Friday, May 24, 2019

Tuning in to Microwave Sickness - How wireless technology can trigger a devastating illness

Children are particularly vulnerable to microwave sickness because of the industrial Wi-Fi networks used in schools and their smaller bodies. Symptoms include headaches, sensitivity to light, sleep and cognitive problems, and nosebleeds. Some may hear strange sounds that seem to come from inside their heads.

In 2016, U.S. officials stationed overseas started showing signs of a mysterious illness. The list of symptoms included headaches, sensitivity to light, sleep and cognitive problems, and nosebleeds. Many heard strange sounds that seemed to come from inside their heads.

Over the next two years, dozens of diplomats staying in U.S. embassies in Cuba and China all developed the same list of symptoms. Doctors summed it up as a type of brain trauma, but there’s no official answer of the cause. Thelead theory is that the diplomats were the target of an unusual weapon—one that emits a directed pulse of microwave radiation.

In an interview with CBS’s “60 Minutes,” Mark Lenzi, a State Department security officer who worked in the U.S. Consulate in Guangzhou, China, said that he and his wife began to suffer after hearing strange sounds in their apartment. Lenzi seemed certain that they were the victims of an energy weapon.

“This was a directed standoff attack against my apartment,” Lenzi told “60 minutes.” “I believe it’s RF, radio frequency energy, in the microwave range.

The first scientist to suggest that microwaves were the cause of the illness was Dr. Beatrice Golomb, a professor of medicine at the University of California–San Diego, and a researcher who examines how drugs and environmental toxins harm health. When she heard about the diplomats’ symptoms, her first thought was microwave exposure.

“The profile of symptoms does not match anything else I’m familiar with,” Golomb said. “These are highly distinctive symptoms known to occur only in that setting. The likelihood that it could be anything else is very remote.”

Golomb wrote a paper outlining her case. Before it was even submitted for publication, it caught the attention of State Department officials eager for a meaningful explanation. She wrote that one major reason why the diplomats’ illness suggests a microwave cause is the auditory symptoms they experienced: hearing loss, tinnitus, and the presence of a chirping, ringing, hissing, or buzzing sound.

“The difference in the sound counts, in part, due to head dimensions,” Golomb said. “There were also reports that the sounds were tightly localized in space. When people moved, the sound’s source seemed to follow them. That’s not the case for stationary sound forces, but it is the case for the micro-auditory effect because the sound is actually produced in the head.”

This microwave-induced phenomenon is known as the “Frey effect” or “radio frequency hearing,” and was proven by Dr. Alan Frey in 1965 when he was working for the U.S. Navy. A 1976 U.S. Defense Intelligence Agency report described how to stimulate it: “Sounds and possibly even words which appear to be originating intracranially can be induced by signal modulation at very low average power densities.”

The good news is that, whatever the cause, it no longer seems to be an issue. Since returning to the United States, diplomats have either totally or partially recovered from their symptoms.

But Golomb believes their story compels a larger question: If there is the reason to believe that microwave radiation can be used to sicken U.S. officials overseas, why aren’t we looking closer at the people with microwave sickness in the population back at home?

“I have heard from hundreds of people who have experienced severe health effects from wireless, and it is a frustration that most news outlets have steered clear of this topic,” Golomb said.

Understanding Microwave Sickness

Everyone agrees that microwave radiation exposure at thermal levels (think microwave oven) can cause harm. But industry and regulatory standards assume that sub-thermal levels are safe. Yet, scientists have documented evidence of an illness from sub-thermal microwave exposure for decades. The condition used to be known as “microwave sickness” or “radio frequency sickness,” but today, it’s usually called electromagnetic sensitivity (ES).

Symptoms of microwave sickness resemble those experienced by the U.S. diplomats mentioned above. The difference is that everyday citizens who develop the condition trace their illness not to a mysterious weapon, but to very common microwave-emitting devices, such as Wi-Fi routers, cellphone towers, and smart meters.

“This group is similar to the diplomats in that different people have different subsets of symptoms, but prominent on the list are sleep problems, cognitive problems, and ear associated problems, with tinnitus the most common,” Golomb said.

Microwave sickness causes a wide range of symptoms, and some can be very serious. For example, many people who develop the illness report feeling a band-like pressure in their head.

“There is a reason to think that this may actually be brain swelling as was occurring in some diplomats,” Golomb said. “One person was actually given social security disability for very severe electro-sensitivity. His brain swelling became so severe at one point that it actually pushed his eyeball out of its orbit.”

One obstacle to understanding microwave sickness is that it can be triggered by electronics that virtually everyone is exposed to. If Wi-Fi routers and cellphone towers really caused illness, why do only some people get sick and everybody else seems fine?

