NY Labor Institute Published “Electromagnetic Fields (EMFs): A Training Workbook for Working People” in 1990. Maybe Because They Didn’t Want Sick Employees

By B.N. Frank

Many Americans aren’t aware that Electromagnetic Sensitivity has a long history and has been a federally recognized disability since 2002.  It was originally called “Microwave Sickness.”  In 2010 experts claimed that up to 1/3 of the population was “sensitive” to some degree to sources of “Electrosmog” and 3% were hypersensitive.  They also warned that increasing levels of exposure would lead to more sick people.  Research has also indicated that exposure is more harmful to children. 

Thanks to Environmental Health Trust for drawing attention to this workbook and providing more details.

Electromagnetic Fields (EMFs): A Training Workbook for Working People:  Full Book Text, Download PDF 

Electromagnetic Fields (EMFs): A Training Workbook for Working People published by the Labor Institute and funded by a grant from the New York Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Training and Education program. Full Book Text, Download PDF 

*This document was issued in the early 1990’s. The research evidence indicating adverse effects has only increased since that time. Yet the Department of Labor and NIOSH have no authority to take any action and we are not aware of any staff  in these federal agencies that have expertise in EMF.

Register Now for The 5G Crisis: Awareness & Accountability Summit. Online and FREE from August 26 – September 1, 2019.

Source

ICD (International Classification of Diseases) now has codes for health effects caused by non-ionizing radiation!

Via Magda Havas

Great news!  ICD (International Classification of Diseases) now has codes for health effects caused by non-ionizing radiation!

https://icd.codes/icd10cm/W90

This was a request from the 2015 EHS Resolution adopted in Belgium.  

Doctors can now use this code to characterize health effects associated with RFR, ELF, dirty electricity, ground current and other types of NIR!  Finally the medical community can now attribute health effects to NIR!  

A major victory for the scientists and activists who attended this conference and for the doctors, lawyers, and EHS/Cancer survivors.  

-magda

Does Electromagnetic Hypersensitivity Present A Current Or Future Claims Risk

Via Patricia Burke:

Article by David Wynn

As technology has increased, there has been an inevitable proliferation in the number of electromagnetic and radiofrequency field sources that people are exposed to on a daily basis. These include Wi-Fi, power lines, mobile phones and masts, IT equipment and other electronic devices.

There are increasing numbers of people who report experiencing unpleasant symptoms due to exposure to these electromagnetic sources – a condition known as electromagnetic hypersensitivity (EHS) – describing a variety of symptoms, including:

• Headaches, dizziness and nausea
• Difficulty concentrating and/or memory loss
• Irritability, depression and/or anxiety
• Insomnia or fatigue.

Should risk managers be worried? Currently, the World Health Organisation (WHO) states that "research has not been able to provide support for a causal relationship between exposure to electromagnetic fields and self-reported symptoms, or 'electromagnetic hypersensitivity'", but has indicated that further research will be completed.

In the UK, EHS is not a recognised medical diagnosis. There is no accepted physiological basis that the symptoms of EHS sufferers are caused by exposure to electromagnetic fields.

The European Economic and Social Committee (EESC) of the European Union provided its opinion on EHS in 2015. The EESC concluded that a report from SCENIHR was likely to conclude as it did in 2013, namely that "overall, there is evidence that exposure to radiofrequency fields does not cause symptoms or affect cognitive function in humans".

Furthermore, this opinion considered new evidence received since 2009, which added "weight to the conclusion that radiofrequency exposure is not causally linked to symptoms [of EHS]", and that often the belief that the subject is being exposed (when they are not) is sufficient to trigger symptoms.

However, the EESC did urge "the [European] Commission to continue its work in this area, particularly as further research is still needed to accumulate evidence concerning any potential health impact from long-term exposure, for example using a mobile phone for more than 20 years". Any further evidence is likely to take a significant period to accumulate.

In the absence of further evidence, EHS may be classified as a psychological illness, which is of course no less damaging for sufferers, and must be dealt with sensitively by employers and government institutions. In the absence of any successful case law or diagnosis, there is no active cohort of claimants and therefore, no claims market for this condition currently. However, it is possible that a claim might be advanced with reliance on a psychological expert report as opposed to a report based on physiological causes.

How such a market would develop is unclear. It is possible there could be claims from employees with EHS who are expected to work around electromagnetic fields. 

