5G and Small Cell Threats to Public Health

WUSA9 Report: Verizon permit delayed over ‘alarming’ radio frequency predictions in Takoma Park

Verizon permit delayed over ‘alarming’ radio frequency predictions in Takoma Park
‘Worst-case predictive modeling’ concludes exposure could be 25-times higher than the FCC limit.
Author: Scott Broom | WUSA9
Published: 10:59 PM EST November 7, 2019
Updated: 10:59 PM EST November 7, 2019

Related Links:

Community Vision Takes Stand on Cell Tower Safety at Local Building

ACTION ALERT: The Montgomery County Council will be holding a Public Hearing on Bill ZTA 19-07 on Tuesday, November 19th at 7:30pm at the Montgomery County Council Building

Posted by twtpadmin in Action Alert, Legislation, 0 comments

URGENT: We need your help, again – to STOP ZTA 19-07

Montgomery County Coalition to Control Cell Towers-MC4T

Dear neighbors,

Councilmember Reimer is back with yet another industry tilted Zoning Text Amendment (ZTA) 19-07 – written by and for the exclusive benefit of Big Wireless.

ZTA 19-07 does NOT protect residents.

It is another retread in a series of bad bills that reduces cell pole setbacks in residential zones and further erodes the already insufficient procedural protections for residents.   Bottom line:  ZTA 19-07 will make it faster, easier and cheaper for Big Wireless to install large cellpoles in very close proximity to homes.

ZTA 19-07 must be stopped! 

How can you help defeat ZTA 19-07?

  • Attend the only scheduled public hearing  and voice your strong opposition to ZTA 19-07 at 7:30PM on Tuesday November 19, 2019 at Council Office Building in Rockville. (You may still be able to sign up to testify here.) Regardless, put this on your calendar and please plan to attend!
  • Email and call members of the Council to express your oppostion to 19-07. (It is very important that the four brand new members of the Council (Albornoz, Friedson, Glass and Jawando) hear from residents about our strong disapproval of ZTA 19-07.  Those four new Councilmembers were not  part of prior wireless ZTA reviews

Residents have been pleading with the Montgomery County Council for 3 years to work with us and to work with the County Executive to write and pass comprehensive legislation that truly protects neighborhoods from obtrusive and ugly wireless contraptions in close proximity to homes,  and to fix the administrative deficiencies of all current wireless telecommunications and related ordinances to provide equity, transparency and fairness for residents.

Please follow @MC4TORG on twitter and like/repost our most recent tweet regarding ZTA 19-07.

And, thanks so much for your continued support!

Rick Meyer

on behalf of

http://www.mc4t.org/

 

Posted by twtpadmin in Action Alert, Legislation, 0 comments

The Montgomery County Council will be holding a Public Hearing on Bill ZTA 19-07 on Tuesday, November 19th at 7:30pm at the Montgomery County Council Building

The Montgomery County Council will be holding a Public Hearing on Bill ZTA 19-07 on Tuesday, November 19th at 7:30pm at the Montgomery County Council Building.  If this Bill passes, it will allow the deployment of Small Cell Millimeter Microwave radiating antennas in "some" residential areas every 2-3 or so homes only 30 feet away from our houses.

Rick Meyer, President of the Montgomery County Coalition for the Control of Cell Towers provides this commentary:

  • Residents defeated three previous attempts since 2016 to pass zoning legislation on behalf of Big Wireless to make it faster, simpler and cheaper to install wireless transmitters in close proximity to residences. (ZTA 19-07 is the fourth attempt since 2016 and the third sponsored by Councilmember Reimer.)
  • Unfortunately, residents were not able to defeat ZTA 18-02 last year which removed protections for apartment and condo dwellers in Commercial zones)
  • Reimer’s 19-07 is no better than what had been defeated previously.
  • And, 19-07 does nothing to fix procedural inequities and lack of opportunities for input by residents. Which is why the residents of Montgomery County have been pleading with the Council for 3 years for comprehensive Legislation that truly protects their neighborhoods from intrusive and ugly wireless contraptions.
  • ZTA 19-07 does NOT protect residents. It is another retread in a series of bad bills written by and for the exclusive benefit of Big wireless.

Here is what you can do now.

