Friday, June 14, 2019

FCC Commissioners Now Literal Poster Boys for Big Telecom

The Wireless Association (CTIA) would like you to know that it really appreciates all the hard work the FCC has been doing this year on behalf of its clients: AT&T, Verizon, and Comcast, and all the other telecom giants.
To commemorate the FCC’s achievements—namely, diminishing its own authority to advocate on behalf of consumers against some of the world’s largest and most powerful companies—CTIA has turned two of its biggest success stories, Republican FCC Commissioners Brendan Carr and Michael O’Rielly, into marketing props, which you can download or share on social media.
What an honor!

Thanks, Brendan. And big ups on that award CTIA gave you last month, too.

Keep up the great work, Mike.
Update, 9:15pm: Commissioner Carr has tweeted at me to point out that CTIA also tweet out quotes about 5G spectrum by Democratic Commissioners Geoffrey Starks and Jessica Rosenworcel. “I’m sure [you] would never let facts get in way of a narrative,” Nathan Leamer, an FCC policy adviser, told Gizmodo.

Rosenworcel this week accused the agency of trying to ram through the $26.5 merger deal between Sprint and T-Mobile. Even though her Republican colleagues had already expressed support for the deal publicly, she had not been given access to the economic or legal analysis produced by FCC Chairman Ajit Pai’s office.
“It looks like some backroom dealing,” she told the Senate Commerce Committee.
Carr and O’Rielly told the committee they hadn’t read the analyses, either. Their support for the merger is a forgone conclusion, nevertheless.

Research shows lower test scores for fourth graders who use tablets in schools

Reboot Foundation questions the use of technology in education

mounting body of evidence indicates that technology in schools isn’t boosting student achievement as its proponents had hoped it would. The latest research comes from the Reboot Foundation, which released a study in June 2019 that shows a negative connection between a nation’s performance on international assessments and 15-year-olds’ self-reported use of technology in school. The more students used technology in schools, the lower the nation ranked in educational achievement.

In the United States, the results were more complicated. For younger school children, the study found a negative tie between the use of tablets in school and fourth-grade reading scores. Fourth-grade students who reported using tablets in “all or almost all” classes scored 14 points lower on the reading portion of a test administered by the federal government than students who reported “never” using classroom tablets. That’s the equivalent of a year of education or an entire grade level. Meanwhile, some types of computer usage among older students could be beneficial. Eighth graders who reported using computers to conduct research for projects had higher reading test scores than those who didn’t use computers for research.

“We see a lot of spending everywhere on tablets, computers, counting the ratio of computers per student,” said Helen Lee Bouygues, who founded the Reboot Foundation in 2018. Bouygues wants schools to pay more attention to how they are using technology.

"Technology is not bad in general,” she said, “although I would argue for younger children, it’s questionable whether it has benefits.”

Reboot aims to increase the teaching of critical thinking in schools and by parents at home. Bouygues said she started the foundation in reaction to the rapid spread of fake news on the internet and the inability of citizens to distinguish reliable sources from propaganda. She said she wanted to learn if technology was a problem for younger students and commissioned data analysts at an outside research firm, the Learning Agency, to conduct this quantitative analysis.

The study found that the more hours American students spent daily on computers doing English language arts, the lower their reading scores. That was true for both fourth-grade and eighth-grade students and across school poverty levels. Math scores didn’t deteriorate as much as computer usage increased. Previous research has generally shown more promise for education technology in math than in reading.

The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) first detected a negative relationship between computer usage in schools and student achievement on its 2012 tests known as PISA, or Program for International Student Assessment, which are taken by high school students around the world every three years. But computer usage in schools was still novel then. The current Reboot Foundation study replicates those findings using 2015 PISA test data, showing that the worrisome trend persisted with increased computer use in classrooms.

Mild computer use, however, might be beneficial. The Reboot study found, for example, that French students who reported using the internet at school for up to 30 minutes daily scored 13 points higher on the PISA math assessment than students who reported not spending any time on the internet during class. But reading scores turned sharply negative for students who spent more than a half hour on the internet daily. This pattern —  a bit of technology may be beneficial but a lot is not — was also seen among eighth graders in Reboot’s analysis of U.S. student data.