Furthermore, it is possible that claims against local authorities for failure to factor in the risk of EHS symptoms being triggered might be considered.

At the moment, given the absence of a physiological and psychological basis on which to pursue any claim associated with EHS, it is currently unlikely that any claim will successfully proceed in the UK. Dryden v Johnson Matthey recently highlighted the willingness of the Supreme Court to broaden what constitutes an actionable personal injury. Should medical evidence in the future confirm that exposure to electromagnetic fields can result in a physiological change, it may be concluded that an actionable personal injury exists. Against whom an individual with EHS may have a claim, and whether that claim could be successful, remains to be seen.

Most European jurisdictions adopt a position consistent with the UK concerning the validity of EHS as a recognisable medical condition. However, in France in 2015, it was reported that an EHS sufferer had been awarded disability benefits resulting from her condition. The ruling accepted that her symptoms prevented the sufferer from working but stopped short of recognising EHS as a physiological illness. 

Additionally a Spanish court in 2017 acknowledged permanent working incapacity due to the syndrome of electromagnetic hypersensitivity.

In Sweden, EHS is officially recognised as functional impairment, but not as a disease, and sufferers are not entitled to sickness benefits as a matter of course. Instead, the focus is on local authorities to ensure that the sufferer is not treated in a discriminatory manner. The impact of dealing with sufferers of EHS is more likely to be borne by local authorities and corporate HR departments, as opposed to insureds and insurers, from a claims perspective.

The WHO has indicated that its research into radiofrequency fields (and by extension EHS) will continue, despite the current accepted wisdom. In 2011, the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), a WHO agency, did classify radiofrequency fields as a Class 2B carcinogen, which is defined as "possibly carcinogenic to humans".

From a claims perspective, EHS poses little concern at the moment. However, recent calls have been made for the IARC to review the carcinogenicity of radiofrequency radiation in light of subsequent animal studies showing higher rates of cancer for rats exposed to cell-phone radiation. Further research into EHS is therefore likely, and any further findings should be watched with care so that potential impacts on businesses and insurers can be understood and dealt with appropriately.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

http://www.mondaq.com/article.asp?article_id=826084

http://www.mondaq.com/uk/x/826084/Personal+Injury/Emerging+Risks+Does+Electromagnetic+Hypersensitivity+Present+A+Current+Or+Future+Claims+Risk

I had to register to read this article and I am not sure if the links will work for others...type in the title of the article to search for it if this does not work

Olle Johansson on the functional impairment electrohypersensitivity

https://youtu.be/UjWAIPHCCbk

Please consider contributing to Olle Johansson - see email thread below - there are 2 ways - via wiring or Paypal.

He is a scientist whose entire life's work has been on electrohypersensitivity and improving understanding of this.  He is also one of the first scientists to talk about this.

He is retired, but continues this important work, without any funding except through contributions.

I first learned about electrosensitivity through Olle Johansson's work.  Through Olle Johansson's paper, I learned about Wi-Fi hot spots being issued as standard equipment on Comcast's residential Wi-Fi routers, and how much more intense Wi-Fi hot spots are.  (The paper was an interesting case study where a woman's demyelination symptoms (seizures, vertigo, headaches) were exacerbated following the installation of an Comcast wi-fi with public hotspot router in an apartment below hers. When she left her apartment for any length of time, the symptoms stopped. After the wi-fi modem was switched out for one without the public hotspot, the seizures stopped immediately and her other symptoms improved.  Then when another neighbor had an xfinity wi-fi with public hotspot router installed in the adjacent apartment, her demyelination symptoms returned.  Full Text of study  https://comitatotutelamonteporziocatone.files.wordpress.com/2016/09/johansson-redmayne-2016.pdf  )

For gifts via bank account

If you can, please, support my efforts economically via this special bank account in Nordea, clearing number 3300, account number 5308130177.

Nordea Bank, Folkungagatan 94, 116 22 Stockholm, Sweden (note change of address from previous applications)

IBAN-nummer SE8430000000005308130177

BIC-kod NDEASESS

Beneficiary:
Olle Johansson
Rådjursvägen 3
130 56 Utö
Sweden

+++

For gifts via PayPal

Open https://www.paypal.com/se/webapps/mpp/send-money-online

(You need to create an account of your own, it only takes a minute and doesn't cost anything)

Use my e-mail address olle.johansson500@gmail.com as the address for transfer.