Gabe Albornoz 240-777-7959
Councilmember.Albornoz@montgomerycountymd.gov
View Staff List for Gabe Albornoz

Andrew Friedson 240-777-7828
Councilmember.Friedson@montgomerycountymd.gov
View Staff List for Andrew Friedson

Evan Glass 240-777-7966
Councilmember.Glass@montgomerycountymd.gov
View Staff List for Evan Glass

Tom Hucker 240-777-7960
Councilmember.Hucker@montgomerycountymd.gov
View Staff List for Tom Hucker

Will Jawando 240-777-7811
Councilmember.Jawando@montgomerycountymd.gov
View Staff List for Will Jawando

Sidney Katz 240-777-7906
Councilmember.Katz@montgomerycountymd.gov
View Staff List for Sidney Katz

Nancy Navarro 240-777-7968
Councilmember.Navarro@montgomerycountymd.gov
View Staff List for Nancy Navarro

Craig Rice 240-777-7955
Councilmember.Rice@montgomerycountymd.gov
View Staff List for Craig Rice

Hans Riemer 240-777-7964
Councilmember.Riemer@montgomerycountymd.gov
View Staff List for Hans Riemer

Related Links:

 

Posted by twtpadmin in Action Alert, Legislation, 0 comments

Letter to Montgomery County Council: 5G and its small cell towers threaten public health

October 2, 2019

To:  The County Council of Montgomery County, Maryland

From:  Ronald M. Powell, Ph.D.
5G and its small cell towers threaten public health.

Implementing 5G is PURE INSANITY.  It requires yielding to two of the worst trends evident in our society today:  denial of science, which provides massive evidence of harm from radiofrequency radiation; and yielding to pressure from corporations that are willing to hurt the public, without compunction, for short-term profit.

Want to know why?  This message describes, as briefly as I can, the answers to the questions below.  Please read what interests you.  I present these comments as a retired U.S. Government career scientist (Ph.D. in Applied Physics, Harvard University).

  • Why is control of 5G secondary to stopping its deployment?
  • What makes Maryland a leader in MANDATING exposure to harmful radiofrequency radiation?
  • What is Maryland’s implicit policy on exposure to radiofrequency radiation?
  • Why is human health so vulnerable to harm from radiofrequency radiation?
  • What is the evidence of harm caused by radiofrequency radiation?
  • What are the advantages and disadvantages of 5G compared to fiber-optic technology?
  • What is driving the implementation of 5G?
  • What should our telecommunications goals be?
  • Who am I?

Why is control of 5G secondary to stopping its deployment?

Control by local government of the deployment of 5G’s small cell towers is, indeed, an important goal, because local governments are closer to the people and can better reflect their wishes.

But there is an even more important goal:  STOPPING the deployment of 5G altogether.  The reason, as shown throughout this message, is that there is NO SAFE WAY to implement 5G in our communities; rather, there are only BAD WAYS and WORSE WAYS.  So local control means ONLY that local governments can choose among bad and worse ways.

It may seem difficult to stop 5G, but it will be easier to stop it NOW than to get it removed later after huge numbers of Maryland residents fall ill.

What makes Maryland a leader in MANDATING exposure to harmful radiofrequency radiation?

Maryland has rushed to implement multiple sources of radiofrequency radiation with little to no consideration of the adverse health effects.  Here are multiple examples:

Wireless Smart Meters for the measurement of electricity have already been forced on homes and businesses throughout much of Maryland.  These meters bring the source of radiofrequency radiation up close and personal to the residents, even to the walls against which children sleep.  Wireless Smart Meters transmit pulses of radiofrequency radiation throughout the day and the night, every day of the year.  To escape the radiation from your own meter, you must pay your electric power company a monthly Opt-Out fee, forever, for a non-radiating meter.  At last report, about 44,000 Maryland homeowners have made this choice.  But there is NO way to escape the radiation from your neighbors’ wireless meters.

Wireless Smart Meters for the measurement of natural gas and water are either already implemented in parts of the State, or are being planned, and will worsen the problem already created by the Wireless Smart Meters for electricity.

Wi-Fi is implemented widely in Maryland’s schools and bathes the children and the teachers in radiofrequency radiation every school day for years.  Parents with the wisdom to protect their children from such exposure MUST forfeit a public school education for those children.  All this has occurred even though the Maryland Children’s Environmental Health and Protection Advisory Council, which reports to the Governor, recommended phasing Wi-Fi out of the schools in favor of much safer wired technology.  (Wifi Radiation in Schools in Maryland, Final Report, December 13, 2016, page 8.  (https://phpa.health.maryland.gov/OEHFP/EH/Shared%20Documents/CEHPAC/MD_CEHPAC_SchoolWiFi_022017_final.pdf)

Many Maryland public schools have even accepted the installation of cell towers on school grounds, in payment for fees, dramatically increasing the exposure of the children and the teachers to radiofrequency radiation.

