There will be no updates again until Friday, at which time I will begin sending them using a new email address:
1) Press release re. Victoria presentation that was sent out today. Please share with your local newspaper or radio station because, if experience is an example, no media will touch this.
2) Below, in Letters, is one from one of our colleagues from London, Ontario who is confronting her municipal council regarding agreement to allow small/microcells without public notification or consultation. As in the article shared last night [2) – https://stopsmartmetersbc.com/2019-06-24-wireless-internet-coming-to-osoyoos/], and noted in her letter, the City is demanding indemnification from any harm from Rogers via insurance covering $5 million per incident. What about the people living 24/7 within feet of strong and multiple transmitters?
I encourage you to consider getting involved with your Mayors and Councils now because Telus is doing the same thing in BC. [http://www.civicinfo.bc.ca/12.asp]
Here is a letter from Dr. Meg Sears addressed to the London City Council which she has offered to share.
http://www.preventcancernow.ca/wp-content/uploads/5G-Licence-email-to-London-PCN-2018June25.pdf
[http://www.preventcancernow.ca/everyday-cancer-prevention-tips/
&
Radiation Exposure – http://www.preventcancernow.ca/everyday-cancer-prevention-tips/#C2]
3) A new report on the dangers associated with electromagnetic fields, like those on home wiring. These fields are increased by smeters, as well as other appliances. It is important to reduce the fields in your homes and I will have information about how that can be done soon.
Health effects associated with exposure to low-frequency electromagnetic fields
“Today, ANSES is publishing a new expert appraisal on the health effects associated with exposure to low-frequency electromagnetic fields. In view of the data available, the Agency is reiterating its 2010 conclusions on the possible association between exposure to low-frequency electromagnetic fields and the long-term risk of childhood leukaemia. It is also restating its recommendation not to build new schools close to very-high voltage power lines. At the same time, the Agency stresses the need to better manage occupational exposure for employees who could be exposed to high levels of electromagnetic fields, particularly pregnant women. “
Letters
Subject: Re: Council Agenda Item #8.1.8
Date: 24 Jun 2019
From: Laureen Maurizio (name given with permission)
To: Mayor Ed Holder <mayor@london.ca>, Councillor Michael Van Holst <mvanholst@london.ca>, Councillor Shawn Lewis <slewis@london.ca>, Councillor Mohamed Salih <msalih@london.ca>, Councillor Jessie Helmer <jhelmer@london.ca>, Councillor Maureen Cassidy <mcassidy@london.ca>, Councillor Phil Squire <psquire@london.ca>, Councillor Josh Morgan <joshmorgan@london.ca>, Councillor Steve Lehman <slehman@london.ca>, Councillor Anna Hopkins <ahopkins@london.ca>, Councillor Paul Van Meerbergen <pvanmeerbergen@london.ca>, Councillor Stephen Turner <sturner@london.ca>, Councillor Elizabeth Peloza <epeloza@london.ca>, Councillor Arielle Kayabaga <akayabaga@london.ca>, Councillor Steven Hillier <shillier@london.ca>, City Clerk Cathy Saunders <csaunder@london.ca>, <csaunders@london.ca>
Mr. Mayor, Deputy-Mayor, Members of the Corporation of the City of London Municipal Council, Madam Clerk,
I have resided in London, ON for 50+ years and as such, am concerned with many issues before Council.
I’m writing to you today to raise concerns regarding your Agenda Item #8.1.8 – (2.6) 4+ / 5G Small Cell Pilot Project (relates to Bill No. 235) having been presented from the Report of the Corporate Services Committee.
Here is their report – see bottom page 3: https://pub-london.escribemeetings.com/filestream.ashx?DocumentId=65392. The report that came from City Staff to the Corporate Services Committee (https://pub-london.escribemeetings.com/filestream.ashx?DocumentId=64821 reflects input from Rogers Telecommunications and it does not appear that the CSC conducted any additional research into the impact that small cell antennae would have in London.
The Ministry of Science, Technology & Innovation (formerly Industry Canada) has published the Spectrum Management Guide to Assist Land-use Authorities in Developing Antenna System Siting (https://www.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/smt-gst.nsf/eng/sf10860.html). This document was intended to assist Municipal Planners and Councils in establishing a Protocol (if they did already have one) and allow an opportunity for Municipalities to contribute to the consultation process for siting of antennae.
I object to the installation of small cell antennae for several reasons.
1) Public Input has not been sought by Council. The Report of the City Staff did not include a recommendation that Public Input be sought, either from the communities recommended for the pilot project, not from the general populace. It would behoove the members of London Council to seek input from respected citizens before implementing the recommended pilot project.
2) Environmental Concerns:
Thousands of peer-reviewed environmental impact studies support that flora and fauna are affected at the cellular level and leaves are subject to burning, leading to the death of the plant/tree. Small Insects are negatively affected in many ways, including distorting of the natural eco-locational systems and dehydration leading to death.
3) Health & Safety Impacts:
The National Toxicology Protocol Research on Cell Phone Radio-Frequency Radiation found
- Clear evidence of tumors in the hearts of male rats. The tumors were malignant schwannomas.
- Some evidence of tumors in the brains of male rats. The tumors were malignant gliomas.