It’s unclear, from this analysis, whether computer usage in schools is causing student performance to rise or fall. The study wasn’t able to see what happened to student test scores before and after the introduction of technology and compare those with similar students who continued to toil with pencil and paper. These sorts of simple comparisons between technology use and test scores might be misleading if weaker, lower income students are more likely use computers in the first place.

Reading scores are lower for fourth graders who use tablets frequently at school, but not for eighth graders. Source: Reboot Foundation
Indeed, the researchers found that American students in high-poverty schools, where more than three quarters of students are eligible for free or reduced-price lunch, use computers slightly more than students in wealthier schools. There was insufficient student survey data for the United States on the 2015 PISA so the researchers scrutinized another highly regarded test, the 2017 National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP). Among low-poverty schools, 44 percent of fourth graders never used computers. Among high-poverty schools, 34 percent of fourth graders never used computers.

Even among similar students, with the same level of poverty, the researchers found that those who used technology more for certain activities had lower test scores. Indeed, the achievement gap between those who use computers more and those who use computers less was largest among low-income students, hinting that the group that’s most likely to be using technology is possibly the most harmed by it.

Computer usage in U.S. schools ranges widely but very few students are using it for many hours a day, which seems to produce the most negative test results.  In fourth grade, 41 percent of students say they spend less than 30 minutes a day on the computer for English work and 34 percent say they use a computer for half an hour. In eighth grade, computer use increases, with only 38 percent of students spending less than 30 minutes a day for English work. Another 29 percent use it for half an hour and 21 percent use it for one hour.

When I first started covering education in 2011, philanthropic foundations were funding projects to introduce technology to schools. Some were founded by tech entrepreneurs, such as Bill Gates and Adam Dell. Reboot, based in Paris and funded by Helen Lee Bouygues, a former consultant at McKinsey & Co. and her husband, French industrialist Bruno Bouygues, is emblematic of a pushback against that early wave out of concern that technology is changing education and society for the worse.  Reboot’s mission to promote the teaching of critical thinking highlights a popular buzz phrase in education that can encompass everything from logic skills to the ability to analyze and evaluate information.

“With the expanded use of digital technology,” said Helen Lee Bouygues, “it becomes more important to teach critical thinking so that we don’t fall into traps of buying into fake news.”


IRELAND - Hundreds of parents sign petition urging switch from iPads to books

Ratoath College’s iPads-only policy sparks controversy over use of technology

Parents campaigning against an iPads-only policy at a Co Meath secondary school say hundreds have signed a petition calling for a return to schoolbooks.
Ratoath College, a 1,000-pupil school which does not use printed books for junior cycle students, has advised parents to buy iPads – at a cost of €500 or more – for their children ahead of the new school year.
However, dozens of parents attending a meeting this week said their children’s education had been harmed by spending too much time on screens since the policy was introduced in recent years.
Many of those who are refusing to purchase new iPads have been told they face late payment fees of €50 by a third-party technology provider.
The petition is due to be handed to the school’s management body, Louth-Meath Education and Training Board (LMETB), on Monday morning.
The board’s chief executive is due to meet the school principal and senior officials to respond to the matter next week.
The row has turned a spotlight on the role of technology in education at a time when some schools are embracing the use of digital devices, while others are restricting their use.
While there are no official figures on how many schoolchildren are using devices for learning, Wriggle – one of the largest firms supplying iPads to schools – manages up to 40,000 devices for students in more than 100 secondary schools.
The Department of Education’s digital learning strategy advocates greater use of technology.
However, a department spokesman said use of devices was a decision for individual school boards of management.
The principal of the school, Oonagh Prendergast, declined to comment when contacted on Friday.
In a previous statement, she said she appreciated that the changes were raising concerns for some parents.
However, she said the school was seeking to meet the needs of students emerging into a rapidly changing world and that “21st century skills” such as collaboration, creativity, critical thinking and problem-solving “cannot be taught from a textbook”.


