocacy:

  1. Support ideas first, secondly support bills that support those ideas. Avoid signing on in favor of “great” bills that can be changed later anyway, behind closed doors, and stick instead to signing on in support of explicitly stated concrete ideas.
  2. Read the bills. Don’t just rely on secondhand information. Look through the bills, for the devil is in the details. Bill titles are usually sweet-sounding propaganda – look at the details.
  3. Speak to Legislators 1-to-1. Speaking privately one-to-one or with a team with your personal legislators appears more helpful to being heard – we know first-hand some legislators do not read emails due to the number incoming! If you cannot speak well, then bring writings and bring a group of constituents to help. Take the time to truly educate one or two legislators in advance of public hearings, since public hearings often limit speaking time to 3 minutes per person and can be disjointed.
  4. Speak for yourself. When the poor, elderly, sick, and other marginalized groups struggle to with time and ability to speak, others with easier lives step in to do so. Those others may have less concern, less problem, and more interest in the status quo thanks to easier, more comfortable lives. Let others speak for themselves. If others speak for you, be sure that speech is limited to as agreed and is verifiable – since what is behind the scenes or in email may be different. Where possible, use your own powerful voice.
  5. Template warning. When signing onto shared testimony or using templates, be careful. I’ve seen templates highlight problem bills as solutions. Be honest about your desires and select the bills or topics you support, rather than following a template to the letter. Also, the problem with templates is that these are generic, and simply bury legislators in reading that often has little new to say.
  6. Co-opting advocacy & movements. People offering help may be self-interested, seeking only fame, employment, sales, an industry, property, et cetera, and may not have the same or sincere concerns. Also, FBI strategy is to select individuals to infiltrate, create division, take over leadership, censor dissent, and tone down and redirect movements, including by offering paid work opportunities and wasting opportunities. Where threatened, industry may follow the FBI playbook. Be wise when working on sensitive topics. You may need to bring issues to the sunlight.

To Investigate or Not to Investigate? Commission Bills 101.

The merit of a political investigation depends on the state — limits and alternatives are recommended

Outcomes of past wireless health risk investigations have varied by state:

    • New Hampshire – successful acknowledgment of risks and suggestions for improvements by the committee, but yet little has been done to address the problem
    • Oregon – nothing to see, according to failed investigation, but advocates are using this event for public accusations of corruption

In New York, Doug Wood of Grassroots Communications states he has a positive impression of the legislature and the intentions for two similar investigation bills in the NY Assembly (A6448) and Senate (S5926). This bill must be followed by interested New Yorkers to determine whether continued public support is warranted.

The success of such a bill depends on political integrity. In many states, political pressures would likely interfere. Popular support forced the Oregon bill forward, but backroom deals watered down the bill such as by omitting all animal studies from consideration.

Even if a bill states that appointees must be ‘experts’ on issues, the industry has consultants & nonprofits at the ready who can claim expertise in nearly any topic, whether or not sincere. Rather than trust, safeguards must exist to prevent industry influence.

The same risk is true for an existing Massachusetts bill, An Act for Disclosure of Radiofrequency Notifications (S. 186), sponsored by Senator Cyr, which could backfire since technology interests are powerful in Massachusetts and political leadership has been accused of making backroom deals in their favor.

In 2020 other advocates pushed the bill forward, but Last Tree Laws and I campaigned against the MA bill and direct & indirect appointments by our state governor, who has been widely accused of favoring utility and broadband interests. Neither could the state legislature, now facing a popular campaign charging lack of transparency and integrity, be an expected savior.

In New Hampshire, the lack of action may be due to the lack of participation on the committee by powerful groups such as unions – such inclusion would increase awareness and political pressure.

In sum, due to political pressures, an investigation bill with substantial political appointments or few powerful members is likely to have a less than gratifying outcome in most states.

To investigate or not to investigate?

The claim is that an investigation provides impetus for change, through education and publicity. Certainly, if grounded in sincerity, that is true.

Yet, technically, Massachusetts legislators have learned about this issue from testimony in public hearings and directly from constituents, and constituents can even easily access and share expert online presentations.

In Massachusetts, when environmental health issues have been at odds with economics, popular demand has pushed issues to the forefront and not legislative investigative commissions. Examples such as halting the gas pipeline, halting biomass facilities, quitting dangerous pesticide use, shutting down nuclear energy facilities demonstrate legislative action results from popular demands rather than legislative commissions.

Setting a new precedent where action requires a “commission” where legislators can become experts as educated by other experts I think is rather disingenuous. This precedent is a delaying tactic.

Passage of a bill generally takes two years in Massachusetts. This means focusing on an investigation bill could mean waiting two years for a commission, and more years for action on other bills. That delay could be used by industry to protect assets and otherwise limit justice, such as further degrading constituent power. Therefore, I advocate for more direct, concrete bills for change, such as listed under the MA Legislation page.

Adapting a Wireless Investigation Bill for Good Purpose

If choosing to adapt a wireless investigation bill, then there are several options to limit political pressure.

