[5G mmW Microcell / Small Cell Towers Antenna Siting Legislation – 1996 Telecommunications Act Section 704 – AAP – Acoustic Neuromas – Animals – BC Hydro Substation (Fire Risk, Lord Roberts School Annex) – Bees – Big Telecom – Birds – Brain Gliomas – Cancer – Captured Agency by Norm Alster – CDC – Cell Phones – Cell Tower Worker Accidents – Children – DNA – Doctor Ronald L. Melnick – EHT – Environment – EPA – FCC – FDA – Firefighters’ Exemption from SB 649 – Health – Heart Schwannomas – Hospitals – IAFF – IBEW – ICNIRP – IoT – Lawsuits – Mark Dowie – Mark Hertsgaard – Military EMR Weapons – NTP – Privacy – Ramazzini Institute – RFR – Safety – SAR – SB 3157 (John Thune, Brian Schatz) – Schools – Scientist Appeal for 5G Moratorium – Smart Appliances – Sprint – Studies – Theodora Scarato – Verizon – Vienna Medical Association – Wireless Devices – Write to VSB | Vancouver, BC – Canada – Belgium – Chile – China – France – Greece – India – Israel – Italy – Poland – Russia – Switzerland – Sacramento, California & Miami, Florida & Atlanta, Georgia & New York, New York & Dallas,Texas & Washington, DC, USA]
1) Vancouver School District and BC Hydro finalized agreement to build a substation under a school and daycare. Unbelievable that children will be put at such risk, especially by the school trustees whose duty it is to protect children.
(click on photos to enlarge)
VSB and BC Hydro finalize deal over Lord Roberts Annex school
“An earlier version of the story said $65 million will be used to build a new school and child-care spaces in Coal Harbour. In fact, the money will go towards a school and child-care spaces in Coal Harbour as well as construction of a new school at the Lord Roberts Annex site.”
If you would like to express your dismay, here are the emails for the Vancouver School Board Members:
firstname.lastname@example.org ; email@example.com; firstname.lastname@example.org; email@example.com; firstname.lastname@example.org; email@example.com; firstname.lastname@example.org
2) Dr. Melnick refutes ICNIRP’s conclusion that the NTP and Ramazzini studies are not significant and do not call for a revision of ICNIRP’s 20 year old exposure guidelines.
US Scientist Criticizes ICNIRP’s Refusal to Reassess Cell Phone Radiation Exposure Guidelines after US National Toxicology Program Studies Show Clear Evidence of Cancer in Experimental Animals
“The conclusion in the ICNIRP report that the NTP study is not consistent with the RFR cancer literature is wrong, and the claim by ICNIRP that epidemiological studies have not found evidence for cardiac schwannomas neglects to note that no studies of cell phone users have examined relationships between RFR exposure to the heart and risk of cardiac schwannomas. While it is true that the NTP did not report an increase in vestibular schwannomas in rats, it must be recognized that the vestibular nerve was not examined microscopically. The NTP findings of significantly increased incidences and/or trends for gliomas and glial cell hyperplasias in the brain and schwannomas and Schwann cell hyperplasias in the heart of exposed male rats are most important because the IARC classified RFR as a “possible human carcinogen” based largely on increased risks of gliomas and acoustic neuromas (which are Schwann cell tumors on the acoustic nerve) among long term users of cell phones. The concordance between rats and humans in cell type affected by RFR is remarkable and strengthens the animal-to-human association.
Based on numerous incorrect and misleading claims, the ICNIRP report concludes that “these studies (NTP and Ramazzini) do not provide a reliable basis for revising the existing radiofrequency exposure guidelines.” The data on gliomas of the brain and schwannomas of the heart induced by cell phone radiation are suitable for conducting a quantitative risk assessment and subsequent re-evaluation of health-based exposure limits. The ‘P’ in ICNIRP stands for Protection. One must wonder who this commission is trying to protect – evidently, it is not public health.”
3) A very interesting article that describes the influence the telecom industry has in the USA where, like the tobacco industry, money influences politicians and has resulted in unregulated proliferation of microwave radiation and wireless devices. Canada is no different. We and local governments have been stripped of our rights to determine where cell towers and microwave transmitters are installed. Telecoms are protected against lawsuits when they cause harm. As the author says, it’s time for dedicated action and to make our voices heard. We need to organize, protest, demand changes.
Opinion: Why Isn’t Our Government Protecting Us?” Environmental Health Trust Resources Alert On Health Risks of 5G Rollout
“What are the health effects? It would not be surprising if you were unaware of some of them, since telecommunications companies are major advertisers in mainstream news outlets and are powerful lobbyists with both parties on the Hill…
Perhaps most concerning is a 2016 review in “Electromagnetic Biology and Medicine” which found that 93% of research studies which investigated oxidative stress, found that wireless exposure induced oxidative stress levels. Induction of oxidative stress is a key characteristic of many human carcinogens. Oxidative stress can lead to a cascade of harmful effects in the body, initiating a myriad of illnesses ranging from cancer to autoimmune problems.
Believe it or not, no US Federal health agency – not the EPA, FDA, nor the CDC – has done a proper systematic review of the current scientific research on wireless nor on the newest technology, 5G, to assess its public health impacts. Our so-called “safety limits” are based on 30- year-old science. The EPA was defunded on the issue, and the agency now states that US radiation limits “do not apply” to long term daily exposures to 5G. In other words, there is no effective oversight over the health effects from telecom radiation in the US…
Internal telecommunications company documents clearly show that telecoms are aware that 5G will increase the levels of RF radiation in the vicinity of the antennae. Many countries — China, India, Poland, Russia, Italy and Switzerland — have stricter radiation limits than do we in the United States, and the telecom industry states that these more protective limits represent a “critical concern,” as the regulations will not allow the full deployment of 5G in those countries. In Switzerland, the telecom industry launched large-scale public relations effort to do away with these restrictions, yet the Swiss Parliament still voted “no” on 5G.”