2017-05-04 Scientists are warning about brain tumors

[BC Human Rights Tribunal EHS Cases – Brain Tumours – CBC’s Marketplace with Wendy Mesley – Cell Phones – Conflict of Interest Act – EMFs – EMR – Ethical Guidelines – Health Canada Safety Code 6 – IoT Internet of Things – Minister of Health Mandate Letter from Prime Minister of Canada – Olga Sheean and Janis Hoffmann Letters to Elizabeth May and Jane Philpott – Open and Accountable Government – Smart Appliances and Smart Cities – Stop Smart Meters Ohio Facebook – The Goddard Report with Jim Goddard (Sharon Noble Interview) – WHO – Wi-Fi – Wingspread Conference on the Precautionary Principle – Wireless Hacking and Security Vulnerability | BC – Canada – Europe – Ohio, USA] & (audios & video)

(audio 20:22) BC Politicians Ignoring Smart Meter Issue. Sharon Noble – May 4, 2017:
(No proof smart meters reduce costs or energy use)
(podcast 20:16) BC Politicians Ignoring Smart Meter Issue – The Goddard Report with Jim Goddard – May 04, 2017:

1)    When I was growing up I never heard of anyone having a brain tumor. Now it seems if you ask just about anyone if they know someone who has or has had a brain tumor, the answer is yes. Just today in a casual discussion with someone he had just met in a doctor’s office, my husband mentioned this and the person, who was probably in her mid-late 20s, said yes, she had a friend with a brain tumor. Why can’t we at least have labels on cell phones warning to keep the phones away from heads, and not to let children use them?  The way research is going, it might not be too long before major lawsuits begin, but that won’t help people who already have these tumors….

(click on photos to enlarge)

Brain tumor warnings from scientists


2)    A new Facebook page and resistance group in Ohio. If you are on Facebook, I hope you will “like” and share your comments.


3)    Re. Cybersecurity and hacking: All of the untested, unsecured wireless “$$mart” technology is leaving us vulnerable in so many ways. But it takes money to make our grid, etc. secure, and it’s not being spent.

Smart Cities? Not until those cyber weaknesses get sorted

“… the race to make all things smart and interconnected have a raft of potential security vulnerabilities been introduced and simply overlooked? Marrying a variety of old legacy systems that have been in operation for a long time with new, bleeding edge technologies might be a recipe for cyber exploitation. Add in poor security standards on the devices used to connect these systems and the increasing availability of sophisticated hacking tools and we may be facing an uncertain future…

Smart TVs and devices such as Amazon’s Alexa are constantly listening in on your conversations. Your smart meter could leave you without heating or electricity if it fails, and is it really telling the truth about your energy consumption? Recently a customer of SSE was surprised when their smart meter showed they had used over £33,000 of power in a single day. This is a rather obvious error, but those of a smaller scale will be much less noticeable to the end consumer…

When it comes to security the track record of many device manufacturers is notoriously poor. In a highly competitive industry companies are in a hurry to get their products to market fast, frequently reducing testing times and leaving security as an afterthought as these add costs and delay product launch. This is why there are so many devices with factory-set credentials that cannot be changed, and little in the way of proper protection.”




From: Olga Sheean
Sent: May 3, 2017
To: elizabeth.may@parl.gc.ca
Cc: Janis Hoffmann ; Sharon Noble

Subject: Your reply to Janis Hoffman + important information about EMR
Importance: High

Dear Elizabeth:

Having written to you several times in the past, regarding the dangers of microwave radiation from WiFi, cell phones and other wireless devices, I was heartened to see that you replied to my friend Janis Hoffmann, and that you are, indeed, aware of the dangers.

However, I do not see how you have ‘addressed the concerns’ Janis raised, since you seem to misunderstand how Health Canada operates, and you make no mention of any action that you will be taking. What will you be doing in your role as an MP? What steps will you be taking to address this crucial issue and to protect our health?

You say:

Canada must be a world leader in protecting its citizens, and to do so Health Canada must continually reassess the available science on these issues. I will continue to stand up for this principle in Parliament.