A meeting of about 100 concerned parents this week heard numerous claims that children using the devices were more distracted and had no access to ebooks for certain subjects.
Others were critical of the quality of course content available on the devices and said their children found it more difficult to retain information or take notes using devices.
The group, which has gathered several hundred parents’ signatures at the meeting and at the local Supervalu, calls for parents to be allowed to purchase books instead of iPads.
It also says that where iPads are used in class, it should be under the supervision of teachers.
Fianna Fáil education spokesman Thomas Byrne, who is a local TD, was present at the parents’ meeting this week.
Mr Byrne said that while he was not directly involved in the campaign, he was satisfied there was a substantial number of parents with genuine concerns and requested that the penalty charge for late iPad purchase be suspended.
“I think we need to research this in more detail. There are genuine concerns and I will be looking to have these issues examined by the Oireachtaseducation committee, so we can hear from educators and experts on this matter,” he said.

Novus Makes New Smartphone for Kids Despite Warnings from American Academy of Pediatrics and Other Experts about Multiple Health Threats

Discouraging kids to have and use smartphones is really ramping up.  PBS and other media sources have been increasing their coverage – and warnings – about screen addictionblue light, LED light and Electromagnetic Radiation exposure.  The long list of health consequences associated with tech use and exposure keeps growing – macular degeneration, blindness, brain health issues (see 12) cancer, insomnia, and so much more.  Warnings from credible medical sources keep piling on.
Of course, Silicon Valley parents (aka tech inventors) have always limited their own kids’ use and exposure to screens – even sending them to “low tech schools.  More recently they’ve been taking more desperate measures to protect them – like making their nannies sign “no screens” contracts and spying on them to make sure they don’t break rank.
So it’s pretty tacky that Novus decided to create a new smartphone for kids and Backhub is helping them raise money for it.  Even tackier – the smartphone can be converted into a watch even though wearable devices have been associated with a variety of issues (including rashes) which led to many being recalled.  This device can also be converted into a night light and alarm clock/to be placed at kids’ bedsides.  OMG!
It’s understandable that parents want to know their kids are safe 24/7.  But wouldn’t’ it be better to instead create something for them that doesn’t have such serious health and privacy risks?  According to their website –
Abardeen is a professional team that has more than 10 years of experience in designing and manufacturing of kids’ smartwatches. We’re on a mission to create the best smart devices for children at affordable prices.
So this is not a team of newbies.  They’ve even admitted:
However we also know that hidden obstacles and challenges often occur. Because of that, we’ve made sure to account for some amount of craziness or unforeseen problems that may occur in our schedule. If something does go wrong, we promise to keep our backers updated and informed about any issues and about the way in which we are solving them.
Nice disclaimer, Abardeen team.  Of course, if parents weren’t willing to buy these products for their kids, tech inventors wouldn’t keep making them.  They’d find another way to feed themselves and their families.

School wireless safety bill passes state senate

Today, June 13, 2019, the Oregon State Senate passed SB 283, which directs the Oregon Health Authority to review independently-funded scientific studies of the health effects of exposure to microwave radiation, particularly exposure that results from use of wireless network technologies in schools.

The bill also directs the Oregon Department of Education to develop recommendations to schools in this state for practices and alternative technologies that reduce students’ exposure to microwave radiation that Oregon Health Authority report identifies as harmful.

The bill is expected to also pass in the House, following compelling testimony from the Chair of the Health Committee, Sen. Laurie Monnes-Anderson. Monnes-Anderson has championed this issue for many years while facing ridicule and disrespect from other legislators.
The issue has come to the fore as reports of cancer clusters in schools near cell towers and using wireless microwave technology, as faculty and students increasingly report being stricken with microwave sickness in schools, at alarming rates.