- Some evidence of tumors in the adrenal glands of male rats. The tumors were benign, malignant, or complex combined pheochromocytoma.
Here is a link to the complete study: https://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/results/areas/cellphones/index.html
On Friday June 8, 2019, a Press Conference was held in Toronto, hosted by the Women’s College Hospital Environmental Clinic and led by Mr. Frank Clegg, former Microsoft Canada CEO. The conference featured a panel of presenters including Dr. Riina Bray (MD, FCFP, BASc, MSc, MHSc, Director at Women’s College Hospital), Dr. Magda Havas (Ph.D, B.Sc, Professor Emeritus, Trent University), Dr. Anthony Miller (MD, FRCP, FRCP (C), FFPH, FACE, Professor Emeritus, Dalla Lana School of Public Health) and Dr. Margaret (Meg) Sears (M.Eng., Ph.D., Sr. Clinical Research Associate at the Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, working on the Canadian Environmental Health Information Infrastructure project).
The panel discussion can be heard here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pxXgGauTdy0&feature=share
A workshop was held at the Women’s College Hospital, the day following the press conference, for physicians and health care facilitators to learn how to diagnose and support patients with Electro-hypersensitivities (EHS) and other environmental disorders & diseases. It was attended by more than 115 people in the medical field. Melissa Chalmers, a former London resident and commercial pilot, was one of the presenters at the workshop. Ms. Chalmers became ill after three telecommunications towers were erected around her Westmount area home several years ago. (I, myself, was diagnosed with Electro-hypersensitivity in 2013, after the installation of a smart hydro meter and a cellular tele-communications tower installed two blocks from my home.)
The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) has requested that the World Health Organization re-classify radio-frequency radiation as a Class 2A Probable Carcinogen, upgrading it from a Class 2B Possible Carcinogen. It is expected to be reclassified in the very near future.
The harm caused by radio-frequency electro-magnetic radiation is REAL! It is not some figment of vivid imaginations. It is documented by scientists and supported with irrefutable scientific evidence.
What is NOT documented, is proof positive that small cell antennae do not cause biological effects on plants, animals or humans.
A number of countries and US States have delayed or ban the 5G small cell installation, including (but not limited to): Brussels, Belgium; Switzerland; New Hampshire; Mill Valley, California. It should be noted that the use of radio-frequency technology has been used by the military as a weapon of defense since WWII. The Environmental Health Trust has a great deal of information curated for members of the Medical Field and the public. It can viewed here: https://ehtrust.org/key-issues/cell-phoneswireless/5g-internet-everything/20-quick-facts-what-you-need-to-know-about-5g-wireless-and-small-cells/
I strongly object to the installation of a 4+ / 5G Small Cell Pilot Project in London! I strongly urge the Municipality of the City of London place a moratorium on all 4+ / 5G Small Cell Projects until scientific proof can absolve the City of all liability for personal injury from radio-frequency electro-magnetic radiation emitted by the Small Cell Antennae used for the Pilot Project.
I respectfully request that the Rogers 4+ / 5G Small Cell Pilot Project be banned on the grounds that community input has not been sought from residents of the Pilot Areas and significant health risks exist to adopt a precautionary measure.
Respectfully Yours,
Laureen Maurizio
______________________________________________________________________
From: Gloria B (name given with permission)
Sent: June-24-19
To: editor@pentictonherald.ca
Subject: About cell tower near Penticton hospital
Attention: Editor
Re: Opinion section, June 20, 2019 – Response to Hans Karow
I was disappointed to read your editor’s note in response to Hans Karow in the June 20, 2019 edition of the Herald. I’m afraid you have been misinformed about cell towers, and the huge risk associated with them. Especially concerning is the fact that a cell tower could be built near our most vulnerable members of society – those who are being born in and trying to heal in our hospital.
Some of the major concerns include:
- Insurance companies will not insure the risk associated with cell tower radiation.
- There are hundreds of independent studies that confirm issues with cell tower radiation
- SC 6 is out of date and doesn’t address the new and significantly higher levels of radiation, not to mention it doesn’t apply to this type of radiation
I’m asking that you print a retraction of the outdated information that you included, and in the future do not include any information that is old and dated when talking about cell phone towers and the associated radiation. You are putting thousands of people at risk due to a lack of research and care, and the impact of this will be felt for generations to come. I’m including some links below for additional information.
Thanks,
Gloria (name given with permission)
*****
The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) first classified RFR as a possible human carcinogen (Group 2B) in 2011. Authors of the literature review say IARC should now upgrade RFR’s designation to carcinogenic to humans (Group 1).
https://monographs.iarc.fr/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/mono102.pdf
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.5694/j.1326-5377.1996.tb138661.x
https://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/asp/jmihi/2018/00000008/00000006/art00023
http://wifiinschools.com/uploads/3/0/4/2/3042232/wolf_and_wolf_2004_netanya.pdf
https://zero5g.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/Biological_effects_of_cell_tower_radiation_on_huma.pdf
Sharon Noble, Director, Coalition to Stop Smart Meters
“You will observe with concern how long a useful truth may be known, and exist, before it is generally received and acted on.” ~Ben Franklin
Sent from my safe, secure wired laptop with no Wi-Fi enabled.