The answer can be found within the same pattern seen in other diseases: If the stress is high and your defenses are low, you’re more likely to develop it. For microwave radiation, exposure means oxidative stress and mitochondrial damage. Luckily, a healthy body can repair itself when hit with a small dose of this stress. However, if the exposure is chronic or becomes too intense, and our defenses are compromised, illness can result.

Golomb mentioned one study, an Italian-Russian collaboration, that showed people who had electromagnetic sensitivity (ES) were significantly more likely to have gene variants in the glutathione system—a major antioxidant system in the body that guards against oxidative stress injury.

“This adversely affects the balance of oxidative stress and antioxidant defense and makes any new oxidative stressor more likely to produce symptoms,” she said.

Angela’s Story

Sweden is the only country that recognizes ES as a functional impairment— this means it’s like a disability, but it has an environmental cause. In the rest of the world, however, the issue is generally unknown, ignored, or sometimes even ridiculed until a notable case goes to court.

Part of the confusion is that some researchers insist it doesn’t exist. Studies primarily connected with industry, for example, aim to show that the condition is merely psychosomatic and not a valid medical concern.

Golomb is familiar with such studies, but said they often come from researchers who make a career out of debunking environmental illness, not from scientists genuinely looking for answers.

“That’s the angle they’re coming in with and, not unexpectedly, the design of these studies does not take into account any of the known science on the variability and time course to onset, resolution, and that different people respond to different frequencies, etc.,” she said.

There is, however, strong physiological evidence for the condition. One study by Dr. Dominique Belpomme, a professor of medical oncology at Paris University, examined 700 ES sufferers. All showed decreased levels of another important antioxidant associated with sleep, melatonin. That explains why sleep problems are such a common problem with this condition.

More than a quarter of the ES sufferers in Belpomme’s study showed evidence of a broken blood-brain barrier—which is considered another hallmark of microwave exposure.

Microwave radiation can affect any cell in the body, but its impact on the brain is particularly worrisome. It often makes its way in through the ear because there is no skull there to protect against it.

A recently published pilot study revealed differences and abnormalities that signified brain injury within the brains of ES patients that were not present in the brains of those not suffering from ES. Researchers believe these MRI scans defy the widely held governmental and wireless industry claim that wireless devices and infrastructure have no consequences to human health and could affect the prevailing opinion that wireless radiation is safe.

Yet few know about such evidence. It’s not taught in medical school, so when symptoms develop, few doctors are prepared to connect the dots.

That’s why Angela Tsiang had so much trouble finding answers when her son started showing signs of a neurological disease when he was 9 years old. It began soon after he entered the fourth grade in August 2013. Tsiang said he had been a normal child up until that point, but he suddenly developed new problems: extreme agitation and nervousness, sleep problems, severe headaches, nosebleeds, a red, swollen rash that would make his hands crack and bleed, digestive problems, and a new fear: loud noises.

“He started becoming afraid of fire drills,” Tsiang remembers. “I said, ‘What are you talking about? You’ve been going through fire drills since kindergarten.’ He said, ‘I don’t know why, mommy, but loud noises really scare me now.'”

The most concerning problem was that her son had also lost his ability to concentrate. Homework became a big ordeal. Assignments that were supposed to take 30 minutes took hours to complete. Even getting ready in the morning became unusually difficult. Tsiang said her son had become so forgetful that the basic routine he had performed for years was suddenly confusing to him.

Worried about what could be wrong, Tsiang took her son to several specialists, but they offered few answers. Everyone could see he had problems, but nobody could explain where they came from. Her son received the most relief from supplements prescribed by her integrative physician, Dr. Rita Ellithorpe. Ellithorpe wasn’t sure what was wrong, either, but Tsiang said the probiotics, vitamins, and essential fatty acids helped ease his symptoms.

“Everything became manageable and he was able to concentrate better, but he still wasn’t quite right,” Tsiang said.

Ellithorpe also gave Tsiang some general lifestyle advice: have her son reduce his use of wireless devices. She also recommended shutting off the cordless phone and Wi-Fi at night. She said it might help him sleep and help his body repair.

Tsiang listened but said that back then, the advice sounded inconvenient, and she didn’t think it would make a huge difference. The devices Ellithorpe mentioned all emitted non-ionizing radiation, which Tsiang learned was harmless from her science and engineering classes.

Yet, it planted a seed in her mind that started to sprout in the spring of 2015. One morning, as Tsiang dropped her son off at school, she got her first flash of insight into what might be causing his problems.