One option is to balance political appointees with independent, outside groups. Selection is critical! Outside groups with good reputation, fairly independent of the issue, should make the majority of the appointments to reduce politics or charges of prejudice.

Board members of the group and donation dependence needs to be vetted. Big organizations may have big donors that are a conflict of interest, and hierarchy may prevent the members from much say. The Audubon Society allows each state branch independence — so it depends on how each independent version is run. Money is influential even for ‘nonprofits’ and board members can change.

Other ideas to increase independence include limiting the connections of appointees to industry.

Below is one draft I worked on in 2020 which may be useful for comparison and ideas, especially on limiting conflicts of interest. Most commissions have 12 or fewer appointees, but this draft has a great number of appointees for consideration.

I never finished, and instead broke down the bill to focus on a commission for security and emergency services, as listed alongside bills on the MA legislation page. One reason is a smaller commission is easier to define. Secondly, I felt that was an issue on which research has not been synthesized, where education is needed, and where there is a greater balance of power is needed to counteract politics. Thirdly, police and security forces are treated with respect if only due to fear, and the union remains powerful. For this reason, I felt a commission to examine the impact of technology on emergency and security services could be useful and lead to positive changes.

DRAFT: An Electromagnetic (Wireless, Electricity) Investigation

Prepared by Kirstin Beatty (Beatty.fyi, co-chair of Last Tree Laws)
Updated version from 2 December 2020

SECTION 1. Whereas, other countries and some states have chosen to limit or ban certain exposures to wireless or electrical frequencies.

Whereas, reputable, peer-reviewed evidence shows wireless frequencies may cause or promote cancer, heart disease, and learning problems – such as research on cancer by the U.S. National Toxicology Program.

Whereas, peer-reviewed science associates certain types of electric exposures with cancer, infertility, and miscarriage.

Whereas, Massachusetts residents would benefit from a review of the science and potential solutions free of influence from corporate and political interests.

Whereas, the following investigative commission reduces political pressure by diversifying who appoints, restricting appointments by politicians, and setting limits on conflicts of interest.

SECTION 2. Resolved, Notwithstanding any general or special law to the contrary, there shall be a special commission, hereafter called the commission, to research the impact of electromagnetic (EMR) radiation ranging from zero to 300 Ghz, with respect to consumer protection, public health, and the environment to determine, if detrimental, how to equitably allay environmental and health impacts.

(a) Commission objectives. The commission shall convene no later than 60 days following enactment in order to research and review non-industry-funded and peer-reviewed science regarding EMR, inviting comment from medical and scientific experts independent of industry.

If concerns are deemed warranted, the commission shall with respect to safer housing, utilities, business, public health, environment, and telecommunications:

(i) identify and review the current state laws, regulations, and administrative directives; (ii) identify the key sectors and regions that would best benefit from improved legislation, regulations, and administrative directives;
(iii) secondarily, as time allows, identify same at the federal level;
(iv) identify funding sources for recommendations;
(v) require the department of housing and economic development to submit reports to the legislature it obtains from cellular and cellular technology companies;
(vi) set a schedule, dividing into smaller committees as warranted to meet objectives; (vii) invite testimony from other experts as useful; and
(viii) may accept public testimony.

The commission shall submit a report of its findings, or a series of reports, including any draft legislation and regulations, to the clerks of the house of representatives and the senate within 16 months of the passage of this act.

(b) Transparency. The commission’s meetings and communications shall be recorded and subject to the Massachusetts open meeting laws so as to be transparent.

(c) Formation and resources.The Office of the Governor shall organize and support the commission arrangements. The chairperson or chairpersons shall with the commission members set a meeting schedule. Commission members shall elect a chair by majority vote, who may be replaced at any time upon majority vote. If the commission members break into smaller committees, the same process shall apply. Commission member attendance and expert testimony by videoteleconference or telephone shall be allowed.

The commission shall be assisted by and have access to all the resources available to the legislature and the executive branch in its investigations.

(d) The commission shall have the following composition:

(a) The Attorney General or designee;
(b) A nominee of the Massachusetts Teachers Association or Boston Teachers Union;
(c) A nominee of the Massachusetts School Nurse Association;
(c) One union member nominated by the Massachusetts AFL-CIO;
(d) One telecommunications worker representative nominated by the Communications Workers of America;
(e) One doctor nominated by the American Environmental Academy of Medicine;
(f) One scientist nominated by the Silent Spring Institute;
(g) One doctor nominated by the Massachusetts Medical Society, ideally with expertise in either cancer, neuroscience, or infertility;
(h) One scientist nominated by New England-based Community Action Works, formerly the Toxics Action Center;
(i) One pediatric doctor nominated by the Massachusetts Chapter of the American Academy of Pediatrics;
(j) One doctor nominated by the Greater Boston Physicians for Social Responsibility;
(k) One doctor or scientists nominated by the Environmental Health Trust [or Massachusetts Breast Cancer Coalition];
(l) One representative or lawyer nominated by the Massachusetts Jewish Alliance for Law and Social Action;
(m) 2 representatives nominated by the Massachusetts American Civil Liberties Union;
(n) 2 nominees from the Institute of Building Biology & Sustainable IBN
(o) A representative of the State House selected by the Speaker of the House;
(p) A senator of the State Senate selected by the President of the Senate;
(q) A representative of small business appointed by the governor;
(r) 3 non-voting members appointed by governor:
Telecommunications representative;
Medical system representative;
Engineer in wireless networks;
(s) 4 non-voting commissioners, directors, or their designees for the following departments:
Public Health;
Telecommunications and Cable;
Technical Assistance and Technology Office;
Consumer Affairs & Business Regulation.

