Doctors and Scientists around the world have warned against unnecessary exposure of children to RF/microwave from wireless technology and recommend safer WIRED internet connection instead, both in school and at home. We are parents who fully support the use of computers and the incorporation of technology in education, and we believe that it must be implemented in a SAFE manner.
An
invaluable 19 min. lecture by world-renowned neurosurgeon and
research scientist Dr. Lief Salford of Lund University, Switzerland,
on research findings showing blood brain barrier leakage in
(thousands of) rat brains leading to increased albumin (neurotoxin)
uptake, memory loss and damage of up to 2% of brain cells.
A
MUST-SEE video for anyone who wants to know what the continuous
bombardment of WiFi's Beacon Signal Radiation sounds like. The
router in the video is only a consumer grade router for home use, whereas in
schools, the multiple routers installed are Commercial Grade access
points with even stronger microwave emission to provide wider
coverage.
Note from
the video that you MUST DISABLE both the wireless function of
the router AND the wireless function of the laptop/tablet in order
for the microwave emission to stop. Plugging in the Ethernet cable
connection doesn't mean the wireless functions automatically stop. However,
unplugging the power supply of the router and the device will stop
the radiation.
For
the radiation measurements of other iPad, iPhone, wireless Laptop and
iPod etc, see:
It
has been said that those who forget history are doomed to repeat
it.
As we consider the issue of Wi-Fi in public schools, let
us consider the case of Dr. Ignaz Semmelweiss.
In 1847 Dr.
Semmelweiss introduced the idea of disinfecting hands before
attending to pregnant mothers in labor drastically reducing the
incidence of puerperal fever and deaths in a maternity ward.
Despite
reducing death rates from a high of 35% to below 1%, his ideas were
not accepted by the Viennese medical community. In those days,
doctors would perform autopsies while waiting for expectant mothers
to deliver, and proceed from the autopsy room to the delivery room
without washing their hands thereby infecting both mother and child.
However, the medical establishment was insulted by the insinuation
that doctors were infecting patients.
In response, the medical
community mocked and shunned him. In 1865 Semmelweiss ended up in
"...an asylum, where he died at age 47 after being beaten by
guards only 14 days after he was committed." (quote from
Wikipedia)
Today there are bottles of disinfectant at the
entrances of public places due directly to the discovery of the
largely unrecognized pioneer, Dr. Ignaz Semmelweiss.
It was
not until the 1860s when Louis Pasteur discovered the Germ Theory
that the mechanism of infection was better understood. Building upon
the work of Semmelweiss and Pasteur, Joseph Lister, introduced the
sterilization of surgical instruments leading to better surgical
outcomes. Today, Lister's most visible contribution survives in
the form of the Listerine disinfecting mouthwash sold beside
toothpaste in many stores.
What is the lesson here? Long
before the mechanism of a medical condition is universally accepted,
the relationship between cause and effect can be observed through
experimentation.
This is the case today with microwave
radiation sickness emitted by devices that utilize wireless
communication. People suffering from physical symptoms such as pain,
nausea, headaches, migraines, heart palpitations, anxiety to name a
few, are ridiculed, told their symptoms are imaginary and widely
disregarded.
Long term exposure to such continued radiation
result in exhausted immune systems that can no longer cope under the
unrelenting stress of pulsed microwave radiation from Wi-Fi, cordless
phones, cellphones, game consoles, Smart Meters and other forms of
electro-smog. Such individuals experience a breakdown of the
body making them unable to work or to have any semblance of a normal
life. Since microwave radiation is so prevalent in modern cities,
they suffer in ridicule. Today, only the country of Sweden recognizes
electro-hypersensitivity as a disability.
Microwave and
radio-frequency radiation sickness has been documented by the
military since World War II. In 1971, the Naval Medical Research
Institute of the United States produced a report citing over 2300
references documenting biological effects of non-ionizing
microwave radiation. In 1973, the Canadian government published a
report titled, "Environmental Pollution by Microwave Radiation –
a Potential Threat to Human Health."
In May 2011, the
International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) - an arm of the
World Health Organization - classified radio-frequency
electromagnetic fields as possibly carcinogenic to humans. Research
is not lacking. What is lacking is the political will to
protect public health.
Let me close by asking a
question:
What do asbestos, DDT, lead paint, BPA and the drug
prescribed for morning sickness called Thalidomide have in common?