“I happened to look up and see a construction worker on this really tall pole in the park next to my son’s school. They were taking the cover off the cell tower. I didn’t even know it was there,” she said. “It was about 300 feet from the school building.”

Following this new lead, Tsiang went to city hall and researched the records on the tower. That’s when she discovered a second cell tower 600 feet away from the school that had been upgraded to 4G from 3G in June 2013, right before her son started fourth grade and all his problems began.

She learned that the tower 300 feet away (where she had just seen the workmen) was now in the process of being upgraded to 4G. The network upgrade would mean better connectivity and bandwidth for wireless devices, but what did it mean for her son’s health?

“I started to panic,” Tsiang said. “Could that have been what caused my son to become sick?”

As she dove into the scientific literature, Ellithorpe’s advice started to make more sense. Despite what Tsiang had been taught, studies have shown that non-ionizing radiation could cause symptoms very similar to her son’s.

But Tsiang and her husband are both engineers who wanted their own evidence, so they purchased a meter and measured the radiation levels at their son’s school. Some of the readings Tsiang found were high enough to cause illness, according to the studies she had read.

“Even though they were below FCC limits, the radiation levels at school were 1,000 times higher than what they were in our home and most areas that do not have a cell tower close by,” Tsiang said. “That’s why those meters are so great: because it objectively shows you how much radiation you’re being exposed to.”

Tsiang learned all these details during spring break and worried about what would happen once her son went back to school with a second upgraded cell tower at even closer proximity. All she could do was wait and watch.

“We didn’t say anything to my son, but when he went back to school, all the symptoms he had in 2013 came back, after they had been manageable for over a year,” Tsiang said. “It was terrifying. He had another month of school to go, and I didn’t know what we were going to do.”

As Tsiang and her husband watched the same pattern of their son’s symptoms returning each school year and fading over the summer break, they became convinced that microwave radiation was the cause.

Tsiang shared her findings with Ellithorpe, who diagnosed her son with ES, and wrote a letter requesting that he be transferred to a different school (one with considerable distance from a cellphone tower), and disability accommodations so that her son wouldn’t be near any Wi-Fi routers or other microwave-emitting devices that might exacerbate his condition.

Doctor Awareness

Doctor support always adds validity to a disease. But Golomb said that, unlike Tsiang’s experience with Ellithorpe, most doctors are not so supportive when patients believe they have microwave sickness.

“In a survey that we did in electro-sensitive people a few years ago, we asked what their doctor’s attitude was, and we asked if this was a traditional doctor or an alternative doctor,” Golomb said.

For alternative doctors, Golumb found that the vast majority of providers were supportive or accepting of the relationship between electromagnetics and symptoms. For traditional doctors, many were dismissive or hostile about the possibility.

“This is a serious problem with each of the conditions we study, whether it’s adverse drug effects or adverse effects from pesticides,” she said. “I would say that traditional medical training is extremely poor on the adverse effects of anything.”

But Dafna Tachover sees a growing awareness among doctors in regard to microwave sickness. Tachover is an attorney and founder of We are the Evidence—an advocacy group dedicated to defending those who have been injured by wireless radiation. She said that, with so much microwave radiation exposure in our world today, doctors can’t help but see more cases of it.

“Unfortunately, most doctors in the U.S. are unfamiliar with the condition, but we definitely see a change,” Tachover said. “Doctors are being educated by their patients and once provided with the evidence realize that likely many of their other patients are sick and suffering from the condition as well.”

In some cases, doctors take the lead. Tachover mentioned several quality surveys conducted by European physicians that have helped educate the medical community. Over the past 20 years, more than 20 position papers and resolutions regarding the health effects of electromagnetic field radiation have been adopted by researchers and physicians worldwide.

Unfortunately, some doctors also learn about the condition the hard way. Tachover has met several physicians who have either developed the condition themselves or have children who have.

But you don’t have to develop the illness to be convinced. Tachover said the proof of health problems related to wireless is vast. The medical establishment just needs to learn to see it.

“There are actually very elaborate guidelines for doctors on how to diagnose the condition,” Tachover said.

In 2016, physicians from the European Academy for Environmental Medicine (EUROPAEM) put out their latest guidelines for the prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of EMF-related health problems and illnesses. The academy stated that studies, empirical observations, and patient reports clearly indicate interactions between EMF exposure and health problems, “raising new challenges for medicine and society.”

Although few doctors know about them, there are also official diagnostic codes for exposure to non-ionizing radiation. The American Disabilities Actalso recognizes ES.