(e) Conflicts of interest. No member, except a non-voting member, or spouse of voting member of the Commission shall have a history involving current telecommunications, energy, IT, or utility industry clients or job dependency; nor shall any voting member have a current investment portfolio with conflicts of interest in the areas of energy, telecommunications, IT, or utilities. No voting member or spouse of a voting member of the Commission shall receive funding or a job from telecommunications, energy, IT, or utility sectors in the two years following the commission’s final report. All commission members must file a statement detailing any relevant conflicts of interest as specified, including activities in relation to immediate family and extended family members. Copies must be freely available for viewing by the public. These statements must be filed with the Secretary of State during the commission period and in the two years following closure of 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. Any commission member deemed a non-voting member shall recuse himself or herself from any commission votes to decide or influence the commission reports, and shall instead serve only to assist the commission. Any nominee with conflicts of interest intended as a voting member shall recuse himself or herself from nomination, except insofar as the nominee’s job represents a conflict of interest, is specified in subsection (d), and the individual is not described as non-voting.

MASSACHUSETTS STATE LEGISLATION IN DRAFT FOR 2021

 

 

Federal wireless bills and 2 phone scripts

The wireless industry has federal bills to halt local community control over wireless infrastructure placement AND to end currently required environmental reviews.

Call or write to tell your house representative to stop these bills and why — be brief (see phone script below). Find your federal house representative here:

https://www.house.gov/representatives/find-your-representative

or

https://www.govtrack.us/.

Also, call the following persons to say: “I object to wireless exposures based on health considerations and want federal investments in WIRED ONLY and the FCC commissioner set on WIRED communications.”

Here is a phone or email script:

I object to house legislation to limit local rights to contest deployment of wireless infrastructure, including to eliminate NEPA environmental review.

I ask you to remove Title I from the Lift America Act (HR 2741) to prevent the auction of further wireless spectrum; halt increasing 911 wireless power density; and stop funding of communication infrastructure that lacks consideration for safety.

I ask you to halt these 5G bills:

    • HR 1060,
    • 1069, and
    • 1074 [Slowly list so numbers can be written down].

I ask you oppose these bills for the same reasons:

    • HR 1039,
    • 1043,
    • 1045,
    • 1051,
    • 1053,
    • 1056,
    • 1058,
    • 1064, and
    • 1067 .

One last bill is simply to create broadband availability maps, but this could be improved by identifying the state of wired broadband and telecommunications availability. This bill is: HR 1044.

Related, I ask you to remove Title III of the Lift America Act (HR 2741), for similar safety reasons with respect to electric vehicle charging, and remove sections of Title IV to prevent further broadband or energy requirements with respect to on health information technology

Lastly, I ask that you support a commission of relevant, independent scientists, medical experts, and engineers to examine how to insure non-ionizing radiation exposures from electricity and communications are limited for public and environmental health.


LIST OF RELEVANT HOUSE BILLS (Find bills here)

    1. H.R. 1060: To amend the Communications Act of 1934 to streamline siting processes for personal wireless service facilities, including small personal wireless service facilities, and for … other purposes.
    2. H.R. 1069: To amend the Communications Act of 1934 to provide that the Federal Communications Commission is not required to perform any review under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 or division A of subtitle III of title 54, United States Code, as a condition of permitting the placement and installation of a communications facility, and for other purposes.
    3. H.R. 1074: To provide that the deployment of a small personal wireless service facility shall not constitute an undertaking under section 300320 of title 54, United States Code, or a major Federal action for the purposes of section 102(2)(C) of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, and for other purposes.
    4. H.R. 1039: To provide that a project for the deployment or modification of a communications facility entirely within a floodplain is not subject to requirements to prepare certain environmental or historical preservation reviews.
    5. H.R. 1043: To provide that an eligible facilities request under section 6409(a) of the Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act of 2012 is not subject to requirements to prepare certain environmental or historical preservation reviews. [Note: https://wia.org/wp-content/uploads/Advocacy_Docs/6409a_Siting_Checklist.pdf]
    6. .R. 1045: To amend the Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act of 2012 to amend the definition of eligible facilities request, to codify the 60-day time frame for certain eligible facilities …
    7. H.R. 1051: To amend the Communications Act of 1934 to streamline siting processes for telecommunications service facilities, and for other purposes.
    8. H.R. 1053: To provide that a project to remove and replace communications equipment or services listed under the Secure and Trusted Communications Networks Act of 2019 is not subject to requirements to prepare certain environmental or historical preservation reviews.
    9. H.R. 1056: To provide that a project for the collocation of a personal wireless service facility is not subject to requirements to prepare certain environmental or historical preservation reviews.
    10. H.R. 1058: To amend the Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act of 2012 to amend the definition of eligible facilities request, to codify the 60-day time frame for certain eligible facilities, and for other purposes.
    11. H.R. 1064: To amend the Communications Act of 1934 to amend provisions relating to franchise term and termination and provisions relating to the elimination or modification of requirements in franchises, and for other purposes.
    12. H.R. 1067: To streamline the process for consideration of applications for the placement of communications facilities on certain buildings and other property owned by the Federal Government, and for other purposes.