All were approved for public use by government authorities but
were subsequently withdrawn due to irreparable health effects.
Owing to the delay in governmental intervention, more than 10,000 children in 46 countries were born with deformities as a consequence of Thalidomide use. Canada was the last country to withdraw this drug from the market and the last country to offer compensation to the victims.
The
metal lead is also classified by the WHO IARC as a 2B carcinogen, the
same as radio-frequency microwave radiation. Lead paint was linked to
childhood deaths as early as 1904, but was only legislatively
withdrawn from the US market in 1971. If you wouldn't paint
your son or daughter's room with lead paint, or give them toys
contaminated with lead, you shouldn't be radiating them with Wi-Fi
microwave radio-frequencies either.
BPA or bisphenol A was
known to be potentially harmful to humans in the 1930s but Canada
only banned it in 2010.
The lesson from history is this:
Waiting for legislature and "safety authorities" to protect
human health is squandering the health of our children and school
staff in the name of following due process.
At the powerful
intersection of commerce, politics, education and public health,
public health is often the loser. With regards to Wi-Fi in public
schools, the question we should be asking is "What environmental
toxins can we avoid while preserving the best of what technology has
to offer for public education?" The answer to that is to
promote the use of wired computers and to disallow devices which emit
microwave radiation in public schools.
Make no mistake: by
opting to ban Wi-Fi from public schools, we are being forward
looking. We understand the lessons from history. We are choosing to
protect life over commercial interests and lucrative service
contracts. We choose uncompromised safety over convenience. We
choose health over planned obsolescence.
When we KNOW better,
we should DO better. Isn't it always better to be safe than
sorry?
WiFi
proponents often say that there is “no evidence” showing
low-level non-ionizing RF/microwave radiation can harm the human
body. This is aMYTH
and a LIE.
As stated in the Council of Europe Parliamentary Committee Report
(2011):
“Serious
scientific and medical studies revealing biological effects of a
pathological nature have existed since the 1930s concerning radio
frequencies and microwaves
from radar installations. Studies in the late 1970s also pointed out
the harmful effects of protracted exposure to the low or very low
frequency electromagnetic fields of electrical transmission lines or
computer screens. The WHO’s IARC (International Agency for
Research on Cancer) classified these fields as “possibly
carcinogenic” for humans (Group 2B) in 2001...
Scientific
studies concerning the negative effects of certain microwave
frequencies on plants, insects and wildlife or farm animals are
disturbing in more than one respect and the scientific studies
disclosing potentially pathogenic biological effects on the human
body are also important and not to be merely brushed aside.
These
studies are very numerous indeed: the 2007 “BioInitiative” report
analysed over 2000 of them, and more were added by an important
monograph published in 2010 by the Ramazzini Institute, the national
institute for study and control of cancer and environmental diseases
in Bologna, Italy.”
In
addition to the 2000 studies presented in 2007, the 2012
BioInitiative Report presents 1800 NEWstudies reporting bioeffects
and adverse health effects of electromagnetic fields (powerlines,
electrical wiring, appliances and hand-held devices) – and wireless
technologies (cell and cordless phones, cell towers, WI-FI, wireless
laptops, wireless routers, baby monitors, surveillance systems,
wireless utility meters ‘smart meters’.
*The
BioInitiative 2012 Report has been prepared by 29 authors from
10 countries*, ten holding medical degrees (MDs), 21 PhDs, and
three MsC, MA or MPHs. Among the authors are three former
presidents of the Bioelectromagnetics Society, and five full members
of BEMS.
PRESS
RELEASE
A new
report by the BioInitiative Working
Group 2012 says that evidence for risks to health has substantially
increased since 2007 from electromagnetic fields and wireless
technologies (radiofrequency radiation). The Report reviews over 1800
new scientific studies.Cell phone
users, parents-to-be, young children and pregnant women are at
particular risk.
“There
is a consistent pattern of increased risk for glioma
(a malignant brain tumor) and acoustic neuroma with
use of mobile and cordless phones” says Lennart Hardell,
MD at Orebro University, Sweden. “Epidemiological evidence
shows that radiofrequency should be classified as a human carcinogen.
The existing FCC/IEE and ICNIRP public safety limits and reference
levels are not adequate to protect public health.”
A dozen
new studies link cell phone radiation to sperm damage. Even
a cell phone in the pocket or on a belt may harm sperm DNA, result in
misshapen sperm, and impair fertility in men. Laptop computers with
wireless internet connections can damage DNA in sperm.
