[5G – Children – HESA – Hippocratic Oath – Letter to Jane Philpott / Reply from Tim Singer re Safety Code 6 & Health Canada Statements re CBC’s Marketplace with Wendy Mesley on Cell Phones – Let’s get Healthy California – Opposition to SB 649 by Sandi Maurer, EMF Safety Network and Mary Beth Brangan, EON Ecological Options Network – RFR – Studies – Susan Foster, EM-Radiation Research Trust Letter to LAUSD re EHS Accommodations in Schools & Revisions to Americans with Disabilities Act Policies – Telus Microcells / Small Cells – Wi-Fi – Wireless | BC – Canada – India – California, USA] & (video)
1) People are still getting responses to their emails re the CBC program re. cellphones. One, and a response back, is below in Letters. Tim Singer is trying to personalize letters to some extent, but he continues to miss the point. A question I asked in response to the same letter that I got a month (or longer) ago remains to be answered. If something is truly safe, how many good, solid studies will show that it isn’t safe? I suggest the number is zero. Yet Health Canada (HC) uses its “risk assessment” or “weight of evidence” to cherry pick the studies it wishes to consider and to disregard the rest. They got away with this for a long time but now we’re on to them. HC is not going to be able to continue to get away with this.
(click on photos to enlarge)
Why is Health Minister Philpott <Jane.Philpott@parl.gc.ca>, who is a doctor, not becoming educated on this very important health topic? Let’s keep pressure on her. She cannot be allowed to believe that she is following the Hippocratic code or doing her job which is to protect us.
2) More input about the dangers of and the reasons the industry is pushing microcells / small cells and, ultimately, 5G. We have to fight the microcells which follow the beneficial fiber optic cable that Telus is “offering”. The offering is a sleight of hand. Telus offers this safe, efficient fiber optic cable, bringing it to your home, but then following up, usually within days, with microcells that will irradiate you and your family without telling you or giving you a choice. And as for the fiber optic cable – it brings the signal to the Wi-Fi devices they install in your home. A double sleight of hand.
Is California Setting Up Precedent For The 5G Wireless Takeover? — The answer is no, not if all of the people fighting this in California are heard. But the industry has deep pockets and uses them to buy their way into the governments at all levels.
We have the benefit of California showing us the problems and the possible means of fighting for our civil rights and safety. Below is one letter from someone who has been active in both the smeter and the microcell battle. Her name is Sandi Maurer.
3) Another excellent letter from Susan Foster, a medical writer, to the Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD) about accommodating teachers and students who are sensitive. There is a lot of very important information in this letter and I hope you will share with teachers, parents and School Boards.
In her letter, Susan refers to 2 attachments which can be found at the following links:
From: Sandi Maurer name given with permission.
Sent: July 6, 2017
Subject: [EMF] [CA} SB 649 Update
Please see attached (at the links that follow) position statement and flyer from EMF Safety Network and Ecological Options Network. We strongly oppose SB 649 because it eliminates local zoning authority, conflicts with federal and other laws, and increases harmful radio frequency radiation (RFR). International independent scientists are calling for reducing RFR based on peer reviewed published science showing RFR harms the public and nature, and children are especially vulnerable.
SB 649 abandons the public to trust the telecom industry to certify safety and RFR compliance with laws.
Over 30 health, environment and consumer justice organizations oppose SB 649 including: Environmental Working Group, Sierra Club California, California League of Conservation Voters, Alliance of Nurses for Healthy Environments, Center for Environmental Health, The Utility Reform Network, Teens Turning Green, As You Sow, Baby Safe Project, Bay Area Educators for Safe Tech, California Brain Tumor Association, Ecological Options Network, EMF Safety Network, Environmental Health Trust, EMR Protection Forum, Green Sangha, Health & Habitat Inc, Marin Chapter of the Weston A. Price Foundation, Physicians for Safe Technology, Radiation Research Trust, Sacramento Smart Meter Awareness, Sage Associates, Scientists for Wired Technology, Seniors for Environmental Awareness, Stop Smart Meters,Veterans for Radiation Safety, Windheim EMF Solutions, Wireless Radiation Alert Network, Your Own Health and Fitness, and more.
A majority of these groups listed above oppose SB 649 based on the science of wireless harm.
California has a vision and policy goal called Let’s get Healthy California. https://letsgethealthy.ca.gov/ You can’t have both unlimited cell towers and a healthy environment. Please address the science of RFR harm.
The response from X to Mr. Singer’s email was inserted into his email – highlighted below.
On Jul 7, 2017, at 12:42 PM, Singer, Tim (HC/SC) <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
Thank you for once again for your further correspondence of March 26 and April 3, 2017, addressed to the Honourable Jane Philpott, Minister of Health, concerning the broadcast of an episode of CBC’s Marketplace on cellular phones and the Government of Canada’s response to the House of Commons Standing Committee on Health (HESA) report entitled “Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Radiation and the Health of Canadians”. I have been asked to respond on behalf of the Minister. I apologize for the delay in responding.
I wish to clarify the statement you quoted from the Marketplace broadcast, attributed to the Department. Health Canada’s complete statement provided to the CBC is as follows:
“Safety Code 6 limits for human exposure to radiofrequency (RF) energy are designed to provide protection for all age groups, including children, on a continuous basis (24 hours a day/seven days a week). This means that if someone, including a small child, were to be exposed to RF energy from multiple sources for 24 hours a day, 365 days a year, within the Safety Code 6 limits, there would be no adverse health effects.”
Health Canada’s intention was not to make a statement respecting exposure to a specific device. The original purpose of this statement was to clarify that Safety Code 6
I appreciate your sincere effort to respond but your information is outdated and false. Safety Code 6 is very outdated and exposes children and, indeed, all Canadians, to health hazards. I wish your department would put some effort into analyzing and reading the independent research rather than the corporate lobbyist profit motivated propaganda. Otherwise you are representing corporations at tax payer expense. The fact that you do not know Safety Code 6 is egregiously outdated, even compared to countries such as India, is terrifying and does not speak well for either your dept. or Min. Philpott.
When will you make an effort to update Safety Code 6? I know you have gone through some pro forma exercise recently but the input was biased and perverted by industry lobby groups.
provides protection for all age groups.
If individuals are concerned, the following practical measures can be taken to reduce your RF energy exposure when using a cell phone:
- limiting the length of cell phone calls;
- using “hands-free” devices; and
- replacing cell phone calls with text messages.
Thank you again for taking the time to write about this important issue. I hope my comments are helpful.
Director General, Environmental and Radiation Health Sciences Directorate
Health Canada / Government of Canada
Director, Coalition to Stop Smart Meters
“We can´t solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them”
~ A. Einstein