The following bill is simply to create a map of broadband accessibility, which ought to be a neutral task.

  1. H.R. 1044: To create a task force at the Federal Communications Commission to ensure the policy and funding decisions of the Commission are informed by data collection and analysis required in title VIII of the Communications Act of 1934, and for other purposes.

Quick Call: Co-Sponsorship Requests!

There is a new list of bills Last Tree Laws will support, though not all will receive equal or full attention.

Please call your legislators to request support or cosponsorship – instructions below! Senators can cosponsor until public hearings. State representatives cannot cosponsor but getting support from them is very important for future votes!

Most legislators know of these issues, but if you need more info please see the Resources page. There are also posts on Facebook and I’m on Twitter to share relevant social media images occasionally.

Please tell me who you call and who listens or cosponsors.

~ Best, Kirstin

ACTION

Hi, my name is _________, and I am a constituent of ______ (name town).

I am calling to request that __________ cosponsor or support the bills supported by Last Tree Laws to limit wireless radiation. All bills are listed at LastTreeLaws.com, including a PDF listing.

These bills are the first step to begin hard-wiring the state and limiting our wireless exposures.

I would appreciate if you would confirm support or co-sponsorships. You can call me at ________.

Please understand this is very important! __[SAY WHY OR SAY THE FOLLOWING:]. The Federal Communications Commission is in court about the safety of its wireless exposure guidelines and likely to lose according to recent statements of the presiding judges. The LA public schools were just required by the CA Court of Appeals to provide disability accommodations for a teacher’s sensitivity to wireless. Clearly, there is something wrong with wireless.

Thank you for efforts!

New Hampshire Report Supports Restricting Wireless

New Hampshire Report Supports Restricting Wireless

By Kirstin Beatty on 31 October 2020

 

A New Hampshire commission has released a report recommending that wireless expansion be reversed on the basis of public health.

The recommendations include migrating schools and public libraries away from wireless, providing health warnings, mapping and labeling cell towers, and adopting policies to hard-wire communications.

Some of the recommendations by the commission, such as setbacks from cell towers, reflect measures included in ordinances across the nation designed to limit 5G cell towers.

In Massachusetts, towns such as Cambridge, Burlington, and Worcester have adopted new ordinances to regulate new technologies like small cell towers, but many other municipalities question the right to set requirements.

To protect residents more universally, the New Hampshire Commission recommends state-wide laws to regulate cell towers. The trick is to make sure state-wide laws are strong and protective, rather than weak regulations that limit the setting of more stringent local zoning laws. Legislators in the pockets of industry can easily turn a promise of protection into a trap. States such as Connecticut have enacted state-wide regulations that weaken, instead of strengthen, local zoning protection.

The commission was initially formed after passage of NH bill HB 522 written by Rep. Abrami, which he wrote after investigating the concerns of resident Deb Hodgdon. The commission’s finding are the result of a months-long investigation by an independent state commission including:

    • Paul Héroux, PhD, a scientist in the electromagnetic field
    • University of New Hampshire electrical and computer chair specializing in electromagnetics, Kent Chamberlain, PhD
    • 5 legislators, including:
    • Bedford Town Councilor Denise Ricciardi
    • two industry representatives, Bethanne Cooley (CTIA) and David Juvett (Business and Wireless Association);
    • Brandon Garrod, Esq., from the Attorney General’s office;and
    • state agency representatives:
      • Michele Roberge (health) and
      • Carol Miller (business).

Of the commission members, two industry representatives and Senator James Gray, a former naval engineer, opted to write an opposing report reflecting industry views.

Full recommendations of the commission can be found online as the Final Report of the Commission to Study the Environmental and Health Effects of Evolving 5G Technology (HB 522, Chapter 260, Laws of 2019, RSA12-K:12-1).

Many of the recommendations reflect legislation I put forward in Massachusetts, via my legislator and posted here on LastTreeLaws.com, but which have not moved forward: to hard-wire public libraries, limit school wireless, invest in hard-wiring infrastructure, register cell towers, and educate medical professionals and patients. Some recommendations reflect ideas I researched and developed with an ordinance group, and then further placed in a sample ordinance for Massachusetts. The overlap is welcome, yet more must be done to improve organizing and lobbying to enact these recommendations.

A summary of the recommendations is listed below, as well as links to presentations.