Based on
strong evidence for vulnerable biology in autism, EMF/RFR can
plausibly increase autism risk and symptoms. “While we
aggressively investigate the links between autism
disorders and wireless technologies, we should
minimize wireless and EMF exposures for people with autism disorders,
children of all ages, people planning a baby, and during
pregnancy,” says Martha Herbert, MD, PhD.
Wireless
devices such as phones and laptops
used by pregnant women may alter brain development of the fetus. This
has been linked in both animal and human studies to hyperactivity,
learning and behavior problems.
According
to David O. Carpenter, MD, and co-editor of the 2012 Report:
“There
is now much more evidence of risks to health affecting billions of
people world-wide. The status quo is not acceptable in light of the
evidence for harm.”
This
study covers EMF from powerlines, electrical wiring, appliances and
hand-held devices; and from wireless technologies (cell and cordless
phones, cell towers, ‘smart meters’, WI-FI, wireless laptops,
wireless routers, baby monitors, and other electronic devices).
Health topics include damage
to DNA and genes, effects on memory, learning, behavior, attention,
sleep disruption, cancer and neurological diseases like Alzheimer’s
disease. New safety standards are urgently needed for protection
against EMF and wireless exposures that now appear everywhere in
daily life.
When
the 1st (2007) BioInitiative Report was presented to
the European Parliament, the EU Parliamentarians scrutinized the
report. Then based on its findings, they voted near-unanimously to
pass immediate resolutions (559-22 votes in 2009 and 522-16 votes in
2008) calling for stricter, more updated exposure standards and
calling for adoption of the Precautionary Principle, especially for
children, pregnant women and the youth.
“wireless
technology (mobile phones, Wi-Fi / WiMAX, Bluetooth, DECT landline
telephones) emits EMFs that may have adverse effects on human
health... particularly to young people whose brains are still
developing”.
"...the
limits on exposure to electromagnetic fields which have been set for
the general public are obsolete .
They do not take account of developments in information and
communication technologies or vulnerable groups, such as pregnant
women, newborn babies and children . "
The
EU Parliament "calls on the Member States to follow the example
of Sweden and to recognize persons that suffer from
electrohypersensitivity as being disabled so as to grant them
adequate protection as well as equal opportunities ."
The
followings are new studies published in the month of January 2013
which show biological effects of electromagnetic radiation at
cellphone, WiFi, powerline intensities.
ALL
these biological effects are being denied by Health Canada's and
US FCC's outdated "safety" standard because they claim that if the
radiation doesn't heat up one's body, nothing else happens! They use
a plastic head called S.A.M. (Specific Anthropomorphic Mannequin)
filled with fluid to do their "heating" test. It is only
tested for 6 minutes, not chronic exposure as in real life, and the test
has no provision for any biological change except temperature
change.
The
S.A.M. head is sized for a 220 lb and 6'2" American soldier.
“The
authors summarize that exposureto
a 1.8 GHzelectromagnetic
fieldmay inhibit
the ciliarybeat frequencyvia
an "novel protein
kinase C"
dependent mechanism...”.
“The
authors concluded that the results show some support for a positive
association between childhood
leukemiariskand
paternal occupation involving [electromagnetic] social contact.
Additionally, the study provided additional evidencefor
higher occupational [electromagnetic] social class being a risk
factorfor childhood
leukemia. ”
“The
authors summarize that the exposureto
a radiofrequencyelectromagnetic
fieldat
1.8 GHz … led
to proteinoxidationin
the braintissueand
an increase in serumnitric
oxidelevel.
“
“The
authors conclude that exposureto
a wireless device of 2.45 GHzcould induce oxidative
stressin
the dorsalroot ganglion[a
nodule on the dorsal root of the spine that contains nerve
cells]... ”.
“These
findings suggest that prenatalexposureto
complex magnetic
fieldsof
a narrow intensity window during development could result in subtle
but permanent
alterations in hippocampalstructure
and function. ”
Reported Biological Effects from Radiofrequency Radiation at Low-Intensity Exposure (Cell Tower, Wi-Fi, Wireless Laptop and 'Smart' Meter RF Intensities)* Click on the image or the link to access all pages.
I am a pediatric
neurologist and neuroscientist on the faculty of Harvard Medical
School and on staff at the Massachusetts General Hospital. I am
Board Certified in Neurology with Special Competency in Child
Neurology, and Subspecialty Certification in Neurodevelopmental
Disorders.