80th  OREGON  LEGISLATIVE  ASSEMBLY--2019  Regular  Session
Senate Bill 283
The following summary is not prepared by the sponsors of the measure and is not a part of the body thereof subject to consideration by the Legislative Assembly. It is an editor’s brief statement of the essential features of the measure.
     Directs Oregon Health Authority to review peer-reviewed, independently funded scientific studies of health effects of exposure to microwave radiation, particularly exposure that results from use of wireless network technologies in schools and to report results of review to interim committee of Legislative Assembly related toeducation not later than January 2, 2021.Specifies requirements for review.
     Directs Department of Education to develop recommendations to schools in this state for practices and alternative technologies that reduce students’ exposure to microwave radiation that Oregon Health Authority report identifies as harmful.
    Declares emergency, effective on passage.
Relating to exposure to radiation in schools in this state; and declaring an emergency.
Be It Enacted by the People of the State of Oregon:
     SECTION 1. (1)(a) The Oregon Health Authority shall:
    (A) Review peer-reviewed, independently funded scientific studies of the health effects of exposure to microwave radiation, particularly exposure that results from the use of wireless network technologies in schools or similar environments; and
     (B) Report the results of the review to an interim committee of the Legislative Assembly related to education not later than January 2, 2021.
     (b) The review described in paragraph (a) of this subsection must, at a minimum, consist of a literature review of peer-reviewed, independently funded scientific studies that examine the health effects of exposure to microwave radiation on children.
     (2) The Department of Education shall develop recommendations to schools in this state for practices and alternative technologies that would reduce students’ exposure tomicro-wave radiation that the review described in subsection (1) of this section identifies as harmful.
    SECTION 2. This 2019 Act being necessary for the immediate preservation of the public peace, health and safety, an emergency is declared to exist, and this 2019 Act takes effect on its passage.

SB 283

Oregon Legislative Information 2019 Regular Session


Do we need warnings on Wi-Fi?

It’s everywhere. The electrosmog of radiofrequencies, electromagnetic radiation and all the Wi-Fi glory that keeps our world humming along. It’s not just pulsing from our digital products, but ever-present, in ever- increasing levels, moving faster, farther and stronger with each passing year.
What could possibly be the harm in that?

A few lawmakers in Salem are choosing to err on the side of caution. Three bills in the Oregon Legislature would lay down new rules to better inform Oregonians about the radiofrequencies from these devices and help limit their exposure to children in schools.

State Sen. Laurie Monnes Anderson (D-Gresham), along with Reps. Alissa Keny-Guyer (D-Portland) and Carla Piluso (D-Gresham), have sponsored Senate Bill 283, which would require the Oregon Department of Education and public and private schools to distribute information about the potential health risks of wireless network technology. The information would have to be distributed to employees, students and parents or guardians of students.

The bill also directs the Oregon Health Authority, or OHA, to examine peer-reviewed, independently funded studies on the effects of exposure to microwave radiation in schools and similar environments, particularly exposure that results from the use of wireless network technologies. The OHA would then use that information to create guidelines for school events that outline the hazards of exposure to microwave radiation and how to use wireless devices more safely to reduce risk. 

“I strongly believe we need to start the discussion on possible health risks associated with digital devices and their use in schools,” Monnes Anderson told Street Roots.
The state senator referenced a report from Kaiser Foundation Research Institute on the evidence of health risks linked to electromagnetic field exposure.

The study, published in the journal Scientific Reports in 2017, showed that exposing pregnant women to non-ionizing radiation from magnetic fields at the higher end of an otherwise normal spectrum resulted in a significantly higher rate of miscarriage. 

Two other bills introduced in the state Senate by Monnes Anderson – Senate Bills 281 and 282 – would require digital product manufacturers to label their products with information about any health risks and direct the state Department of Education and the Oregon Health Authority to conduct a study to determine health standards to govern student use of computers, mobile digital devices and other electronic media in classrooms. Senate Bill 282 also calls for developing policies that would allow a parent to give or deny consent for their child to participate in school course work that involves extensive work with these digital devices and electronic media, and offer alternatives.

Among the possible health risks to be labeled in SB 281 are addictions, microwave sickness, and dangers specific to children and pregnant women.