Canada is far from being a world leader in protecting its citizens. Since all levels of government have been made aware of the proven dangers of microwave radiation, yet have done nothing to protect us, they are already guilty of reckless endangerment of the public, given their inaction and their failure to tell the truth. Worse still, they have intentionally denied the dangers and misrepresented the scientific facts. Health Canada is fully aware of the facts, yet chooses (for reasons to do with industry bias) to ignore, distort and misrepresent them. Far from being a part of the solution, it is, in fact, THE problem.

Kindly advise as to how you will ‘stand up for this principle in Parliament’, and how that would help, given Health Canada’s blatant denial of the facts and Minister Philpott’s assertion that this radiation presents no danger. For Health Canada to claim that a child can be exposed to a cell phone 24 hours a day, all year long, and not suffer any ill effects, is nothing short of criminal. Clearly, Health Canada is NOT applying the precautionary principle – or any other principle designed to actually protect our health. The only thing it seems to be interested in protecting is industry interests.

Please also see the attached report, which clarifies Health Canada’s multiple failures and shortcomings regarding SC6. Note that I never received a response to the questions posed in this document, and that Health Canada has demonstrated zero accountability in this respect. The truth is that Health Canada will never be able to answer these questions or justify its position, since doing so would expose its lies and its failure to take appropriate action.

Please also find attached a report I recently submitted to WHO, exposing its failure to fulfill its mandate of protecting global health, with regard to EMFs. Having worked for WHO in Geneva, I understand how things are manipulated behind the scenes and I have documented the fact that its EMF Project has been funded by the telecoms industry, and is actually run by an electrical engineer who has done research for the mobile phone industry. This blatant conflict of interest, combined with WHO’s denial of the facts, industry bias and disregard for humanity, has resulted in governments worldwide following WHO’s industry-driven lead and completely ignoring the rapidly emerging epidemic of microwave sickness/electro-sensitivity.

To my knowledge, you are the only Canadian MP who has acknowledged the proven dangers of electromagnetic radiation and responded in a positive way. Please don’t stop there. Words and good intentions are meaningless to those of us being progressively harmed. And it’s not just us.

If you have truly understood the issue, you will know that this is not just about YOU helping US. It’s about helping everyone (including you) who is being knowingly/unknowingly affected by this radiation, either directly (in terms of being physically harmed) or indirectly, in terms of our environment, food supply, healthcare systems and economic sustainability being threatened.

As someone who has had a brain tumour caused by WiFi/cell phone radiation, who has undergone brain surgery in a hospital bombarded with this same radiation, who has lost health, hearing, home and livelihood because of the inescapable radiation condoned and promoted by government, and who has received NO response to repeated requests for action to be taken, I take little comfort in knowing that a local MP is ‘standing up for a principle in parliament’. There are countless worthy principles inherent in the Canadian constitution, but they are meaningless unless they are actually enforced and backed up by action. When you also consider that the lawyers at the BC Human Rights Tribunal are appointed by this same industry-friendly government, and that one of those lawyers spent his career successfully defending the wireless telecoms industry – and now rules (negatively) on EHS cases – you begin to despair of finding any integrity, accountability or enforcement of human rights, at any level of government.

Together with Janis Hoffmann, Sharon Noble and the countless others who are doing all they can to inform the public about electromagnetic radiation (essentially, doing what public officials are elected to do, but without being paid for it), while pushing for this matter to be urgently addressed, I look forward to hearing what actions you plan to take for the benefit of your constituents, our shared environment, our food supply, and the health and well-being of all.

Olga Sheean
——– Forwarded Message ——–

Date: 26 Apr 2017
From: Elizabeth.May@parl.gc.ca
To: Janis Hoffmann


Dear Ms. Hoffmann,

Thank you for copying me on your email to the Hon. Jane Philpott, and for sharing your concerns about the effects of wireless radiation.

My position is simple: people should not be compelled to expose themselves to radiation that they believe to be harmful. This policy regarding wireless radiation is based on the “precautionary principle.” Since we do not yet know the long-term effects of exposure to these frequencies, people should be able to make their own choices, informed by science.

Though Health Canada asserts that the ‘totality’ of the evidence does not point to a link between cell phone use and increased health risks, it is hubris to think that we fully know the effects of all our brand new technologies. The least we can do is allow people to make fully informed choices – and ensure that they have the ability to make their decisions in full possession of all of the facts. Canada must be a world leader in protecting its citizens, and to do so Health Canada must continually reassess the available science on these issues. I will continue to stand up for this principle in Parliament.