This assault on the public health by radiofrequency radiation will be completed by installation of 5G’s small cell towers up and down residential and business streets, up close to Maryland residents.  These towers will operate 24 hours per day throughout the year.

What is Maryland’s implicit policy on exposure to radiofrequency radiation?

Maryland’s implicit policy appears to be this:

“No resident of Maryland shall be permitted to escape 24-hour exposure to radiofrequency radiation, at ever higher levels, even though such radiation has already been shown to be harmful to human health.”

“Wireless technology is good by definition, so the more of it the better, no matter what its effects on health may be.”

“All scientific evidence that shows that exposure to radiofrequency radiation is harmful to human health should be categorically denied, no matter what source that evidence comes from, including the National Institutes of Health, the International Agency for Research on Cancer of the World Health Organization, and the international biomedical research community more broadly.”

Why is human health so vulnerable to harm from radiofrequency radiation?

In the simplest terms, human beings are bioelectrical in nature.  That is why electrocardiograms work when they monitor a beating heart.  And that is why electroencephalograms work when they monitor the activities in the brain.  Humans evolved in levels of radiofrequency radiation far below those produced by human technology today.  We humans are simply not designed to tolerate today’s high levels of radiofrequency radiation.

When the radiofrequency radiation from cell towers, including 5G’s small cell towers, and other wireless sources, hits the body, that radiation disrupts the bioelectrical workings of the body.  This disruption occurs at levels of radiation far below the Maximum Permitted Exposure limits set by the Federal Communications Commission, which are the only “official” limits in place in the U.S.A. today.  In response, the body must fight back constantly to regain control.  This battle can lead to a wide range of health problems.  Here is just a partial list:  sleep disruption, headaches, irritability, ringing in the ears, fatigue, loss of concentration and memory, nerve pain, dizziness, eye problems, nausea, heart palpitations, depression, and cancer.

No one is immune to harm, but vulnerability varies widely with the individual.  That vulnerability appears to be greatest for pregnant mothers, young children, teenagers, men of reproductive age, seniors, the disabled, and those with chronic health conditions.  A host of major medical conditions are now under study by the international biomedical research community to determine what role exposure to radiofrequency radiation may play in causing, or aggravating, them.  Examples include autism, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), autoimmune diseases, and Alzheimer’s disease, among so many others.

The effects of radiofrequency radiation appear to be cumulative; so the longer that exposure continues, the greater the chance that an individual will be overtly affected.  Some individuals will develop a devastating condition called Electromagnetic Hypersensitivity Syndrome, with a host of symptoms, including extreme pain from exposure to even very low levels of radiofrequency radiation.  Just to survive, such individuals must often leave their homes and jobs, where exposure levels have proved to be too high, and move to rare locations away from radiation sources.  Such individuals regularly contact scientists (including me), physicians, and other aware individuals for advice on what to do.

What is the evidence of harm caused by radiofrequency radiation?

Thousands of archival biomedical research papers, published in peer-reviewed journals, have shown that radiofrequency radiation (“wireless radiation”) is harmful to human health, not to mention the health of other living entities.  These papers have been collected and reviewed in a number of major documents.  Here are three examples of such reviews:

BioInitiative Working Group, Cindy Sage, M.A. and David O. Carpenter, M.D., Editors, BioInitiative Report:  A Rationale for Biologically-based Public Exposure Standards for Electromagnetic Radiation, December 31, 2012.  Written by 29 authors from 10 countries.  Draws on about 1800 references.
(http://www.bioinitiative.org)

Igor Belyaev, Amy Dean, Horst Eger, Gerhard Hubmann, Reinhold Jandrisovits, Markus Kern, Michael Kundi, Hanns Moshammer, Piero Lercher, Kurt Müller, Gerd Oberfeld, Peter Ohnsorge, Peter Pelzmann, Claus Scheingraber, and Roby Thill, EUROPAEM EMF Guideline 2016  for the prevention, diagnosis and treatment of EMF-related health problems and illnesses, Reviews of Environmental Health 2016, Vol. 31, No. 3, pages 363-397.  Draws on 308 references.
(https://www.degruyter.com/downloadpdf/j/reveh.2016.31.issue-3/reveh-2016-0011/reveh-2016-0011.pdf)

Martin L. Pall, Ph.D., 5G Risk:  The Scientific Perspective (2019).  Addresses the intracellular mechanism of harm from wireless radiation, and the eight primary areas of biological harm.  Draws on 139 references.  (www.stopsmartmetersbc.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/5G-Risk-The-Scientific-Perspective-by-Martin-L.-Pall-The-5G-Summit-2019.pdf)