+++++

(Please, since I work day and night trying to solve the situation, with many and long e-mail conversations, do not write back if not needed. And to you who has already contributed in the past, I say again: thank you so much! Your support means the world to me!)

With my very best regards

Yours sincerely

Olle

A Slow Death by 5G Wireless Technology

Richard Gale and Gary Null PhD
Progressive Radio Network, July 9, 2019


During the past year, Senate hearings leading up to the roll out of 5G wireless technology have made it quite clear that the race to capture first prize in the Internet of Things has little do to with popular consumer demands for improved internet access. Being called the fourth industrial revolution, the hype is that 5G will provide internet speeds up to one hundred times faster than 4G. Yet aside from the idealized and perhaps hyperbolic benefits of faster internet connections and downloads, 5G is best understood within the context of the US’ competitive race against China to establish global wireless dominance.  The Obama administration’s FCC, under the influence of the telecommunication industry’s insider Tom Wheeler, who served as the chair of the agency, launched the Spectrum Frontiers rules to mandate the 5G rollout as a “national priority.” Therefore, rather than the fundamental incentive to improve the lives of citizens, more important is 5G’s role to reinforce American global economic expansionism and military hegemony. For past presidents, and Trump in particular, economic figures hold all-consuming importance. One estimate claims 5G will bring over $12 trillion into the global economy, about $3.5 trillion in the US while providing 22 million new jobs. While 5G surely holds the promise of a huge windfall for the economy, these benefits will be eventually be neutralized by medical and environmental catastrophes.  

For the Defense Department, 5G will further harness global military dominance and strengthen the US’ lead as the planet’s policeman. For the Department of Homeland Security, other federal intelligence agencies, and local law enforcement 5G assures more far-reaching surveillance and policing on the American public. International spying and interference in other nations’ internal affairs will also advance exponentially. All the while the telecommunications industry wets its lips over the certain forecasts of rising stock prices and enormous executive compensations. 

For the Trump administration, the 5G roll out is imperative. Last December the White House released an announcement that “[I]t is imperative that America be first in fifth-generation (5G) wireless technologies — wireless technologies capable of meeting the high-capacity, low-latency, and high-speed requirements that can unleash innovation broadly across diverse sectors of the economy and the public sector.”  What we are really looking at is a competitive war the US is waging with China, which has already installed 1.9 million wireless sites.  As the US continues to lag behind, it is equally imperative that 5G opponents keep careful watch of the predictable rise in disease and mental health disorders in China. 

5G smart cities will provide the government with total surveillance of society. This was announced by T-Mobile’s Chief Technology director Neville Ray at the 2018 Mobile World Congress in Barcelona. Sprint Vice President Ron Marquardt remarked that city government officials will have the capacity to monitor “security issues.” The new generation technology, therefore, will offer a boon for the private security industry. 

Writing for The New Yorker, investigative journalist Sue Halpern describes how the new era of electromagnetic connectivity will increase the risks and severity of cyber attacks. “Ransomware, malware, crypto-jacking, identity theft, and data breaches have become so common that more Americans are afraid of cybercrime than they are of becoming a victim of violent crime.” writes Halpern.  “Adding more devices to the online universe is destined to create more opportunities for disruption.” 5G will not simply connect your alarm clock and television to your mobile unit. It is estimated that millions of new 5G base stations will be installed, 20,000 new satellites orbiting in space, and 200 billion objects with wireless antennas will be transmitting EMF waves by 2020. A few years later it is expected to expand to one trillion electronic objects.  5G technology will be fully integrated into airplanes, automobiles, trains and subway systems. Imagine being in a commercial flight 6 miles above the earth and a major 5G disturbance occurs. 

5G servers are already being utilized for spy operations. Halpern reports on the discovery of Huawei wireless servers installed in the African Union’s headquarters in Addis Ababa “sending sensitive data back to China every evening.”  Israel, Russia and the US have already been accused on many occasions for conducting industrial and defense cyber espionage. On all accounts, the threats of cyber warfare will worsen after 5G is functioning fully on a global scale. 

In the meantime, Washington and our mainstream media proclaim 5G is perfectly safe and the next great stride for America’s utopian progress. Yet it may very well be the trojan horse that brings the US into an electronic dark age. 