I have an extensive
history of research and clinical practice in neurodevelopmental
disorders, particularly autism spectrum disorders. I have published
papers in brain imaging research, in physiological abnormalities in
autism spectrum disorders, and in environmental influences on
neurodevelopmental disorders such as autism and on brain development
and function.
I recently accepted an
invitation to review literature pertinent to a potential link between
Autism Spectrum Disorders and Electromagnetic Frequencies (EMF) and
Radiofrequency Radiation (RFR). I set out to write a paper of modest
length, but found much more literature than I had anticipated to
review. I ended up producing a 60 page single spaced paper with over
550 citations. It is available at
In fact, there are
thousands of papers that have accumulated over decades – and are
now accumulating at an accelerating pace, as our ability to measure
impacts become more sensitive – that document adverse health and
neurological impacts of EMF/RFR. Children are more vulnerable than
adults, and children with chronic illnesses and/or neurodevelopmental
disabilities are even more vulnerable. Elderly or chronically ill
adults are more vulnerable than healthy adults.
Current technologies were
designed and promulgated without taking account of biological impacts
other than thermal impacts. We now know that there are a large array
of impacts that have nothing to do with the heating of tissue. The
claim from wifi proponents that the only concern is thermal impacts
is now definitively outdated scientifically.
EMF/RFR from wifi and cell
towers can exert a disorganizing effect on the ability to learn and
remember, and can also be destabilizing to immune and metabolic
function. This will make it harder for some children to learn,
particularly those who are already having problems in the first
place.
Powerful industrial
entities have a vested interest in leading the public to believe that
EMF/RFR, which we cannot see, taste or touch, is harmless, but this
is not true. Please do the right and precautionary thing for our
children.
I urge you to step back
from your intention to go wifi in the LAUSD, and instead opt for
wired technologies, particularly for those subpopulations that are
most sensitive. It will be easier for you to make a healthier
decision now than to undo a misguided decision later.
Parent
Groups Warn against WiFi Industry posing as consumer watchdog
To
School Boards and the public: A group of computer software personnel
who serve the wireless industry posed itself as a consumer
protection watchdog. This group called Bad Science Watch recently
issued a report1
to attack concerned scientists and citizens who raise awareness about
the well-documented health impacts2
of WiFi and wireless technology, especially on children.
The
committee chair of this report, Gem Newman, is the lead developer at
Invenia Technical Computing3.
Invenia's customers are utility companies who are rolling out
radiating wireless smart meters4.
Committee member Adrian Powell is a software contractor.
No one in this committee has any credential regarding the
interaction between electromagnetic radiation and human biology.
Just
like the tobacco and asbestos industries have done in the past, this
group diligently promotes the myth that there is no risk from WiFi
radiation. They ignore all peer-reviewed scientific
studies showing harm of microwave and electromagnetic fields on
animals and humans, and ignore the calls for precaution by legitimate
doctors associations5,
the International Agency for Research on Cancer6,
the European Parliament7,
the Council of Europe8
as well as scientists around the world who conduct research on
electromagnetic radiation.
Swisscom,
Switzerland's largest IT services provider, recognized the genotoxic
effects of WiFi routers. The science behind was elaborated in
Swisscom's patent filed in 2003 when they attempted to reduce such
danger through an automatically-deactivated router design18.
Unfortunately, North American manufacturers have not adopted this
patent, but continue to produce WiFi routers which bombard humans and
all living beings with microwave beacon signals, 24/7.
In
December, 2012, The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP),
representing 60,000 pediatricians and pediatric surgeons, warned
against "the potential dangers of RF energy exposure" on
children and pregnant women: "The differences in bone density
and the amount of fluid in a child’s brain compared to an adult’s
brain could allow children to absorb greater quantities of RF
(radiofrequency) energy deeper into their brains than adults... the
current exposure limits may not reflect the latest research on RF
energy".9
In
October, 2011, Health Canada encouraged parents to reduce children's
radiofrequency exposure, because “children are typically more
sensitive" and "there is currently a lack of scientific
information regarding the potential health impacts of cell phones on
children".10
Industry
propagandists have no regards for the health of children as long as
the negative health impact of WiFi and wireless devices remains
inconclusive, as long as the archaic radiation exposure limits of
Health Canada doesn't change, and the profits from the sale of such
technology is not affected. They even exploit low income families,
making up an absurd excuse that these families “rely on wireless
networks”. Any experienced professional can instantly debunk
this lie. Wireless is a convenience (at the expense of health), but
not a necessity. Children from low-income families, just like
children from any family, need a safe and healthy environment for
them to grow and learn. Wired connection provides fast and secure
access to the internet and educational resources, without the risk of
radiation. In most instances, wireless mobile devices such as
smartphones and tablets cost more than wired equipment and are
designed with planned obsolescence to drive product sales.