    1. Resolution for US Congress to require FCC to conduct an independent study into mitigation and health effects.
    2. Require appropriate NH agencies provide health warnings, particularly for newborns, pregnant women, and youth.
    3. Label every small cell tower antenna, in such a way as to be legible 9 feet away.
    4. Migrate schools and public libraries away from wireless.
    5. Measure radiation at all facilities, repeating at every instance of software or other relevant change, with costs borne by the site installer.
    6. Improving accuracy of cellular radiation.
    7. Setbacks from businesses, schools, private citizens.
    8. Upgrade the educational offerings of home inspectors to include private measurements.
    9. Map state-wide measurements.
    10. Require cellphone software to prevent radiation when held against the body.
    11. Adopt a state-wide position to hard-wire and use fiberoptic cables.
      Use warning signs in buildings. Establish safe zones in hospitals, state, and commercial buildings for refuge, especially for those sensitive to exposures.
    12. Engage scientists with ecological knowledge to establish measures to protect nature.
    13. Legislate that the FCC do a NEPA (environmental) evaluation of the state- and country-wide impact of wireless expansion.

The following are direct links to presentations given to the commission:

The following are 2 examples of presentations recorded in the minutes – with notes to highlight some points:

  • Dr. Tim Schoechle, on policy
  • Dr. Paul Heroux on historical background of federal guidelines and scientific aspects, – notable points:
  • History perspective:
    • US guidelines were developed by 15 people, 10 being from the military.
    • USAF exposure limits from 1960 survived more or less as the current US limits – at the time, lowering the exposure limits was considered antipatriotic due to use by military
    • Soviets based exposure limits on nervous system disturbances, and differentiated limits between the public and military.
    • 44% of the world has lower limits than the USA and most of the western world.
  • Industry will want to change federal exposure limits to prevent 5G phones from being illegal
  • 5G Necessity:
    • Remote medicine can be accomplished with FioS, you do not need 5G
    • 5G is not necessary for autonomous vehicles
  • Wireless Properties & Effects:
    • 5G mmW penetrate further than the UV waves from the sun
    • 5G beam steering and focusing is a new aspect
    • 5G beams can be narrowed to 3 to 10 degrees in width
    • 5G frequency can change every 12.5 seconds
    • Amplitude modulation, modulated by a person’s voice, of wireless and digital amounts to being hit, a pulsing, and has a more negative effect than analog which is more like a push.
    • 5G will create more problematic noise (like static)
  • Health impacts:
    • altered enzyme activity, biochemical changes, oxidative changes (ROS), pathological cell changes, neuro-behavioral changes, DNA damage, altered gene instruction, brain wave changes [hundreds of research papers]
    • cancer cells all react to wireless & other non-ionizing radiation
    • most at risk: youth, brain, pancreas
  • Dr. Herman Kelter on 4G and 5G power densities and associated health effects, sample points:
    • Manufacture of antennas may malfunction, increasing exposures
    • With multiple transmitters in an enclosed space, meters understate the actual power density due to variations in space
    • Pulsating, peak power of great concern
    • 5G may lead to:
      • temperature spikes and tissue damage in skin
      • more adverse effect than recorded for 5G mmW frequencies due to combination of pulsing, data sending, and special phased array antennas
      • Sommerfeld and Brillouin precursors are induced in the body, damaging cells and organs by moving charged particles [Albanese,R, Blaschak, J, Medina, R, Penn, J. “Ultrashort Electromagnetic Signals: Biophysical Questions, Page 13of 34Safety issues, and Medical Opportunities.” Aviation, Space, and Environmental Medicine. May 1994: A116-A120 (“Albanese May 1994”.; see also OMB No. 0704-0188 94-24875 AD-A282 990 dated Jan 90-Aug 93; Jakobsen PK and Masud Mansuripur. “On the Nature of the Sommerfeld-Brillouin Forerunners (or Precursors.” Quantum Studies: Mathematics and Foundations(November 8, 2019)]
    • Bioweapon capability enhanced by targeted 5G beam, which envelopes user, by facial recognition software, and by ability to intensify beam using software – one known instance of wireless being used in past to injure Catholics in Northern Island in conjunction with investigation by Dr. Barrie Trower
    • Associated with exposures:
      • rising suicides and reduced mental health – Dr. Kelting suggests federal agencies have concealed this by removing the online federal data after he sent a letter informing of rising suicides
      • brain damage to fetuses, miscarriages, cancer, children’s behavioral difficulties, ADHD, cancer of the brain, salivary gland, and breasts; leukemia, anxiety, depression, stress, sleep disturbances, reduction in melatonin, cataracts, inflammation; damage to the testes, sperm, blood brain barrier, DNA (damage through strand breaks), eyes, heart, thyroid hormones, electromagnetic hypersensitivity (EMH), damage to the autoimmune system, etc.

Request to Medical Professionals for Electromagnetic Education

This has been updated as of 21 July 2021.

13 October 2020

Request to All Medical Professionals for Electromagnetic Education

 

Fighting against environmental pollutants is often hindered by ignorance, corporate public relations, and the burden of harm. Death and disability has resulted from industry denial, as seen with tobacco, asbestos, and other products.

