1) Devra Davis has tweeted a video by a neurosurgeon in Arizona who is seeing more young cancer patients and believes, based on the scientific evidence he’s seen, that cell phones are to blame.
https://twitter.com/saferphones?cn=ZmxleGlibGVfcmVjcw%3D%3D&refsrc=email (Several interesting videos. Scroll down to see the one by the neurosurgeon.)
2) IBM is reporting on a flaw that it discovered a year ago that could make many wireless devices subject to hacking — devices include smeters and insulin pumps. There is no explanation why this information is coming out only now. As if the vulnerability of wireless devices in general isn’t enough…
(click on photos to enlarge)
IBM Finds Flaw in Millions of Thales Wireless IoT Modules
“A patching effort has been underway for six months to upgrade Thales wireless communication modules that are embedded in millions of IoT devices, including smart meters and insulin pumps. Left unpatched, a vulnerability in the modules could allow attackers to control devices, IBM warns….
The modules are used in devices in a variety of industries, including healthcare, automotive, energy and telecommunications.”
Embedded in the article above is one on the costs and consequences of flaws being ignored or not fixed quickly enough. Shouldn’t we be demanding a moratorium on IoT connectivity being forced on us through 5G? Our safety, security and privacy, as well as our health, will be jeopardized to a greater degree than they are already with so many wireless devices.
Costs and Consequences of Gaps in Vulnerability Response
“Major data breaches continue to dominate the news, and almost 48% of organizations report that they have had a data breach in the past two years. As the severity and volume of attacks increase, the race to outpace attackers continues. Cybersecurity teams are not equipped enough to keep up, and need to leverage the right tools to detect and patch in a timely manner.”
https://www.bankinfosecurity.com/whitepapers/costs-consequences-gaps-in-vulnerability-response-w-5814 (In the article there is a link to the entire report which is 46 pages long.)
3) After receiving no response from Minister Bains re. cell phone testing, I wrote to a bureaucrat in ISED and received a very quick, though predictable, response. The stream of emails are below in “Letters” and you will see that the un-named author has not answered my question but has passed on the dangerously misleading statements promoted by Health Canada.
Please read from the bottom up.
From: Sharon Noble
To: “Certification Bureau / Bureau homologation (IC)” <firstname.lastname@example.org>, “simon kennedy” <email@example.com>
Sent: Friday, August 21, 2020 12:33:21 PM
Subject: Re: Cell phones exceeding SC 6 SAR
Dear Mr. Kennedy,
Thank you for your prompt response. At this time I do not wish to debate with you or ISED the adequacy of Safety Code 6 or the assertions that even children would suffer no health effects if exposed to cell phone radiation 24/7/365 since these issues are not within your mandate. Rather the purpose of my communication is to ask about ISED procedures for ongoing testing of cell phones that are being sold to and used by Canadians.
I am happy to hear that ISED audits and evaluates wireless devices sold in Canada. I would appreciate if you would provide the following information regarding testing procedures and results:
– Would you please provide documentation regarding the methods by which such monitoring is done?
– Are wireless devices being tested taken from the shelf or are they provided by the manufacturer?
– Has ISED tested off-the-shelf models of the cell phones that were found to have exceeded France’s allowance?
– May I request copies of the audit reports for cell phones tested over the last 5 years?
– Within the last 10 years has ISED found any wireless device to be in non-compliance and, if so, what actions were taken?
Thank you for your time, and I look forward to receiving your response.
From: “Certification Bureau / Bureau homologation (IC)” <firstname.lastname@example.org>
To: Sharon Noble
Sent: Friday, August 21, 2020 11:26:38 AM
Subject: RE: Cell phones exceeding SC 6 SAR
Dear Ms. Noble:
On behalf of Mr. Simon Kennedy, Deputy Minister of Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada and Dr. Mona Nemer, Chief Science Officer, I am writing in response to your emails regarding cell phones and radio frequency (RF) exposure.
The Government of Canada is committed to protecting the health and safety of Canadians from environmental risks, including those posed by overexposure to RF energy. As such, Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada (ISED)’s regulatory framework provides safeguards for Canadians. ISED has adopted Health Canada’s Safety Code 6 as the Canadian radiofrequency (RF) exposure limits for wireless devices and their associated infrastructure. To protect the public, these limits are set far below the threshold (at least 50-fold safety margin) for all known established adverse health effects and provide protection for all age groups, including children, on a continuous basis (24 hours a day, seven days a week). This means that if anyone, including a small child, were exposed to RF energy from multiple sources within the Safety Code 6 limits for 24 hours a day, 365 days a year, there would be no adverse health effects.