These bills mark a milestone in the debate about the safety and risks associated with wireless technology – a debate that at its extremes swings from allegations of incomplete or flawed science to willful negligence and corporate cover-ups. But at the very least, the three bills before the state Legislature raise the question of how much we really know about the ever-increasing electromagnetic radiofrequencies that we can’t seem to live without.


The man behind the bill is no stranger to controversy on the matter. David Morrison, a Portland book dealer, has been fighting for greater recognition of the impact of radiofrequency emissions on children ever since a tower was installed at his daughter’s middle school. Morrison sued Portland Public Schools in 2011, seeking to have the equipment removed. That lawsuit was dismissed in federal court by U.S. District Judge Michael Mosman, who ruled that the suit was challenging safety standards set by the Federal Communications Commission and that only the FCC has the authority to hear complaints regarding its rules. Portland Public Schools maintained that the radiation levels emitted from the Wi-Fi equipment were below federal standards.

Morrison said this is the third time he’s tried to have this legislation introduced, and he hopes it will ultimately mean that internet connections in schools will be hard-wired and cordless phones and other wireless devices will be removed from classrooms.

“I am happy with the bill, but of course not happy until wireless tech is out of the schools, as it is in many countries throughout the world,” Morrison said. But, he said, the influence of corporate donations, federal backing of tech companies and public opinion are working against him. 
Deb Mayer said she authored the other two bills on labeling and allowing parents to opt their children out of digital-laden coursework. Mayer is with Parents Across America Oregon, the state chapter for the national organization that works to improve conditions in public schools. 

“While product manufacturers already instruct consumers of safer ways to use the devices, it is buried so deep within the product that most people don’t know it exists,” Mayer said. “We’re just asking them to make warning labels visible, list the possible health effects, and make age recommendations. … We’re asking that schools determine devices are safe before requiring our children to use them.”
Mayer said the bills have already brought out a vitriolic response from people. 

“People love their cellphones and other screens and don’t want to believe there is a downside to them. They tend to ignore the message and attack the messenger. Personally, I have nothing to gain by taking on this issue, but to ignore the environmental welfare of our children at school is unconscionable. Too much is at stake.”

The Oregon Department of Education is neutral on the bills, said Marc Seigel, ODE communications director. Seigel told Street Roots that the department “does not distribute any information about cell towers to the districts, nor does ODE collect data on their emissions.”

Portland Public Schools receives money from leases with AT&T and T-Mobile for six cell towers at Beaumont Middle School, Grant High School, Green Thumb, Alliance High School/Meek Campus, Rigler Elementary School and Roosevelt High School. It does not monitor or receive information on the radiofrequency emissions from these towers, according to PPS public records officer Ryan Vandehey. Vandehey said PPS believes is up to the carriers to monitor the emissions. Wi-Fi is provided in all PPS buildings through a network of routers.

Eileen Park with the mayor’s office said the city of Portland doesn’t monitor the emissions from the 118 wireless facilities on utility poles in the city’s right-of-way, and it doesn’t know how much is being emitted.  


Kaiser Foundation’s 2017 study, as reported in Scientific Reports, concluded pregnant women exposed to wireless radiation at the higher levels present in the real world experienced a rate of miscarriages nearly three times higher than the general population. According to the study, which concluded that “accurate measurement of MF (magnetic frequency) exposure is vital for examining health effects,” exposure “could have adverse biological impacts on human health.”

The American Cancer Society says there is very little evidence to support the idea that cell tower emissions cause health issues and cancer. But it also says very few studies have focused specifically on cellular phone towers and cancer risks. What studies it does reference show no demonstrative correlation. 

In 2011, the World Health Organization’s Interagency for Research on Cancer classified radiofrequency electromagnetic fields from cellphones as a “possible human carcinogen.” That designation was based on a specific increased risk to glioma, a malignant type of brain cancer, and still falls short of meeting the more significant “probable human carcinogen” designation. More recently, a study published in November by the federal National Toxicology Program showed high exposure to radiofrequency radiation caused cancer in male rats. But applying those results to human implications is problematic, and cellphones are placed next to our bodies, while radiofrequency emissions are all around us.