The overarching question being ignored by Congress concerns 5G’s public safety and environmental implications. During a Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee hearing last February, Senator Richard Blumenthal (D-Connecticut) challenged representatives from the telecommunication industry about the technology’s health risks. When queried on the industry’s commitment to comply with the FDA’s insistence to fund “independent research” on EMF’s biological effects, Brad Gillen, an executive VP for CTIA – the leading trade association representing the wireless communications industry — denied there were any industry-funded studies and no research on 5G’s health risks were active. Nor was Steven Berry, President of Competitive Carriers Association, aware of any ongoing research. Blumenthal also sent a formal request to Trump’s FCC Secretary requesting information about the scientific evaluation of 5G’s risks. The FCC failed to acknowledge his request. 

Besides the unbelievable arrogance displayed by the industry’s spokespersons, from our perspective it is perhaps worse that Senator Blumenthal, a ranking committee member and highly respected in Congress, failed to present any of the scientific literature confirming 5G’s health risks. He could have also subpoenaed the FCC for ignoring his request. He has unlimited resources through the National Academy of Sciences, the National Institutes of Health medical database, the EPA, and FDA yet didn’t cite a single study nor invite an independent medical expert to testify what we already know about 5G’s and earlier generation’s EFM adverse effects on the human body. Dr. Henry Lai, a DNA researcher at the University of Washington could have been called to testify. Prof Lai was quoted in the British Medical Journal for stating “I can name 600 studies showing bioeffects of microwaves off the top of my head.” Earlier this year, a petition signed by 26,000 scientists, medical doctors and environmental experts warned the United Nations, the World Health Organization, the EU and Council of Europe and the governments of all nations that “the deployment of 5G constitutes an experiment on humanity and the environment that is defined as a crime under international law.”  

The Senate hearing was another typical dog and pony show that we have become accustomed to over the decades, with pro-industry shills declaring ignorance of facts, and pleading for a green light while repeating false promises to conduct further research. In the meantime, Congress concedes to industry demands because revenues are being lost and shareholders are becoming impatient. We have heard this all before with the approval of asbestos, Monsanto’s glyphosate and genetically modified crops, tobacco and countless pharmaceutical drugs with questionable safety and efficacy records.  

May’s Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on 5G was even more of a charade. Senators Lindsay Graham and Barbara Feinstein completely avoided the evidence supporting 5G’s detrimental effects on human, animal, insect and environmental health. The 5G rollout was a certainty in the mind of every Committee member. Questioning of industry representatives focused solely on national security and cyber threats to the Internet of Things. Nor were the larger public consequences of safety from having all electronic systems controlled by artificial intelligence suddenly being disabled discussed. Clearly national security, protecting the country’s military, intelligence and the elite trumps health issues.  Since no modern military can realistically win a conventional war, then how likely will the next war between superpowers be waged in the cyber world? This possibility seemed foremost in the minds of our Senators.

The FCC is a fully industry-captured agency. In 1996, President Clinton willingly handed over to the telecommunications industry carte blanche power over state and local governments to install 5G technologies. Clinton’s Telecommunications Act (TCA) is a corrupt piece of legislation. It decrees that no health or environmental concern can interfere with telecom installations. In addition, the TCA gives full power to the FCC to regulate telecom EMF’s health effects. This ruling was a dangerous joke because the FCC is not a health agency, nor does it employ biomedical experts. The Act also overrides the authority of towns, cities, and county councils to rule against 5G stations and cell tower installments. 

Under President Obama, FCC chair Tom Wheeler in no uncertain terms called for the private industry’s technology to drive national policy rather than vice versa. In other words, the telecommunications industrial complex has been handed precedence over elected legislators, including Congressional leaders, such as Senator Blumenthal, who voice deep concerns about 5G’s human and environmental risks. Wheeler, a principal architect behind the 5G strategy, has never acknowledged that there is an enormous body of medical research concluding EMF threats. He is a product of the same private industrial mindset that has churned out climate change deniers in the fossil fuel corporations and the GMO-risk deniers in Big Agriculture. 

Obama’s FCC also established a criterion whereby  the technology antecedes the warnings voiced by medical, health and environmental institutions and agencies. And under Trump and the chairmanship of Ajit Pai, the FCC’s corruption has entered steroidal hyper-drive to destroy net neutrality laws and “dismantle existing consumer protections.” Pai, a former Verizon attorney, was originally appointed by Obama and has been accused by the New York Times for running the department in secrecy and failing to make the agency’s internal policy decisions public. 