Tachover believes one big roadblock in the understanding of microwave sickness is the name people use most often to describe it: electromagnetic sensitivity or hypersensitivity. Not only does the term blame the victim rather than the cause, but it also creates a disconnect from all the evidence that had been known about the condition several decades before smartphones came along.

“This is not sensitivity. It’s a serious injury caused by microwave-based technologies,” she said. “Microwave sickness was acknowledged by NASA and the Navy. Before we commercialized cellphones and wireless technology, there were occupational doctors who were dealing with soldiers, and radio and antenna workers, because they were the only ones who were exposed to the high levels of non-ionizing radiation. Now, the entire population is being exposed to it.”

Seeking a Safe Distance

There are a number of remedies that reportedly help with ES symptoms. According to Golumb, some patients benefit from melatonin, and ginkgo biloba, an herb known for improving blood flow to the brain. Other doctors familiar with microwave sickness recommend glutathione, magnesium, and acupuncture—a treatment that helps balance the body’s own electromagnetic field.

But treatments and supplements can only help so much, and Golomb stressed that these remedies come primarily from word of mouth, not published research. According to her, and the EUROPAEM guide, the primary treatment method should mainly focus on reducing exposure as much as possible.

“The only people who have really been successful in ameliorating their severe problems are those who have found a way to reduce exposure,” Golomb said.

It’s unclear how many people are affected by microwave sickness. The most comprehensive attempt to find a number comes from an Austrian survey which found that it affects about 10 percent of the population. But consider that this figure was documented in 2006, before the emergence of the smartphone and the massive wireless infrastructure that followed. By one estimate, we are subjected to 1 quintillion times(1,000,000,000,000,000,000) more electromagnetic radiation today compared to just a decade ago.

Golomb believes finding a good estimate of affected individuals today would be extremely difficult, given that people who develop the illness can be hard to reach.

“You’re not going to find the people who end up living in their car. You are no longer going to find the people who no longer have the technology by which you can contact them. By definition, the most severely affected people are not going to be participating, and certainly not in an online survey,” she said.

Tachover developed microwave sickness when she was a telecommunications officer in 2009. Tachover was an early adapter of wireless, but her symptoms became so debilitating, she was forced to give up her devices and eventually retreat to the Catskill Mountains—the closest place the radiation was low enough for her body to recover.

“It is like a wound—it cannot heal if you keep scratching it,” she said.

Tachover believes, given that the background radiation in our lives is constantly on the rise, more people are bound to develop this illness. She regularly encounters individuals who show the first signs of the condition: hands tingle when holding a wireless device, pain in the head and ears while using it, memory problems, heart palpitations, and flu-like symptoms that won’t go away.

“Our body is electric, our brain is electric, our heart is electric, and our nervous system is electric. So radiation that is a quintillion times higher than what our body can tolerate will affect it,” she said.

But in a world where wireless technology is so thoroughly embedded into the fabric of life, finding distance is becoming increasingly difficult to do.

In 2016, soon after Tsiang was able to make disability accommodations for her son at his school in California, her husband’s employer wanted him to transfer to Minnesota. Tsiang managed to find a superintendent in a district who sympathized after hearing her son’s story. He personally expressed concerns over cellphone use in children because he had seen a study showing that cellphone radiation penetrated children’s skulls more deeply than adult skulls. He had even limited his own children’s cellphone use as a result.

With the promise of help, the Tsiangs purchased a home. But once the family moved, the school board changed its tune.

“They had written a very insulting 504 report. It basically said that ES is not a valid medical condition, there are no legal precedents, and we’re not going to accommodate for it, even though we had accommodations at our school in California. It said that it was my belief in this condition that was responsible for his symptoms,” Tsiang said. “But verbally they said the Wi-Fi router would be turned off in [my] son’s classroom because they had determined they didn’t need it.”

The message Tsiang received from the meeting was that the school believed Wi-Fi was making her son sick, but they didn’t want it documented for liability concerns.

The problem was that since the school refused to document the accommodations, accidents occurred frequently. As a result, his symptoms would return, consistently validating that his environment was the cause.

“I contacted a disability advocate, explained this situation and the accidents that were happening,” Tsiang said. “At that point, the school hired an attorney for the second round of hearings. He downplayed all his symptoms. He said, ‘What’s the big deal about having a rash. Just put some lotion on it. It’s no different than having chapped lips.’”

Tsiang said that despite her knowledge of the issue—she is the science resource specialist at Environmental Health Trust—the school now aims to discredit her and obfuscate the scientific evidence in hopes that she will give up. It’s a strategy that also serves to intimidate other parents who might consider stepping forward.

