I apologize for the disruption with the Updates which was caused by a major computer problem. To try to catch up, I will be sending out updates this weekend.
1) 5G seems to be getting people involved and causing concerns about RFR exposure. Maybe something good will come from this travesty.
(click on photos to enlarge)
Parents Enraged about Cell Tower Antennas Installed on School Rooftop; Superintendent Calls Police to Break Up Meeting
“T-Mobile antennas installed on the rooftop of an elementary school in Wyandotte, MI drew angry parents, and then police, to the school following a heated debate last week, noted WXYZ-TV. The school had originally contracted with the carrier to lease the school rooftop site back in 2018 at a rate of $1,000 per month. Construction was delayed at Washington Elementary School due to COVID, according to the carrier. Parents contended they were not aware of the agreement….
“For us to now find out what this monstrosity is on top of the kids’ elementary school was truly shocking, and that’s why you saw some of the animosity here tonight,” parent Josh Castmore told WDIV-TV. Parents threatened taking legal action against the site before being disbursed by the police.”
2) Phonegate and 5 other groups are calling out ANSES (French equivalent to Health Canada) for its conflicts of interests as displayed at a recent conference.
Six associations suspend their participation in the Radiofrequency and Health Dialogue Committee of ANSES
“The signatory associations believe that, contrary to the aforementioned ANSES petition of principle, this committee no longer presents the conditions for a true dialogue and no longer guarantees the scientific rigor that should prevail in risk assessment concerning public health issues related to electromagnetic fields.
In this respect, the conference organized by ANSES and WHO in Paris last November on the links between cancers and exposure to radio frequencies appeared to us to be scientifically biased. Instead of an objective assessment of the state of knowledge, we attended a biased conference.”
https://phonegatealert.org/en/six-associations-suspend-participation-in-dialogue-committee-anses/
3) Over and over again, as evidence builds, credible independent scientists are calling for microwave radiation to be upgraded as a carcinogen yet WHO, FCC, Health Canada, the Cancer Society and others deny harm is possible at non-thermal levels. But reports such as this are reaching more and more people like the parents in item #1 — finally.
Top Scientists Find ‘Substantial Scientific Evidence’ RF Radiation Causes Cancer
Based on the results of their landmark review of the latest science, four of the world’s top experts in environmental health called for prevention and precaution when it comes to public exposure to radiofrequency radiation….
They pointed out that senior advisers to the World Health Organization, including Dr. Lennart Hardell, have said that if RF radiation were evaluated based on more current studies, it would likely be upgraded to a probable — if not confirmed — human carcinogen…..
According to the authors, the public discourse around RF radiation has been distorted by some “fundamentally flawed” yet widely publicized reports — written by “industry-affiliated scientists” — purporting to show “no health risk.”…
Davis said scientists and the public realized the studies suggesting tobacco was safe were “manufactured” by the tobacco industry — and the same thing is happening now with RF radiation and the telecom industry, she added.”
https://childrenshealthdefense.org/defender/radiofrequency-rf-radiation-cancer/
Here is the review:
Problems in evaluating the health impacts of radio frequency radiation
“Recent experimental and epidemiological studies have added considerably to the record and have led Miller et al., 2018 to conclude that on the basis of evidence amassed as of 2018 RFR constitutes a class one proven human carcinogen. Another more recent report concurred (Hardell and Carlberg, 2020), as do the recent publications by Lin (2022b) and the (International Commission on the Biological Effects of Electromagnetic Fields (ICBE-EMF), 2022). This paper builds further on those records and provides an update on the science applying the principles for deducing a causal relationship between RFR and cancer.
These conclusions regarding the carcinogenic and other potential adverse effects of RFR are not shared equally, with strong dissent provided by a vocal number of industry-affiliated scientists (Foster et al., 2000, 2022; Grimes, 2021; Repacholi, 2010). While some that have questioned the causal nature of the relationship may be well-meaning, a disproportionate number of those who discount the data are in the direct or indirect employ of the affected telecom industries. As a result, the ability to carry out independent analysis of the matter remains hampered, fueled in no small part by the genuine complexity of the topic and by a well-organized effort to ‘manufacture doubt’ (Alster, 2015; Weller et al., 2022).”
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0013935122023659
Letters:
From: “Oona McOuat” (name given with approval)
To: “Timothy Peterson” <tpeterson@islandstrust.bc.ca>, jharris@islandstrust.bc.ca, “Laura Patrick” <lpatrick@islandstrust.bc.ca>, ssiinfo@islandstrust.bc.ca, “directorssi” <directorssi@crd.bc.ca>
Sent: Tuesday, March 7, 2023 8:41:33 PM
Subject: Please force Rogers to stop cell tower development on Channel Ridge
Dear Timothy, Jamie, Laura and Gary,
I was appalled to learn today that Rogers is forging ahead at the Channel Ridge site despite your clear directive not to. This blatant lack of respect cannot be accepted. This large corporation must respect the LTC’s authority and rights, and I encourage you to put an immediate legal stop to further development.
Remember, although ISED has the final say about tower siting in Canada, as the LUA, the LTC is entitled to enter into an official dispute resolution process with the proponent, Rogers, and to give valid reasons for refusing this tower, reasons which were not adequately discussed in the original application process.
And there are many:
- Given that this site is adjacent to a nature reserve and sensitive watershed we should be concerned about the environmental effects on flora and fauna, with a specific emphasis on the effects on birds, bats and other wildlife (collisions with towers, electrocution, entanglement, habitat disturbance and fragmentation, the effects of lighting needed to conform to aeronautical requirements, RFR which may disorient natural navigation fields or affect reproductive or other biological systems.)
- the fire hazard this tower poses, especially in a drought-prone forested area
- its close proximity to homes, including effects of noisy cooling fans and aeronautical lights
- procedural errors – specifically the fact that the antenna siting protocol we had in place was not used for this siting
- the demonstrated archaeologicalsignificance of this site to First Nations
- the lack of valid demonstrated need and community support for this project.
- I encourage you to act on this quickly.
I hope to have the opportunity to meet Timothy and Jamie one of these days. My work schedule does not permit me to attend LTC meetings as currently scheduled.
All the Best,
Oona McOuat
Salt Spring Island
Sharon Noble, Director, Coalition to Stop Smart Meters/Citizens for Safer Tech
“The absence of evidence is not proof of safety.” Dr. Devra Davis
Sent from my wired laptop with no wireless components. Practice Safe Tech.