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 Activism
claimed
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, Jamie Williams,
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)
(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: Science Today Indicates No Causal Link.
- The Tobacco Institute: It Maybe or May Not Be Harmful. We don't know.
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!
Sincerely,
Parents
for Safe School and SafeinSchool.Org