But in some schools, the evidence can become impossible to dismiss. One recent example is at an elementary school in Ripon, California, where four students and three teachers were diagnosed with cancer after a cellphone tower had been installed on school grounds three years ago.

Several parents were wary of a cell tower so close to their kids’ school before it was ever built. But after the fourth child was diagnosed in March 2019, parents’ patience had disappeared, and many kids were pulled out of school. Although the school had another 15 years left on its lease agreement to keep the tower on its grounds, the owner (Sprint) agreed to remove the structure due to public pressure.

Sometimes, public pressure is the only way to create change because the law won’t allow it. One study found that some California firefighters were experiencing profound neurological symptoms following activation of cell towers near their stations. SPECT scans revealed brain abnormalities in all the firefighters suffering symptoms. They sued the wireless company that told them the towers were harmless, but since The Telecommunications Act of 1996 doesn’t allow health to be taken into consideration when siting a tower, the judge dismissed the lawsuit.

As a result, the International Organization of Firefighters passed a resolution that prevents building cell towers on fire stations in California.

Today, Tsiang said she has no choice but to homeschool both her kids, but she would also like them to have some social interaction. So she filed a lawsuit with the school in 2017, not for damages, but to get the accommodations her son needs. The case is still waiting to go to trial. The school is trying to get the case dismissed, or at least dismiss the experts Tsiang wants to testify.

Tsiang is frustrated with the situation, but she said she has no choice but to educate people until they understand.

“No one is born with this,” Tsiang said. “We were using Wi-Fi and everything was fine for a while. We used to use a lot of these things. We were like everybody else. For some people, their tolerance level is at a lower threshold and when they hit it, the body can’t deal with it anymore and it starts to react.”

Golomb said that, at a minimum, there should at least be some safe places available where people can live without electromagnetic radiation pulsing 24/7 in the background. Some need this distance simply to survive, but everyone could all benefit from such places.

“You may not be sensitive now, but that doesn’t mean you won’t be sensitive five or 10 years from now,” Golomb said.

Tachover agrees that there is a desperate need for wireless-free zones where injured individuals can recover, but doesn’t believe it’s a practical strategy. How do you create a space for so many people completely separate from the wireless world the rest of us inhabit?

“This is not a long-term solution. We cannot move 10 percent of the population and their children,” Tachover said.

LED lights damage eyes and disturb sleep, European health authority warns

Susan Scutti, CNN, May 16, 2019

The blue light in LED lighting that is increasingly used in our homes can damage the eye's retina while disturbing our biological and sleep rhythms, a French health authority warned in a new report. 

New scientific evidence confirms the "phototoxic effects" of short-term exposures to high-intensity blue light, as well as an increased risk of age-related macular degeneration after chronic exposure to lower-intensity sources, according to the French Agency for Food, Environmental and Occupational Health & Safety, known as ANSES. Age-related macular degeneration, a leading cause of vision loss among people over 50, causes damage to the macula, a small spot near the center of the retina that's needed for sharp central vision. 

Yet protection from the harmful effects to the retina offered by "anti-blue light" screens, filters and sunglasses varies, and their ability to preserve sleep rhythms is not proven, ANSES also said. 

Lighting 101 

LEDs or light-emitting diodes consist of a semiconductor chip positioned on a reflective surface; when electricity runs through the semiconductor, light is produced.

Blue light itself is not new. Sunlight produces rays of blue that have higher energy than other wavelengths in the light spectrum. And old-fashioned lightbulbs produced some blue light, though less than what is emitted by energy-efficient curlicue (fluorescent) lightbulbs or LEDs.

LEDs are "undergoing rapid technological and economic development as a new source of lighting. For many years, they were only used in electronics but are now found as integral parts of lighting systems," ANSES wrote in a 2016 report. Today, LEDs are used for domestic purposes as well as industrial and commercial ones. 

In the United States, LED products have been seeing increased adoption, a positive development in terms of energy consumption because they use significantly less electricity per lumen than many traditional lighting technologies, according to the US Department of Energy. Market penetration of LED lighting is increasing and will represent 48% of total lumen-hour sales by 2020 and 84% by 2030, the agency estimates.

ANSES differentiates types of blue light in its report. For example, "warm white" domestic LED lighting has weak phototoxicity risks, similar to traditional lighting, according to ANSES. However, other LED lighting sources, including the newest flashlights, car headlights and some toys, produce a whiter and "colder" blue light that is more harmful. 

Additional scientific evidence 

An American study also described the use of blue light as "increasingly prominent" in today's world. Lead author Gianluca Tosini, professor and chief scientific research officer at Atlanta's Morehouse School of Medicine, said blue light can indeed damage the eyes, but only if the wavelengths are below 455 nanometers and the intensity is quite high. 