It therefore seems certain that Washington, in full collaboration with the telecommunications industry, has been scheming full spectrum dominance of the global wireless connectivity for two and half decades. During this time, the tactic has been to demolish public protections. In return for America’s efforts to achieve telecommunication hegemony in order to expand the police state and the nation’s imperium, average citizens are handed the leftover crumbs of faster internet speeds.  The real victims in the US’ cyber chess match with China is the world’s population.  No animal, bird, insect, plant or human will be able to avoid exposure. 5G will expose us to levels of radiation that are tens to hundreds of times greater than what we face today. And this exposure will be uninterrupted throughout the day, throughout the year and well into the future. It is now just a matter of a short period of time before we will all be saturated with microwave pulses. 

Unfortunately, the telecom industry and its contracted scientists remain in complete denial.  A plethora of medical and environmental research has accumulated about the health and ecological risks of electromagnetic frequency radiation (EMF) and microwaves. Four hundred new studies on electromagnetic radiation risks have been compiled by public health Professor Joel Moskowitz at the University of California at Berkeley. These studies cover earlier generation technologies, whereas 5G will be far more evasive and less safe. Compared to 4G technology in use today, every 5G base station will contain hundreds of thousands of antennas each aiming laser like microwave beams to all devices. 

In a study published in the August 2018 issue of Journal of Medical Imaging and Health Informatics, after an extensive review and analysis of the medical literature researchers concluded that “incidence of cancer cases was remarkably higher among people who resided in 400 meters from mobile antennas, in comparison to those who lived further away. Inhabitants living close to cellular antennas are also at increased risk for developing neuropsychiatric complaints.” Under the 5G regime every American in a suburb or city will be living 100 meters or less from an antenna. In 2016, the Europa EM-EMF guideline found “strong evidence that long-term exposure to certain EMFs is a risk factor for diseases such as certain cancers, Alzheimer’s disease, and male infertility…Common EHS (electromagnetic hypersensitivity) symptoms include headaches, concentration difficulties, sleep problems, depression, lack of energy, fatigue, and flu-like symptoms.”

In our opinion, the 5G rollout is an irresponsible experiment with potential holocaust-like consequences in the long term. Neither the US nor China have ever felt obliged to follow UNESCO’s Precautionary Principle to avoid “morally unacceptable harm” when the science is plausible but still uncertain. In the case of 5G, the harm to human life is conclusive, and in the view of Dr. Lennart Hardel, an oncology professor at University Hospital in Orebro, Sweden, it may be in violation of the Nuremberg Code.

Among the many research papers on the adverse effects of electromagnetic radiation, some are especially worrisome:

Nearly 100% of studies employing real mobile phone exposures reveal adverse effects, which include associations to brain tumors, declines in animal populations, and symptoms of un-wellness. (published in BioMed Research International).

Children are at greater risk than adults and absorb more microwave radiation than adults. (Journal of Microscopy and Ultrastructure)

The geometry of a child’s head significantly increases mobile phone EMF absorption in the brain, eye, cortex, hippocampus, and hypothalamus. Children have especially high bone marrow conductivity, greatly increasing EMF absorption.(published in the journal Physics in Medicine and Biology)

Simultaneous exposure to lead and RF from mobile phone use was associated with increased ADHD symptom risk.(Published in PLOS One)

Chronic multi-system illness” correlates electromagnetic hypersensitivity to 3 MHz-300 GHz, with headaches, concentration difficulties, sleep problems, depression, lack of energy, fatigue, and flu-like symptoms. (published in Reviews of Environmental Health).

Oxidative stress due to 900 MHz and 1.8 GHz microwave exposure associated with cognitive impairment and inflammation in rat brain (Published in the Indian Journal of Experimental Biology)

Use of laptop computers connected to internet through Wi-Fi decreases human sperm motility and increases sperm DNA fragmentation (published in the journal Fertility and Sterility)

Radiofrequency waves emitted from conventional Wi-Fi devices poses potential effect on both fertility and the integrity of sperm cells. (Published in the Journal of Pediatric Urology)

Population living within 350 meters of an 850 MHz, 1500 watt cell phone tower in Netanya, Israel experienced a 4 fold cancer increase (i.e., carcinoma of the breast, ovary, lung, kidney, bone, and Hodgkin’s disease). (published in the International Journal of Cancer Prevention).