Most experts in the field recommend rolling back wireless and other electromagnetic exposures, yet these voices have been neglected in mainstream U.S. news, even though the evidence is very strong that wireless greatly increases cancer, infertility, and contributes overall to ill health and disease.

In Massachusetts, I’ve written many state legislative solutions, such as policies to reduce exposures in medical settings, but seen these die. Legislators shy from sponsoring bills for actual change, or leadership prevents a vote.

Medical professionals have a pivotal say in whether society recognizes environmental pollutants and their ensuing harm.

Given this social responsibility, as a medical professional, wireless awareness and education is critical. Excellent free resources are available online as well as medical conferences that may provide CMEs, support networking, and help establish a broad base of knowledge.

Because of the relationship of wireless to industry and military interests, unified public support is needed. As a medical professional, you can directly influence public awareness, understanding, and support, thus persuading public officials and the courts to change course. Unified public statements by medical groups, associations, and professional medical guidance to every single patient are needed to help shift public opinion and protect patients.

I hope for patient education on safer technology habits and your active political support for change with Last Tree Laws.

Sincerely,

Kirstin Beatty

Co-chair of Last Tree Laws

Massachusetts ballot measure committee

 

Resources:

 

  1. MA Legislation at https://LastTreeLaws.com/ma-legislation; lawsuits and other examples of state legislation on top menu
  2. Register for virtual conference, held 28-31 January, Thursday – Sunday, at https://emfconference2021.com/
  3. Bioinitiative dot org (see Henry Lai’s research summaries)
  4. Physicians for Safe Technology and SaferEMR.com
  5. EMF-Portal search engine (Aachen University, Germany)
  6. Additional resources at https://lasttreelaws.com/resources/ ~ and the recent New Hampshire Report recommending reduction of wireless exposures: https://lasttreelaws.com/11/nhreport/

Support Attorney Healey’s Smart Grid Investigation

Support Attorney Healey’s Smart Grid Investigation

By Kirstin Beatty

 

Update September 2021:

The Department of Utilities is working on expanding the smart grid, despite allowing opt outs of smart meters. This will increase electromagnetic exposures and so I’m working on preparing joint testimony for docket 21-90 through 92 in addition expanding on what I’ve already submitted for 21-80 through 82. I’ve filed a last-minute, imperfect petition to intervene which appears ignored.

The Attorney General is likely only to examine financial aspects of the grid, and little else, due to that being the office’s primary legal role, and so cannot be relied upon to do more in examining this docket.

However, you can file a civil rights complaint on this issue with the Attorney General’s office. Highlight that this is a civil rights complaint, to avoid sending it to the lawyer in the Attorney General’s office who is hired by the DPU.

Update June 2021:

The Department of Utilities has not recommended a full stop to the smart grid, but has recommended that ALL Massachusetts utilities now allow opting out of smart meters for a fee. This decision is likely because of the submissions to the docket, including my own submission, a version of which is posted here.

Update 6 November 2020:

November 17 & 20, the DPU is holding virtual technical conferences on the smart grid, which advocates can present regarding opt-out provisions on November 20th at the very end, within a one hour slot, with the request being that repetition of prior testimony be avoided and a joint presentation occur synthesizing ideas.

The topic of the technical conferences is essentially to discuss technical workings & needs of smart grid, appearing to acccept smart grid expansion and continuation as a done deal. I initially thought was meant to discuss the uneven burden of ratepayer costs upon those without EV – but that doesn’t seem to be considered. The only recognition of the health issue appears to be the possibility of an opt-out provision.

If you have facts or suggestions for topics to include in a synthesized presentation, please email using addresses in the footer.

________________________

Deadline: Friday, 4 September, 5 PM Eastern.

Background

The Massachusetts Department of Public Utilities is accepting public “reply” comments on whether to expand the smart meter program, possibly to serve electric vehicles (EV). As a result of existing comments on the docket by various organizations and individuals as described here, the Massachusetts Attorney General is initiating a public investigation into the matters discussed in the docket, which included counter-arguments to the grid for reasons of health, environment, economic justice and civil rights.

See an excerpt of the statement, where the Attorney General states she is engaging consultants to investigate the claims and suggest (propound) discovery, a pre-trial procedure: “better insure an outcome in this proceeding that is in the best interests of ratepayers, the Attorney General’s Office must engage consultants with the expertise to review and analyze the material filed in response to the Department’s Vote and Order, and to assist the Attorney General’s Office in preparing itw own filings and in propounding discovery . . . “

 

Reply comments could help guide the Attorney General, with domino effects on smart grids in Massachusetts and others states, as well as upon 5G and other wireless technologies.

Reply comments are meant to reply to existing comments in the docket. The Attorney General’s initial comment was in support of smart meters in order to advance green technology and to save energy.

Filing comments may mean that you can be included in any court case filed against the DPU or the state. You would need to say in the docket and be able to prove you are being or would be harmed by grid expansion.

Do say if the smart grid harms you & how.