"There are blue light photoreceptors in the retina that directly communicate with the brain circadian clock," Tosini, who was not involved in the ANSES report, wrote in an email. "It is true that exposure to light in the evening affect sleep and circadian rhythms mostly by inhibiting the synthesis of the sleep promoting hormone melatonin."

Yet he also said that a few studies have shown that "exposure to blue light in the middle of the day may have beneficial effects" in that it increases alertness.

Janet Sparrow, a professor of ophthalmic sciences at Columbia University, wrote in an email that "blue light is thought to help individuals to maintain the daily rhythms that allow sleep."

The retina "accumulates fluorescent molecules generally referred to as lipofuscin," explained Sparrow, who was not involved in the ANSES report. "These compounds become more abundant with age and are sensitive to blue light." Early evidence suggests that this light sensitivity may lead to unhealthy optical responses over the long term, she said.

Tosini noted that scientists are convinced that exposure to LED blue light in the range of 470 to 480 nanometers for a short to medium period (days to weeks) should not significantly increase the risk of eye disease, but the same is not necessarily true for long-term exposure (months to years). 

"I believe that more studies are needed on this topic that is really affecting the health of many citizens," he said. He added a potential solution to the problem of blue light would be to develop intelligent lighting systems that change the composition of lighting throughout the day. 

An unrelated 2017 review of scientific studies also lends support to the finding in the ANSES report that sunglasses and filters may not protect us. The review investigated the potential benefits or harms of "blue-blocking" lenses, marketed to protect against phototoxicity, and found "a lack of high quality evidence" to support their use "for the general population to improve visual performance or sleep quality, alleviate eye fatigue or conserve macular health." 

However, Sparrow said that, generally, sunglasses block ultraviolet light, and those "that have a yellow tint should be preferred as they will also reduce the amount of blue light that reaches the retina."

Ultimately, ANSES believes the recommended maximum limit on short-term exposure to blue light should be revised downward, even if most people would only rarely be able to meet that level. Children and teenagers, whose eyes do not fully filter blue light, are particularly sensitive to the harms of cold blue light, the French authority noted. The agency also recommended that only low-risk LED devices be available to consumers and the luminosity of car headlights be reduced.


Joel M. Moskowitz, Ph.D., Director
Center for Family and Community Health
School of Public Health
University of California, Berkeley

Electromagnetic Radiation Safety
Twitter:            @berkeleyprc

FCC responds to 5G health concerns as politicians push for more information

FCC Chairman Ajit Pai has been tasked with quelling concerns about the safety of 5G, as consumers across the country seem to be growing increasingly alarmed by speculation that 5G may pose a health threat.

A group of U.S. politicians have written the FCC in recent months asking for information on the safety of 5G small cell infrastructure on behalf of their constituents. 

Representatives Andy Kim (D-N.J.), Thomas Suozzi (D-N.Y.) and Peter Defazio (D-OR) each sent letters to the FCC expressing concerns about possible negative health impacts of RF exposure due to 5G small cells. 

Small cell towers are being installed in residential neighborhoods in close proximity to houses throughout my district,” said Rep. Suozzi in his letter (PDF). “I have heard instances of these antennae being installed on light poles directly outside the window of a young child's bedroom. Rightly so, my constituents are worried that should this technology be proven hazardous in the future, the health of their families and value of their properties would be at serious risk.”

 The Congress members pointed out that the FCC’s own RF safety guidelines do not account for the higher frequency exposure possible with 5G small cell infrastructure. 

“Current regulations governing radiofrequency (RF) safety were put in place in 1996 and have not yet been reassessed for newer generation technologies.” Rep. Kim said in his letter (PDF). “Despite the close proximity to sensitive areas where these high-band cells will be installed, little research has been conducted to examine 5G safety,” he said, adding that the FCC itself has admitted that its SAR guidelines need to be reassessed to address more recent wireless technologies. 

Rep. Defazio noted that the Government Accountability Office made a similar assessment in 2012. “It is unacceptable that six years later the FCC still has not conducted a reassessment of its 1996 guidelines,” Defazio said in his letter (PDF).  

In a series of letters sent in response to the inquiries, Pai states that the FCC places a “high priority on the safety of wireless services and devices,” but doesn’t specifically address the outlined concerns. 

“The FCC relies on the expertise of health and safety agencies and organizations with respect to appropriate levels of RF exposure,” Pai said. “Our current RF exposure limits incorporate recommendations from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, and other federal health and safety agencies. And these limits are derived from exposure limits recommended by the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc and the National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements. Both these institutions have extensive experience and knowledge in RF-related issues and have spent a considerable amount of time evaluating published scientific studies that can inform appropriate exposure limits.”