In 2011, the International Agency for Research on Cancer of the World Health Organization classified radiofrequency radiation as a Group 2B Human Carcinogen (“possibly carcinogenic”), naming explicitly “wireless phone” radiation (cellular radiation), based on the increased risk for glioma.  Glioma is a malignant type of brain cancer that is usually fatal.  It most recently took the life of Senator John McCain and Beau Biden, the son of Vice President Joe Biden.  (https://www.iarc.fr/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/pr208_E.pdf)

In 2018, a massive study by the National Toxicology Program at the National Institutes of Health linked cellular radiofrequency radiation (RFR) to cancer of the nerves of the heart (schwannomas), to cancer of the brain (glioma), and to multiple other health effects in test animals.  (https://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/results/areas/cellphones/index.html)

In 2015 and continuing, 247 scientists from 42 nations signed an appeal to the United Nations.  These are scientists who have “published peer-reviewed papers on the biological or health effects of non-ionizing electromagnetic fields” (which are inclusive of radiofrequency radiation).  Their appeal was the following:

“Address the global public health concerns related to exposure to cell phones, power lines, electrical appliances, wireless devices, wireless utility meters and wireless infrastructure in residential homes, schools, communities and businesses.”  (https://www.emfscientist.org/)

For more information on the health effects of radiofrequency radiation, please see the website of the Environmental Health Trust, especially the “Science” tab.  (https://ehtrust.org/)

What are the advantages and disadvantages of 5G compared to fiber-optic technology?

5G has only ONE advantage compared to a wired technology, like fiber-optic technology:  5G will support mobility, just as current cellular technologies do.  Among wireless technologies, 5G will support faster wireless data rates, enabled by its operation at higher frequencies than current cellular technologies.

But wired technology, especially fiber-optic technology, is superior to 5G in EVERY WAY other than mobility.  Fiber-optic technology produces NO radiofrequency radiation, so it poses NO health hazard and thus is far safer than 5G or any cellular technology.  Also, fiber-optic technology is MUCH faster than any wireless technology, including 5G.  And fiber-optic technology is more reliable, more cyber secure, more private, and far more energy efficient than 5G or any cellular technology.  Further, fiber-optic technology requires no cell towers and antennas.  Rather fiber-optic technology employs optical fibers that are no bigger than a wire.  These fibers are close to invisible and are easily buried.  So fiber-optic technology does not despoil the environment with massive cell towers and antennas, unlike 5G and any cellular technology.  (For a more detailed description on the limitations of 5G, see https://whatis5g.info/.)

So users of wireless technology, including 5G, will have to decide if mobility ALONE is more important for their particular application than any other factor, including their own health and the health of their families, their friends, and their communities.

Compared to fiber-optic technology, 5G is already an out-dated technology, even aside from its adverse health effects.

What is driving the implementation of 5G?

5G appears to be an effort by the wireless industries to open new profit centers, now that they have largely maxed out the profits from today’s cell phone technology.  Consider these questions:

Is the hype for 5G coming more from potential providers of 5G, who hope to profit from 5G, or from potential users, who will have to pay for 5G?

Is the RUSH to implement 5G more about staking out claims to small cell sites in right-of-ways than about providing services that customers really need?

Is the RUSH to implement 5G driven by the growing awareness of the public and its representatives that radiofrequency radiation is harmful to health, and thus the providers feel that they must act quickly before resistance builds further?

What scientific studies, from impartial sources, can the providers of 5G identify that prove that 5G has NO adverse health effects on humans?  The burden of proof is on the providers.

When questioned by U.S. Senator Richard Blumenthal in a hearing before the Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee (February, 7, 2019), the representatives of industry could name no existing Independent studies and none in progress that industry was supporting.  (Story:  https://www.blumenthal.senate.gov/newsroom/press/release/at-senate-commerce-hearing-blumenthal-raises-concerns-on-5g-wireless-technologys-potential-health-risks; Video:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hsil3VQE5K4)

What should our telecommunications goals be?

Let me suggest the following:

Promote the expansion of fiber-optic technology as widely as possible, instead of degrading our environment with more harmful radiofrequency radiation, this time from 5G.

Require that the safety of 5G be proven by impartial studies before 5G can be installed in Maryland, instead of permitting the use of Maryland residents as guinea pigs to test that safety.

Join forces with other state and local governments to fight back against Federal laws and regulations that attempt to force any potentially harmful technology on the public without adequate PRIOR proof of safety.