If expounding on a topic, pick one or two and just do those well – the AG may have to read all comments. The best reply comments would probably include or be as follows:

      • Information on why smart meters are not green
      • Personal suffering and disability caused by the smart grid and/or wireless
      • Scientific and medical references
      • References from proven sources
      • Submissions from scientific and medical experts
      • Submissions by legislators, such as Senator Moore submitted
      • To thank Last Tree Laws, please link to the website in your submission!

A template and instructions are provided below.

Much thanks to Patricia Burke, who initially was very active with Halt Smart Meters Massachusetts and is likely the state smart meter expert, for sending a mass email encouraging comments on the DPU docket and for suggesting the topics of economic and environmental justice as well as health. Patricia Burke’s detailed comments can be found online here.

Submission Requirements:

Draft your statement and save as a .pdf file. The DPU requires a .pdf file to be posted to their website.

  1. Observe deadline – fillings are required by Friday, September 4, 5 PM Eastern
  2. Address email to:
    • Peter.Ray@mass.gov
    • Tina.Chin@mass.gov
    • Sarah.Spruce@mass.gov
  3. CC line: Please add Patricia’s gmail account, as she is confirming the DPU receives and posts emails – please cc Last Tree Laws as well:
    • gmail via stopsmartmetersmass@
    • lasttreelaws.com via action@
  4. Subject line for email:
    • Reply Comment MA DPU 20-69 Modernization of Electric Grid Phase Two
  5. Place in text of email:
    • See attached reply comment of ___________ (your name) in Opposition to MA DPU 20-69 Modernization of Electric Grid Phase Two
    • Your name or company, title, credentials
    • Email address
    • Telephone number
    • Note: File size may not exceed 20 MB, so larger files must be split. If you send additional attachments or articles other than your comment, please list them in the email.
  6. Craft your testimony in a separate document (not in the body of the email)
    • See template below.
    • Include your name and credentials at top
    • For all links and references, state at the end: “All references, including links, are incorporated into this testimony by reference.”
    • Do not include personal contact information, which will be posted online as part of the PDF.
  7. Save your document as a PDF. If you’re not sure how to create a .pdf file, reach out to Patricia’s gmail account and she’ll help: stopsmartmetersmass@
  8. Attach the PDF to your email and send.
  9. Check that your PDF is posted a few days later by typing 20-69 into this search box.

Template

DATE:___________

FROM:____[Name, credentials]_____

TO: Mark D. Marini, Secretary, Department of Public Utilities, One South Station, 5th Floor, Boston, MA 02110

RE: Reply Comment MA DPU 20-69 Modernization of Electric Grid Phase Two

Please halt any smart grid expansion and roll back existing installations. Right now, the question of safe wireless infrastructure is a subject of federal and state court cases. Proceeding is foolish. Smart meters threaten health, safety, resources, energy, and economic justice.

Expanding the smart grid in Massachusetts impacts me because _______.

I am going to discuss: _________.

[Discuss topic – for resources, see SmartMeterHarm dot org (reports); StopSmartMeters dot org (problem page); StopSmartMetersBC dot com (tabs of many issues); MichiganStopSmartMeters dot com (legal and other points); and ElectronicSilentSpring dot com (eco-focus) – EHTrust dot org and MDSafeTech dot org are also helpful]

Please take these concerns into consideration.

 

5G Actions

Massachusetts – Actions:

This page needs some updating, so please also check the resource page for materials.

  • Social media:
    • Twitter – you can retweet from @BeattyKirstin, co-chair, and other advocates or organizations – we don’t have a LastTreeLaws account!
    • Check Facebook for helpful posts or links to share – we’re not so active but have some posts!
  • Letters to the editor such as to the following papers (choose one paper):
        • letters@tauntongazette.com
        • letters@heraldnews.com
        • submissions@thecantoncitizen.com
        • letter@globe.com
        • your local paper (most likely to publish your letter)
      • Contacting Medical Doctors:
        • Physicians for Safe Technology 5G Letter
  • News to Share:

 

 

 

 

Past Teleconferences:

29 August 2020 ~ 5G Strategies

1 August 2020, Saturday, 3 PM ~ How to Get Safer, Respectful Technology

      • Discussion of health and social impacts of technology & solutions. Led by Last Tree Laws co-chair Kirstin Beatty, a former teacher in Springfield public schools. This event is sponsored by the Springfield Cultural Council and therefore Springfield residents have priority seats. This is part of a grant titled “Safer Technology, Healthier Society.”

Lemmings for Bad Bills

Lemmings for Bad Bills

By Kirstin Beatty on 10 May 2020

~ Updated 21 July 2021

 

Please be careful and pay attention to what you support or sign. Don’t be a lemming!