Pai concluded each letter by offering to bring Congressional staff members to a testing facility in Columbia, Maryland in order to “see and speak with our engineers and technicians as they operate the RF testing equipment.”

Multiple Countries Ban Wifi & Cell Phones Around Schools, Young Children & Fetuses

There are thousands of peer-reviewed studies that have come out, and continue to come out, raising some alarming facts about our favourite gadgets such as cell phones, tablets, our use of Wi-Fi (Wi-Fi radiation) and more. But the main focus lately seems to be on WiFi and cell phones, as a number of countries around the world have set severe limits with regards to the use of WiFi and cell phones around children in schools.

Take France for example, they passed a law in 2015 banning WiFi from all nursery schools. In addition to that, the law states that Wi-Fi must be turned off in all elementary schools when it’s not in use. A wired connection, if possible, is preferred. When it coms to cell phones in France, all advertisements must recommend headsets to reduce the phones radiation exposure to the brain. Furthermore, advertisements directing cell phone use towards young children are banned.

It’s not just a concern for children, the French National Library and many others in Paris, along with several universities, have completely removed all Wi-Fi networks, and it’s also banned in many municipal buildings.

Can you believe that? Based on their research, health authorities in France are saying no to Wi-Fi and cell-phones.
You can access hundreds of these scientific papers and read more HERE, just click on the science section and under each heading there are links directly to the research.  If you click on the drop down tab, a list of scientific references as documentation appears. 

Other countries include: Belgium, Spain, Israel, Australia, Italy, Switzerland, Germany, Austria, India, Finland, Cyprus and more.

Namibia’s atomic energy review states quite clearly that current so called “safety” standards don’t protect citizens from long term health effects, and that the guidelines governing their use do not guarantee adequate protection against the effects of long term exposure.

The list goes on, and all of them have varying levels and degrees of limitations and bans.

So why has nothing happened yet in North America? We’ll get to that a little later.

The Science

These countries are not banning Wi-Fi for nothing. The science is quite clear and it speaks for itself. There are thousands of peer-reviewed studies showing multiple concerns, links to cancer, and more. And, it’s especially concerning for children because the bone marrow of a child’s head absorbs 10 times more radiation than that of an adult.
The links to the studies can be found below a little later in the article.

Above you’ll see an image from a study published by Dr. Om Gandhi, from the University of Utah in 1996 (IEEE Publication). Here’s another one of his publications a few years after that also cite the above picture. On the far left you will see how cell phone radiation, at that time, effected the brain of a 5 year old child, in the middle is the brain of a 10 year old, and on the far right is the brain of an adult. A child’s brain absorbs several times as much as that of an adult.

Cell phones and wireless expose everyone to  a type of microwave radiation also known as radiofrequency radiation or RF-EMF. Peer reviewed research has demonstrated a myriad of adverse biological effects from wireless radiation including reproductive dysfunction, single and double-stranded DNA breaks creation of reactive oxygen species, immune dysfunction, stress protein synthesis in the brain, altered brain development, sleep and memory disturbances, and increased brain tumors and more.

“Waiting for high levels of scientific and clinical proof before taking action to prevent well-known risks can lead to very high health and economic costs, as was the case with asbestos, leaded petrol and tobacco.”

These effects have occurred at wireless radiation exposure levels hundreds of times lower than presently legal international limits. These effects have occurred after exposure to devices that are government approved and legally sold to the public.

“Scientific data on the biological effects of radio-frequency indicate the immediate need for a precautionary approach to protect the public. Conclusive proof is not necessary. The research has accumulated enough to provide strong evidence that low levels are not safe.”
– Environmental Health Trust

Dr. Martin Blank, Ph.D., from the Department of Physiology and Cellular Biophysics at Colombia University, has joined a group of scientists from around the world who are making an international appeal to the United Nations regarding the dangers associated with the use of electromagnetic emitting devices like cell phones and Wi-Fi. He and hundreds of other scientists around the world are currently petitioning the UN, and have been for quite some time, regarding the dangers associated with these devices.

“Putting it bluntly they are damaging the living cells in our bodies and killing many of us prematurely” (source)

A great place to find some more research is the Bioinitiative Report 2012 as a good documentation of the peer reviewed science.

Experimental research shows chronic exposure to wireless reduces brain cells and causes brain cell death in the memory and learning centers of the brain. Cell phone radiation has also been shown to alter brain activity in humans. In 2011, NIH research found just 50 minutes of a wireless transmitting device (cell phone) next to the brain increases glucose in the part of the brain most exposed. Preliminary 3G and 4G research has further shown that non-thermal levels of this radiation alter the brain’s electrical activity.