The Kaiser report also references a year-long project by the National Institute for Environmental Health Sciences, conducted by the National Toxicology Program, that also showed an increased risk of cancer associated with Wi-Fi radiation exposure. 

The National Toxicology Program, or NTP, investigation is reportedly one of the more comprehensive studies on the issue. The study, which lasted more than 10 years, concluded that “there is clear evidence that male rats exposed to high levels of radiofrequency radiation like that used in 2G and 3G cellphones developed cancerous heart tumors.”

The NTP notes the results cannot be directly compared to the exposure that humans experience using a cellphone because of the higher levels of radiation involved, compared to normal cellphone use. The study did not investigate the next generation in wireless technology, or 5G.
Regarding the proposed legislation, Monnes Anderson points to the warning Deustche Telekom – the owner of T-Mobile – puts on its Speedport Smart home Wi-Fi router. The passage, in German in the operating instructions, cautions owners from placing their Speedport routers “in the immediate proximity to bedrooms, children’s rooms, living rooms (means also common rooms or lounges, i.e.) in order to keep the exposure to electromagnetic fields as low as possible.”

“There are so many advantages of using Wi-Fi but we have a responsibility to discuss this topic, to make sure we are not exposing our children to undue harm, make school districts aware of the issue, and encourage the industry to do more research,” Monnes Anderson said.

In 2015, the French National Assembly voted to limit public exposure to electromagnetic fields generated by wireless technology. The French law bans Wi-Fi and wireless devices from “the spaces dedicated to home, rest and activities of children under 3 years old.”

In 2014, Belgium banned the sale of cellphones to children 7 and younger as a safety precaution. In Spain, various parliaments and municipalities have also passed resolutions aimed to limit electromagnetic exposure to young children. Other countries, including Australia, New Zealand and Canada, have either passed or are researching related policies to curtail the proliferation of these products among children.

There is no federally developed national standard for safe levels of exposure to radiofrequency energy in the United States, according to the FCC. The FCC does, however, set safe exposure levels for all wireless communication devices based on the absorption rates into the body, which vary according to products.


Ready or not, 5G is coming to a neighborhood near you. It’s been billed as being 100 times faster than the current 4G technology, but it also will rely on a new network of antennas and significantly higher frequency spectrum bands called millimeter wave frequencies. Reports on this impending network have said the frequencies are higher, but they also have a shorter range. The shorter range means more antennas, closer together – as many as 300,000 more antennas across the country, according to a report by CBS.

For years in the ramp-up to 5G, doctors have been outspoken against its implementation without more investigation into its impact. A group of more than 180 scientists and doctors from 35 countries have appealed to the European Union to place moratorium on the 5G roll-out across Europe “until potential hazards for human health and the environment have been fully investigated by scientists independent from industry.” The signees say 5G will substantially increase exposure to radiofrequency electromagnetic fields on top of the 2G, 3G, 4G, Wi-Fi, etc. for telecommunications already in place. “(Radiofrequency – electromagnetic frequency) has been proven to be harmful for humans and the environment,” the doctors state in their appeal. 

The FCC authorizes and licenses devices, transmitters and facilities that generate radiofrequency radiation and has jurisdiction over all transmitting services in the U.S. except those specifically operated by the federal government. It does not, however, have jurisdiction over health and safety issues.

The FCC says that the radiofrequency emissions from antennas used for cell transmissions are at exposures that are well below safety limits and that there is no reason to believe that such towers could constitute a potential health hazard to nearby residents or students. When it comes to cellphones in particular, the jurisdiction for determining safety falls with the Food and Drug Administration. On its website, the FDA has said that it cannot rule out the possibility of risk but that the risk is probably small. 

The FCC, in its campaign to “ensure the United States wins the global race to 5G,” has passed new rules to streamline the installation of 5G, “small cell” infrastructure by overriding state and local regulatory barriers. The rules, approved Sept. 26, 2018, mandate time limits for state and local reviews, and in some cases waive fees if the FCC deems them barriers to deploying service. And numerous states have followed suit, enacting legislation to further nullify local control and streamline the implementation of 5G networks. Oregon is not one of those states.