These two bills are still in play IN 2021-2022 and still a problem:

  • H. 383 for a 5G Task Force > now H. 124 (2021-2)

    • This bill is to create ‘equity’ in 5G development – this is a misleading objective, equity, because:
      • 5G is an injustice to our health
      • Big business would have a big seat at the table
      • Municipalities & residents are fighting to stop 5G and failing because the industry, supported by the FCC, has too much weight.
  • S. 129 Resolution for Radiofrequency Disclosure > now S. 186 (2021-2)
  • Note: I heard from legislative staff that this bill, although sponsored by Senator Cyr, was sent to the department of health by the Joint Committee of Consumer Protection & Licensing and then rewritten as above.
  • Note 2: Although I’d rather the bill was just halted, I WOULD BE GLAD TO MEET WITH SENATOR CYR TO FIX THIS BILL since proposed New Hampshire bill replacement text is problematic for Massachusetts.
  • This post discusses more issues with commissions, such as years of delay on action, and potential solutions if pushed forward.
    • This bill is for a commission to study impact of wireless harm, but looks like planning for industry bailout – of 11 members:
      • Governor Baker, with a dark money rap, controls all appointments.
      • 3 members depend on the wireless industry
      • 4 members are directly beholden to Baker, of which:
        • 2 work closely with IT and telecommunications
        • 1 works closely with business
        • 1 denied release of a fact sheet on reducing exposures created with the Massachusetts public health department
      • Of the remaining 4, nothing prevents conflicts of interest and every position could be filled by industry hacks
        • 2 positions as written could be filled by local industry hacks: the scientist and the “environmental” lawyer
      • The first item of business for the commission is to examine how the industry may be financially impacted if wireless is harmful!

Some of the bills submitted to the Massachusetts legislature on wireless may look good on the surface, but the devil is in the details as noted. The same can be true for requests for testimony – you must be sure to know what the bill actually represents before signing.

Advocates are going to support the bills most close to heart, but I find sometimes that advocates support problematic legislation without caveat.

In addition to the above bills, here are examples of 2019-2020 Massachusetts bills that need a little work to meet public needs:

      • The Best Management Practices bill H. 1874 > Now H. 115
        • For 2021, a constituent and I contacted Representative Dykema and discussed all the issues below and she did not want to change the install wireless phrasing, and in fact nearly did not submit the bill as she did not have the interest. Yet, she has several sponsors for the bill and an actual bill to hard wire, H. 105, has only Rep. Patricia Duffy and I as sponsors. I find this a mistake on the part of advocates who apparently don’t understand that Rep. Patricia Duffy is willing to do more and deserves support.
        • Marketed as a solution for harm from school wireless, but phrasing was to install wireless and use “best practices.”
          • In real life, asking individual teachers and students to turn wireless on and off is impractical.
          • The education department under Governor Baker has been closely tied to technology interests and may not be the best for developing “best practices.”
          • This bill offers a small step but needs improvement – in the 2019-2020 session, H. 587 does better at effecting changes – but with tweaks, both might work well together.
          • In the previous 2017-18 session, Dr. Devra Davis offered support for the best management bill and my bill criminalizing wireless.
      • The Commission to Study Power Frequencies bill 1956 > Now H. 2351
        • 2021 – As a sign that legislators do not read emails, this bill has been regularly submitted each legislative session without any changes to the criticisms below. Before this session, I asked a constituent who knew Representative Linsky to catch him and discuss these issues, as well as sponsor bills, but have the sense that never happened as there are not any changes or sponsorships. True, this session the time frame for sponsorships was odd due to Covid19 but it is disappointing.
        • Independence of the commission needs to be examined as the American Cancer Society is known to have serious conflicts of interest. The Environmental League of Massachusetts is also of concern due to working closely with a corporate council and other reasons (see the MA legislation page).

Legislators barely have time to examine or alter bills, and to support these bills or support them without caveat is a disaster. H. 383 is in fact to directly promote 5G – how can this help without a miracle?

I’ve heard advocacy for the above problem bills without any discrimination, despite my critiques or warnings. Looking at the templates offered by advocates in support of some of these bills, criticism and details about bills are absent. When I prepare testimony for others to sign, I make very clear what the testimony supports in fairness to signatories and legislators.

By focusing on problem bills, we waste our efforts on fixing those bills as legislators rarely have the staff and time to do so, especially given the number of bills to review. Instead, a simple bill to hard-wire buildings should get full support, and this could move forward even just on a internet security and speed basis, without mention of health, while leading to real change.

I believe legislation and critical analysis posted here at Last Tree Laws is helpful, as well as the original legislation I’ve written. Current 2021-2022 examples of positive legislation are posted at MA legislation and need lobbying in support. Some examples submitted in MA for 2019-2020 include:

        • S. 294 An Act Limiting School Screen Time – to allow schools to opt out of mandated technology use in every classroom;
        • S. 295 and H. 588 – bills which protect student and staff privacy and support a more thorough education about technology risks.
        • S. 1271 – Educating patients on environmental health risks – initially conceived in 2015 and submitted then as SD. 2256.
        • In fact, I did put forward a bill to require release of a fact sheet on wireless and other electromagnetic radiation – that flew under the radar and is another story . . .
        • Etc. . . .

Your subscription and any help matters.

Note: To read about the specific problems with the bills listed, please visit the MA Legislation page.