Thank you again for writing. I hope I have addressed your concerns. It is an honour to serve as your Member of Parliament.


Elizabeth May, O.C.
Member of Parliament
Saanich – Gulf Islands
Leader of the Green Party of Canada

= = =

From: Janis Hoffmann
Sent: March 26, 2017
To: Hon.Jane.Philpott@Canada.ca
Cc: Prime Minister’s Office; marketplace@cbc.ca; Ayoub, Ramez – Député; Carrie, Colin – M.P.; Casey, Bill – M.P.; Davies, Don – M.P.; Eyolfson, Doug – M.P.; Kang, Darshan – M.P.; Leitch, Kellie – M.P.; Oliver, John – M.P.; Harder, Rachael – M.P.; Sidhu, Sonia – M.P.; Trudeau, Justin – Député; Webber, Len – M.P.; ~Health/Santé; Fry, Hedy – M.P.; May, Elizabeth – M.P.; Rankin, Murray – M.P.


Dear Hon. Health Minister Philpott,

On Friday night CBC Marketplace, broadcast a program called, “The secret inside your cellphone” [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wm69ik_Qdb8]

where it was explained the Minister of Health, which would be you, was unavailable to comment on the safety of cell phone use. Instead Health Canada submitted the most outrageous and irresponsible comment “EVEN IF A SMALL CHILD WERE EXPOSED TO A CELL PHONE… 24 HOURS A DAY, 365 DAYS A YEAR … THERE WOULD BE NO ADVERSE HEALTH EFFECT.

Your silence by refusing to inform the public of the potential health risks by not enforcing the safety manuals mandated by the federal government and included in all wireless technology makes you accountable for any and all permanent injuries to our children.

In January 1998, The Wingspread Conference held a three-day academic conference where the precautionary principle was defined. It involved 35 scientists, lawyers, policy makers and environmentalists from the United States, Canada and Europe.

It was agreed the Precautionary Principle would be implemented when an activity raises threats of harm to human health or the environment, even if some cause and effect relationships are not fully established scientifically. The precautionary principle shifts the burden of proof, insisting that those responsible for an activity must vouch for its harmlessness and be held responsible if damage occurs.

Your job and obligation to implement the Precautionary Principal and protect the public on this potential health crisis would have taken 5 minutes of your time to comment on the need to inform the public on the basic safety measures of using a cell phone and protect themselves and their children from the potential health risks from the radiation exposure.

Maybe it’s time to read over the mandated letter from Prime Minister Trudeau and the promises you made to live up to the highest ethical standards so Canadians could look up to their government with pride and trust?

We have committed to an open, honest government that is accountable to Canadians, lives up to the highest ethical standards, and applies the utmost care and prudence in the handling of public funds. I expect you to embody these values in your work and observe the highest ethical standards in everything you do. When dealing with our Cabinet colleagues, Parliament, stakeholders, or the public, it is important that your behaviour and decisions meet Canadians’ well-founded expectations of our government. I want Canadians to look on their own government with pride and trust.

As Minister, you must ensure that you are aware of and fully compliant with the Conflict of Interest Act and Treasury Board policies and guidelines. You will be provided with a copy of Open and Accountable Government to assist you as you undertake your responsibilities. I ask that you carefully read it and ensure that your staff does so as well. I draw your attention in particular to the Ethical Guidelines set out in Annex A of that document, which apply to you and your staff. As noted in the Guidelines, you must uphold the highest standards of honesty and impartiality, and both the performance of your official duties and the arrangement of your private affairs should bear the closest public scrutiny. This is an obligation that is not fully discharged by simply acting within the law. Please also review the areas of Open and Accountable Government that we have expanded or strengthened, including the guidance on non-partisan use of departmental communications resources and the new code of conduct for exempt staff.



This irresponsible statement is unacceptable, proving you have not fulfilled your obligation to the public by protecting them from potential harm.  It should not be up to the public to prove that a product is not safe but up to the industry to prove it is safe.

Janis Hoffmann


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.

Smart Meters, Cell Towers, Smart Phones, 5G and all things that radiate RF Radiation