In addition there is something largely missing from the 5G debate in the US, whereas some European nations are paying attention to it; that is, existing safety standards for wireless technology are obsolete. This conclusion was arrrived at independently by Vienna Medical University in Austria and Carl Blackman at the University of North Carolina, published in the journal Pathophysiology. The problem herein lies in the failures of federal regulatory agencies to be truthful to the scientific evidence rather than show favoritism to the wireless industry’s own junk science and commercial interests. Again, private interests profit, and the public is harmed. 

Finally, we may consider 5G’s vulnerability and dangers to society in the event of a solar storm, such as a massive coronal plasma emission (CPE). Such a threat is very real, as University of Michigan professor of space sciences Justin Kasper told members of the Senate Committee on Homeland Security last February. Kasper specializes in how solar activity effects society. His fears are that a solar flare similar to the one that engulfed the earth in a “magnetic tsunami” in 1859 could potentially wipe out the country’s electrical power grid. Power transformers are massive utilities costing tens of millions of dollars each and generally there are no backups. Therefore, imagine if such a solar storm were to assault a fully installed global 5G wireless network whereupon everything modern culture depends upon is interconnected. Satellite communications will be an essential component of the 5G infrastructure and are defenseless against massive radiation emissions from the sun. Without operative electrical and water utilities, septic systems, gas pumps, air conditioning in summer or heating in winter, for weeks, months and perhaps a year in the event of a massive coronal plasma emission, society as we know it would come to a standstill. Nuclear power plants would likely spiral downward into meltdown. Transportation as we know it would come to a halt. And in the event of a super “magnetic tsunami” chaos could follow.  

Therefore, 5G poses far more problems than even its sharpest critics voice. It is not simply a threat to human health and the environment from constant exposure, but the security of the entire international community of nations is in peril. Our Congressional leaders are a national disgrace for failing to side with the public rather than the telecommunications industry. Obviously contaminating all life on the planet is too insignificant of a concern. In fact, 5G holds the possibility in being another tipping point in the sixth extinction. 

Source

EHS Recognition through Americans with Disabilities Act?

MESSAGE FROM SUSAN FOSTER:

Attached (below) please see the case I have made to San Diego County Supervisor Dianne Jacob regarding the FCC’s small cell [5G] directive. I am taking the position that San Diego County legally can, and must, accommodate individuals with EHS in the face of the planned exponential increase in 5G towers close to homes, schools, workplaces and throughout our lives. I am arguing that the ADA is not preempted under the Telecommunications Act of 1996 [Section 704] because of a Massachusetts District court judge's ruling in a separate case. You will see my logic within the letter. 

Also attached is my filing with the FCC from 2013 regarding the brain study I organized of California firefighters exposed to a cell tower on their station for over five years. And here is the link to a pretrial ruling from District court judge Timothy S. Hillman in the Fay School Wi-Fi case. I refer to both throughout letter. 

https://www.casewatch.net/civil/wifi/130_order_excluding_experts.pdf

I sat on San Diego County’s 2002 cell tower ordinance siting committee, and I am a stakeholder in the shaping of the current ordinance which was passed in February 2019, but was remanded to staff to craft some more protective amendments. I was brought in to help with this, but the pushback from industry was relentless. We tried to get ADA language into the ordinance that was expanded beyond just addressing the installation of the cell tower itself. Industry is fine complying with ADA as long as it's isolated only to the cell tower construction. But of course they're not going to put their backup generators on the sidewalks. They would get sued if children got hurt while riding their bikes, etc. The industry does not want ADA to apply to individuals with EHS. When the topic of shielding was brought up during one of our discussions with the county, the industry said that shielding was preempted under the Telecom Act. It was the industry's claim that shielding was going to be preempted that made me look at Judge Hillman's ruling in the Fay School case. In that case the judge decided the ADA did apply and was not preempted by the TCA. I am arguing that San Diego County is not any different. 

The industry is trying to tell the County zoning planners that EHS is not a "real" illness. My position is that acknowledgment of EHS, also known as radiofrequency radiation exposure, is not a debatable issue. The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid offer a number of billing codes related to RF radiation exposure. If the government pays for it on one hand, it cannot pretend it does not exist on the other.