Follow
the $ MONEY $
As
more and more voices around the world draw the public's attention to
the potential danger of WiFi and wireless technology, it is not
surprising that the industry makes extra efforts to obfuscate the
picture18.
This report called Investigation
of Anti-WiFi Activismclaimed
to
“investigate
the motivations, funding sources, agendas, and conflicts of
interest”.
Ironically, it is the report's own publishers who are full of
conflicts of interest.
Executive
Director of
Bad Science Watch, JamieWilliams,
is a software developer for Layer 7 Technologies which supplies
software for smartphones, tablets, wireless smart meters as well as
Cisco WiFi routers (access points) which are aggressively marketed to
school boards across Canada11.
Also, BSW is a spin-off organization of Center for Inquiry12
which is financed by electronic tycoon Lorne Trottier. 13.
RF/EMF emitted by wireless devices has been classified by the World
Health Organization as a 2B possible cancer risk while Trottier's
Oncocyme Pharma specializes in selling cancer treatment14.
Shall we ask: who has “financial
motives”? (N.B. Trottier's relationship with the wireless industry is explained here: http://www.safeinschool.org/2013/04/conflict-of-interest-influences-emf.html)
Conflict
of interest is a rampant problem that hinders the science on
electromagnetic radiation15.
Instead of following profit-driven corporate agendas, school boards
and parents must examine non-industry funded, independent research16
and professional opinions of genuine experts17.
In
2010, Dr. Annie Sasco - Teaching fellow of Harvard University and
former Chief of the World Health Organization's Cancer Control
Programme - testified to the Canadian Parliament Standing Committee
on Health, “With regard to electromagnetic fields, we have, of
course. more than plenty of evidence of exposure... We may never have
the absolute final proof, but if our goal is to reduce somewhat the
burden of cancer and other chronic diseases in the years to come, we
have enough data to go ahead with a precautionary principle to avoid
unnecessary exposure.”19
We
as parents support the use of technology as a tool in education, and
believe that wired connection to the internet is the best way to
provide educational benefits without long-term health risks for
children. Unfortunately, avoiding unnecessary exposure for health is
not the priority of trillion-dollar corporations.
21st
Century Learning was a marketing scheme invented by IT giants
Cisco, Bill Gates and Promethean through their Global Education
Leaders' Program (GELP)20.
Aptly
stated by Tara Ehrcke, President of Greater Victoria Teachers'
Association: “To sell more IT products, the 21st Century
Learning advocates create a need for those products. No longer
should schools spend their resource and IT budgets only on textbooks
and computer labs. Anytime, anywhere, collaborative, integrated,
blended learning requires a massive infusion of new IT products.”21
If
children need SMART wireless gadgets to make them smarter, why
do Silicon Valley executives send their children to no-tech Waldorf
schools?22
Increasing
profits and market share are the priorities of corporations. Their
marketing machines crawl through commercial, political and
educational institutions. They crawl through the internet and the
media, even disguised as consumer advocates, citing
industry-funded studies to mitigate the harm of wireless technology
shown in non-industry-funded studies, attacking citizens' right to
take precaution, and mocking parental protection of children's
health. These are the same shameful tactics employed by tobacco
companies for decades, while numerous deaths resulted from their
delay and denial.
Tobacco Industry Statements:
Philip
Morris Compared Smoking To Eating Applesauce.
Philip
Morris CEO Told Pregnant Women That Cigarette Smoking Was Not Harmful
To Babies.
RJR Chairman: ScienceToday Indicates No Causal Link.
The Tobacco Institute: It Maybe or May Not Be Harmful. We don't know.
http://youtu.be/txYH8RCC-Qk
Nobody
but parents has the biggest stake in our children's health and
well-being. We refuse industry propaganda which promotes their
business but pretends to speak as our watchdog. NO,
THANKS!