In turn, Health Canada’s scientific evidence indicates that the recommended SAR limit of 1.6 W/kg for cell phones is not the threshold for the occurrence of adverse health effects. As a precautionary measure, the SAR limit in Safety Code 6 was set to more than 50 times below the level at which excessive tissue heating could occur in the most sensitive tissue (the eye). This means that the SAR limits in Safety Code 6 would need to be exceeded by a factor of more than 50 before one would see any thermally related adverse health effects.
Furthermore, ISED requires that all manufacturers of wireless products, including cell phones, meet the regulatory requirements set forth in its technical standards. ISED’s technical standards are based on recognized international testing procedures that have been adopted by most countries around the world. When cell phones are tested for compliance, they are tested at full power for the duration of the test. In reality, cell phones operate at much lower power levels, to preserve battery life, maximize call time and avoid network interference. As such, under normal operating conditions, a cell phone yields much lower specific absorption rate (SAR) levels than levels measured during compliance testing performed in laboratory settings.
ISED also maintains a market surveillance program, which audits and evaluates a sampling of wireless devices currently on the Canadian market on an ongoing basis. The market surveillance program helps to ensure that wireless devices available to Canadians continue to meet the RF exposure requirements. If a wireless device is found to be in non-compliance, ISED will take immediate actions.
Additional information on Radiofrequency Energy and Safety can be found on our website.
Please accept my best wishes.
Certification and Engineering Bureau, Engineering, Planning and Standards Branch
Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada / Government of Canada (11)
IC.CertificationBureau-Bureauhomologation.IC@canada.ca / Tel: 613-990-4218 / TTY: 1-866-694-8389
Bureau d’homologation et services techniques, Direction générale du génie,
de la planification et des normes
Innovation, Sciences et Développement économique Canada / Gouvernement du Canada (11)
IC.CertificationBureau-Bureauhomologation.IC@canada.ca / Tél: 613-990-4218 / TTY: 1-866-694-8389
From: Sharon Noble
Sent: August 19, 2020 1:16 PM
To: Kennedy, Simon (IC) <email@example.com>
Subject: Cell phones exceeding SC 6 SAR
Dear Mr. Kennedy,
The Department of Innovation, Science and Economic Development (ISED) is responsible for enforcing the Radiocommunications Act which ensures that radiation emitting devices such as cell phones sold and used in Canada fall within the guidelines established by Health Canada, Safety Code 6.
I therefore am directing to you, Mr. Kennedy, the concern regarding the current use and marketing of cell phones which emit levels of radiation many times higher than the SAR limit of 1.6 W/kg.
In 2016, Dr. Marc Arazi announced to the world that in testing nearly 100 of the most popular cell phones sold in France, nearly 90% were found to have radiation emissions in excess of France’s standard. France’s SAR limit of 2 W/kg is higher than Canada’s Safety Code 6, 1.6 W/kg. Since that time, France has banned the sale of and recalled several cell phones that were on Dr. Arazi’s Phonegate list. (https://www.phonegatealert.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Dossier-de-presse-liste-des-mod%C3%A9les-%C3%A0-risques-28-juin-2018.pdf).
Independent testing of several cell phones sold in North America was done by the Chicago Tribune https://www.chicagotribune.com/investigations/ct-cell-phone-radiation-testing-methodology–20190821-whddrljk6fbmxoqh25u5t7lkb4-story.html. and results were consistent with those reported by Dr. Arazi. Dr. Om Gandhi reported that hundreds of cell phones in common use exceed US emission standards of 1.6 W/kg by as much as 11 times. https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/stamp.jsp?tp=&arnumber=8688629
Apparently these are the only cell phone emission tests done in either the US or Canada.
In May, 2020, France banned a “top-of-the-line” and popular gaming phone, the Razer Phone 2 after finding, under controlled testing, that its SAR was 3.29 w/kg when held 5 mm from the skin. The SAR, of course, increases dramatically when the distance is reduced, exceeding 10 W/kg when in direct contact with skin. https://www.phonegatealert.org/en/press-release-withdrawal-of-the-razer-phone-2-not-seeing-the-forest-for-the-trees When being used or carried, it is common for cell phones to be in touch with the body.
As far as I’ve been able to determine, ISED has not done any testing of off-the-shelf devices as a result of the findings noted above. Many of the cell phones which have been found by agencies other than ISED to have exceeded the standards established by Safety Code 6, for example the Razer Phone 2, are still being used and sold in Canada. Can you please explain why the Radiocommunications Act has not been enforced by ISED with regard to these devices?
Thank you for your time. I look forward to receiving your response at your earliest convenience.
Sharon Noble, Director, Coalition to Stop Smart Meters
“Success is not final, failure is not fatal: it is the courage to continue that counts.” Winston Churchill