Perhaps most importantly I am urging Chairwoman Dianne Jacob to contact California Gov. Gavin Newsom and urge a statewide moratorium on the deployment of 5G. We can and we must accommodate those individuals who are already EHS, and we must prepare for the additional numbers of people who will become ill following deployment of 5G. We need to get wording into contracts with telecom to pay for shielding in public places so that all public buildings are accessible to those with EHS. You will see that I'm making a case for shielding in some homes, as well.

It has been argued that it would be extremely impractical and prohibitively expensive to shield entire wings of schools, hospitals, libraries, court houses and other public facilities. I would argue that is extremely impractical and prohibitively expensive to risk making our entire population ill, unproductive, and in need of medical care they will no longer be able to access.

SUSAN FOSTER

U.S. Adviser, Radiation Research Trust (UK)

Honorary Firefighter, San Diego Fire Department

Medical Writer

Rancho Santa Fe CA 92091

susan.foster04@gmail.com

PRACTICAL ADVICE FOR THE ELECTRICALLY SENSITIVE - WHEN OPTING OUT IS NO LONGER ENOUGH: MITIGATION OF HIGH FREQUENCY EMI FROM A NON-TRANSMITTING DIGITAL METER

By Eileen Chandler and Weber Hertz

In the fall of 2017, the Arizona Corporation Commission (ACC) ruled that Arizona Public Service (APS) would be allowed to designate smart meters as their “standard meter”, with non-transmitting digital meters (not the analog meters customers already had) becoming the new “non-standard meter” for those who opt out of the smart meter program. This small change in wording allows APS to remove the existing analog meter of opt-out customers and replace it with a non-transmitting digital meter at any time.  APS, the largest electricity utility in Arizona, serves 1.2 million customers in 11 counties across the state, mainly in Northern and Central AZ, out of an estimated population of 7.12 million in 2018.  But APS is not the only power company making this change:  Electric utilities in many other parts of the U.S. are asking for and receiving the same redefinitions of customer agreement terms from their state regulatory agencies.  Because I (Eileen) am electrically sensitive, I have been in the APS smart meter opt-out program since its creation at the ACC Opt-Out-Policy Hearing of December, 2014. So I had retained my analog meter even after most people in this area were switched over to smart meters.  But, recently (late-summer 2018), I received a letter from APS stating that my analog meter would be replaced within the next few weeks with a non-transmitting digital meter.  When I talked to the supervisor of the AMI* opt-out department about the letter, he said my analog meter was scheduled to be replaced shortly, by either a smart meter or a non-transmitting digital meter. Those were my only two choices. The reason he gave for the replacement was that I was using too much electricity to remain on any of the standard rate, non-time-of-use plans. (Maximum allowed usage is 1000 kwh/month, averaged over a year’s time, and I was using an average of about 1100 per month.)  In order to be correctly billed on a time-of-use (TOU) plan, I had to have a digital meter that could measure how much electricity I was using at various times of the day*.  So that’s what would be installed.  He also said that, although I was being forced to change over now, all of the opt-out program participants would eventually have their existing analog meters replaced by digital meters.  It was just a matter of time. That is the reason for this article.

*AMI (Advanced metering infrastructure) is defined as “an architecture for automated, two-way communication between a smart utility meter with an IP address and a utility company. The goal of an AMI is to provide utility companies with real-time data about power consumption and allow customers to make informed choices about energy usage based on the price at the time of use.”  In other words, an AMI meter is a “smart meter” as opposed to the Itron non-transmitting digital meter provided to customers who opt-out of the AMI program.  (See the Resources section below for a link to an article explaining the dangerous health effects of both “smart meters” and “non-transmitting digital meters”.)

Ten days after I received the letter, an APS technician showed up to install the new digital meter. Within a few minutes of his turning it on, I began to experience debilitating symptoms.  I had hoped that perhaps I could adapt to the high frequency interference the digital meter was putting on my home power wires.  But, instead of adapting, I became more sensitized and my symptoms worsened to the point where, at the end of a week, I could no longer function.  I finally thought to experiment with turning off the main breaker to the porcelain trailer where I sleep. That helped tremendously, allowing me to at least sleep normally at night. Since I have no appliances, and use no electricity except for overhead lights, in the trailer, I was able to shut off all circuits and navigate by flashlight at night.  But that was not an option for the other buildings where I cook, work during the day, and have my appliances, freezers, refrigerator, hot water tank, and hot water boiler for heat.  Those could not be without electricity.

Read full article here