1) Here is the joint statement submitted by Dr. Meg Sears to the ISED calling for a moratorium re. the auction of millimeter wave frequencies which would be used by 5G technology. It includes some of the many studies and scientific reports published since 2017 that show harm resulting from exposure to microwave radiation. Thank you to all of you who submitted comments to the ISED.
Joint Statement to Industry, Science and Economic Development Canada (ISED) On behalf of Canadian experts and citizens’ Groups urgently calling for a moratorium on the release of the extremely high frequency millimetre wave spectrum (mmWaves) including the 26/28 and 38 GHz bands
2) With regard to the ongoing Evidentiary Hearing for Murray v Motorola (which starts at 9 am ET every day for the next few days), here is some history about this case from Arthur Firstenberg. Below in Letters is some information about the court’s refusal to accept Dr. Panagopolous as an expert witness. The judge’s reasoning makes no sense to me — except that it managed to help Motorola by excluding a potentially damaging expert on the subject.
MURRAY V. MOTOROLA GOES TO TRIAL AFTER 21 YEARS
I’ve listened to part of the proceedings for the last 2 days and found the testimony, especially by Dr. Kundi today, to be very interesting. Here is how you can connect. I couldn’t get the audio via Webex to work, so I watched the video and called into the number provided for Victoria BC (250-900-4337) and listened via phone.
1. Open your Web Browser in Google Chrome and copy and paste the following URL or click: https://dccourts.webex.com/meet/ctb518
2. Select Join, enter the Access Code/Meeting ID: 129 685 3445
AUDIO ALTERNATIVE: Instead of automatically using USE COMPUTER FOR AUDIO, you may select CALL-IN and follow the CALL-IN prompt window. It is very important that you enter the Access ID # so that your audio is matched with your video.
3) As children are returning to schools, they are being exposed to high levels of wireless radiation within their schoolrooms via Wi-Fi modems and other wireless devices. In addition, many schools here, as in the USA, are allowing cell towers to be erected on school property or transmitters on school buildings because schools need money. Given the demands for more cell transmitters to support the 5G grid, the telecoms will probably be approaching more School Boards for approval.
School Board members need to be informed about these dangers and held responsible when children become sick as a result. Unfortunately, many of the health effects are long term which will make it difficult to make the connection. It is our responsibility to educate Trustees, reminding them of their oaths of offices and obligation to protect both children and teachers.
(click on photo to enlarge)
Children’s Defense: No 5G Near Schools
“School districts around the country are risking our children’s health and safety by partnering with telecom giants Verizon, T-Mobile and AT&T, to install cell towers directly on school grounds in exchange for monetary gains. Yet, the scientific literature confirms the harms of RF radiation on children’s health, and no long-term studies exist that show 5G is safe. In fact, experts in the fields of human health and telecommunications recommend a minimum distance of 1640 feet between cell towers and school grounds.”
Re. Murray v Motorola — a email circulated to a large international group on which I was copied.
“This is huge, this case has been running for decades.
As far as I know, one of the witnesses is Dr Michael Kundi, on this email list. There was a huge procedure to determine what is credible “science” in this field. The court actually changed the whole legal basis for this process at least three times, it was incredibly convoluted. Dimitris Panagopolous was excluded as an expert witness because he used actual cell phones (he said he wanted to study the “real thing”) instead of a controlled mock-up of the radiation. The judge said this went against general scientific methodology in this field.
Panagopolous says that with controlled radiation, always at the same level, the studies are about 50/50 in finding problems. However, 97% of studies that look at the “real thing”, real-life exposures, find issues. The body adapts to constant levels of radiation. If levels are always fluctuating and exposure is intermittent (as with a real phone) it is harder for the body to adapt.
In the future, I wonder what people will say when they find that a top scientist was excluded from giving evidence on the danger of cell phones, specifically because he studied real-life handsets, instead of idealized radiation.
This court case has the possibility of seriously disrupting the wireless industry. When the case was originally announced, Vodafone stocks had their most disastrous two-week fall in their history (Vodafone was exposed through their major stake in Verizon, which they’ve subsequently sold). This court case was quite widely publicized and genuinely spooked the markets.
Since then, it’s all been kept very quiet. The fact that it’s moving into evidentiary hearings is an absolute unmitigated calamity for the wireless industry. We can only hope that some of the real facts are allowed to emerge in court.”
All the best
Karl Muller (name given with permission)
Sharon Noble, Director, Coalition to Stop Smart Meters/Citizens for Safer Tech
“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.” George Bernard Shaw