The U.S. Conference of Mayors has repeatedly protested the FCC’s order on 5G, calling it “an unprecedented federal intrusion into local (and state) government property rights that will have substantial and continuing adverse impacts on cities and their taxpayers, including reduced funding for essential local government services, and needlessly introduce increased risk of right of way and other public safety hazards.”

Multiple cities, including Portland, have protested the ruling and threatened to sue the FCC.

*An earlier version of this story incorrectly referred to the tower emissions as "radioactive." The term "radiation" in relation to electromagnetic radiation and radiofrequencies does not mean radioactive.

Email Executive Editor Joanne Zuhl at

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

EMF Health Summit Starts Today - June 14 -20, 2019

Via Lloyd Burrell:

In 2009 for the princely sum of $50 ElectricSense was born.
My first utterings were a YouTube video—filmed in my living room.
I was thinking, if just one person sees this and get’s the message, it will have been worth it.
Fortunately, quite a few people saw it.
Since then over 3 million people have visited ElectricSense.
In fact probably quite a few more than that, my stats only go back to 2013.
In that first video I was just blowing off steam.
I was a bit cheesed off (I’m being polite) not just because I’d been harmed by these supposedly safe technologies but because nobody seemed to know a darned thing about any of these dangers.
The medical community was, and still is by and large, clueless.
But more to the point everyone was walking around ignorant, business as usual, complaining about the poor reception on their cell phone, buying cell phones for their kids, etc.
Since then my mission has morphed into one of not only raising awareness about the dangers but sharing solutions.
And it’s just grown and grown over time, thanks to you.
But despite all my efforts (and the valiant efforts of many others), a lot of people are still buying cell phones as if they're going out of fashion, buying them for their kids AND complaining like spoilt children when they can't get enough bars to stream the latest blockbuster on Netflix.
At the beginning of last year I was feeling a bit deflated.
Which got me thinking, what can I do to take this to the next level?
What can I do to really get the message out to a broader audience?
EMFs need's to go mainstream.
That’s where the idea of holding an EMF Health Summit bubbled up.
I’d like to say that I sat and meditated for a solution and that’s how it came to me.
But it didn’t quite work like that.
I’d been kind thinking it over for about 2 years!
But I guess I felt that, to quote one of my favorite Elvis Presley songs, ‘It’s Now or Never’.
To pull it off I knew that I needed the support of 30 or so world leading experts on EMFs.
I also knew that I needed the support of some major websites in the natural health space to help me get the message out.
How to convince them to help me?
I decided to dive in at the deep end.
I emailed Dr. Mercola, told him my bold plan and asked if he would participate.
I figured if I can get the man behind the number one most visited natural health website on the planet on my side, who by the way is passionate about EMFs, then I would be off to a good start.
He said yes!
And the EMF Health Summit just snowballed from there.
I've been able to connect with 34 world-class experts on everything EMF... cell phone radiation, 5G, WiFi, smart meters, dirty electricity, Bluetooth, you name it.
Each of them shares their best strategies to protect yourself from these digital toxins, which are causing chronic inflammation and so many other conditions and diseases. Including cancer.
And do you know the best part?
It’s FREE.
All 35 interviews (34 guests but 35 interviews because I did a 2 part interview with Building Biologist Oram Miller) are free to watch between 14th and 20th June.
Register here today to guarantee you don't miss it!  
Note: If you registered for last years broadcast - this is the same event. I know how tough it can be to find the time to access all these amazing interviews that's why I'm sending you this email so you get another opportunity to take part in the biggest FREE EMF Summit event ever...
You know I always ask you to share my emails, well this time it's super important to share because with your help I really feel we can change something here.
Please share with your loved ones, your friends and your neighbors!
Lloyd Burrell
Live a naturally healthy life in our electromagnetic world!
P.S. if the above link doesn't work please copy/paste this link into your browser