It’s not only neurotoxic effects, it’s fertility and reproduction, cognition and impaired memory, behavioural issues, hearing loss, headaches, sleep issues, oxidative stress, and more.
Genotoxic effects are also an issue. A 2015 experimental study found that 2.4 GHz (Wi-Fi radiation) can alter expression of some of the miRNAs, and the study’s authors concluded that “long-term exposure of 2.4 GHz RF may lead to adverse effects such as neurodegenerative diseases originated from the alteration of some miRNA expression and more studies should be devoted to the effects of RF radiation on miRNA expression levels.”

Research has also shown that damage to the pineal gland, adrenal gland, and thyroid gland.  Research has shown that low levels of microwave exposure can reduce melatonin. Melatonin is not just critical to maintaining our sleep rhythm but it’s also an antioxidant that helps to repair damaged DNA and reduces the growth of cancer cells. Additionally, research shows thyroid hormone levels can be impacted by wireless radiation. It has been established that even a small change in thyroid hormones can alter the brain.

Heart functioning is another one, the list goes on and on, and like I said, there are thousands of peer-reviewed publications that’ve been raising concerns for years.

You can access hundreds of these papers and read more HERE, just click on the science section and under each heading there are links directly to the research.  If you click on the drop down tab, a list of scientific references as documentation it appears. 

It’s Not Just Humans

It’s not just humans, research is showing that the growth and development of plants and trees is being altered by electromagnetic radiation.

As the Environmental Health Trust points out (one of the best resources of information on this subject), studies on wireless EMF frequencies have found physiological and morphological changesincreased micronuclei formationaltered growth as well as adverse cell characteristics such as thinner cell walls and smaller mitochondria. What’s interesting is that they point out how electromagnetic exposure creates biochemical changes. Research shows that plants perceive and respond to electromagnetic fields and are a good model to study the biological effects of exposure.
“Documentation of tree damage from base stations is made visible in the Report “Tree Damage Caused by Mobile phone base stations” in which he states, “RF radiation effects on plants have not been considered. In the Explosive Proliferation of the diverse wireless communication technologies across the entire environment and almost all areas of life, this represents an uncovered risk” (Breunig, 2017).

EMFs have also been shown to alter the behavior of bees and birds.

Below is another image showing radiation from a tablet. It’s not just the tablets, it’s also electromagnetic radiation in general, not just from our Wi-Fi, tablets and cell phones, but devices we seem to be using a lot and that are in very close proximity to our bodies. Who knows how damaging the signals from Wi-Fi can be from long distances as well.

With All of This Science, Why Haven’t We Heard A Peep? We’ve seen this across all scientific literature in general. A lot research out there is industry research, and it conflicts greatly with a lot of other research. Industry corruption has kept these facts in the dark, and they continue to do so, as these companies have amassed a wealth of power. It’s not much different from tobacco and what we saw the industry do to the conclusive science that was emerging. Extreme amounts of fraud and advertising dragged out the process over years, until finally, it became public knowledge that smoking can kill you. 

In fact, one of the leadings doctors in the field of electromagnetic research, Dr. Devra Davis founded non-profit Environmental Health Trust, was also one of the scientists raising concerns about tobacco, and the industry science vs. the real stuff. 

“The case against science is straightforward: much of the scientific literature, perhaps half, may simply be untrue.” (source

Another great example of this was shown in a public meeting at FCC headquarters, the agency which once served the American people instead, acted very inappropriately. 

A former Congressional candidate, Kevin Mottus, asked the federal communications commissioner Tom Wheeler, 

“Hey Tom, with the NTP study showing wireless causes cancer sub-thermally, how can you proceed with more wireless expansion, with FCC standards only recognizing thermal effects — ignoring thousands of studies showing cancerous effects, neurological effects, reproductive harm, immune system disorders… people are being electrosensitive…” 

After about 20 seconds of yielding the floor to Mottus, Wheeler interrupted, dodged this very appropriate question, and diverted to an FCC-compliant journalist. 

You can read more about that story here

The bottom line is, we live in a corporatocracy, not a democracy, and when it comes to the products and services that surround all aspects of human life, they are controlled by the very few and very powerful. Year after year it becomes increasingly evident that our health is not really their priority nor their concern, and they will lie, deceit, and cheat in order to accomplish whatever their goals are. But the more we become aware of it, the more problems we cause, and the more awareness we create, the more action is taken against us which is why so many countries are now implementing strict rules and bans.

Read more here