Assert the legal right of the public to be free from the threat of assault by a wireless technology which every scientific indication to date suggests will be harmful to human health and sometimes fatal.

Who am I?

I am a retired U.S. Government career scientist (Ph.D. in Applied Physics from Harvard University).  During my Government career, I worked for the Executive Office of the President, the National Science Foundation, and the National Institute of Standards and Technology.  I currently interact with other scientists, with physicians, and with aware individuals worldwide about the impact of radiofrequency radiation on human health.

I have been a resident of Montgomery County since 1979.

Respectfully,

Ronald M. Powell, Ph.D.
Montgomery Village, MD

 


Take Action: Contact your county council representatives.


Posted by twtpadmin in Action Alert, 0 comments

Action Alert: Montgomery County is about to vote on 5G cell towers in our front yards!

Wednesday, October 2, 2019
Small Cells in Montgomery County Action Alert

Montgomery County is about to vote on 5G cell towers in our front yards!

The latest effort by Councilman Hans Riemer is a new zoning law that will allow cell towers 30 feet from homes.

Here is what you can do now.

1. Talk to your neighbors about 5G. Here are some resources to learn more

News Articles

2. Call and email the Council. Connect with them on Twitter and Facebook.

Gabe Albornoz 240-777-7959
Councilmember.Albornoz@montgomerycountymd.gov
View Staff List for Gabe Albornoz

Andrew Friedson 240-777-7828
Councilmember.Friedson@montgomerycountymd.gov
View Staff List for Andrew Friedson

Evan Glass 240-777-7966
Councilmember.Glass@montgomerycountymd.gov
View Staff List for Evan Glass

Tom Hucker 240-777-7960
Councilmember.Hucker@montgomerycountymd.gov
View Staff List for Tom Hucker

Will Jawando 240-777-7811
Councilmember.Jawando@montgomerycountymd.gov
View Staff List for Will Jawando

Sidney Katz 240-777-7906
Councilmember.Katz@montgomerycountymd.gov
View Staff List for Sidney Katz

Nancy Navarro 240-777-7968
Councilmember.Navarro@montgomerycountymd.gov
View Staff List for Nancy Navarro

Craig Rice 240-777-7955
Councilmember.Rice@montgomerycountymd.gov
View Staff List for Craig Rice

Hans Riemer 240-777-7964
Councilmember.Riemer@montgomerycountymd.gov
View Staff List for Hans Riemer

Posted by twtpadmin in Action Alert, 0 comments

How to view the hearing on the bills SB937 and SB713 on Small Cell Towers and 5G before the Finance Committee of the Maryland State Senate

Dear Maryland Colleagues concerned about Small Cell Towers and 5G,

Background

The U.S. Government is working hard to force small cell towers and 5G on the state governments, the local governments, and YOU.

Maryland State Senate bill SB937, and its "cross filed" identical bill HB654 in the Maryland House of Delegates, make the Maryland State Government the principal authority forcing small cell towers and 5G on the Maryland local governments and YOU.

Maryland State Senate bill SB713, and its "cross filed" identical bill HB1020 in the Maryland House of Delegates, make the local Maryland governments the principal authorities forcing small cell towers and 5G on YOU.

SB937 and HB654 are supported by the telecommunications industry, among others.  SB913 and HB1020 are supported by the Maryland Municipal League, an organization comprised of many local Maryland governments, among others.

Both bills accede to Federal demands that no entity, at any level of government, will be able to stop the forcing of small cell towers and 5G on YOU.

You may access the text of the bills by clicking on the bill numbers shown here:  SB713 and SB937.

How to View the Hearing

You can view the hearing held on both SB937 and SB713 before the Finance Committee of the Maryland State Senate on the Maryland General Assembly website.

Your web browser must accept Pop Ups.  According to Maryland Legislative Services, which provides the videos of the hearings, you need to load the RealPlayer free software to see its videos; BUT, surprisingly, I did not find it necessary to load RealPlayer with either the current Firefox browser or the current Microsoft Internet Explorer browser.  I cannot explain why at this point.

First, try to view the hearing with your computer set up as it already is.  If that does not work, unblock (permit) Pop Ups temporarily in your browser, and try again.  (Remember to block Pop Ups when you are done viewing the video.)

Click HERE to take you directly to the video.

If that does not work, use the step-by-step approach below to reach the above URL, and to learn how the video of any hearing can be accessed:

(1) Click on the URL at the end of this sentence to open your browser automatically and to move to this URL:  http://mgaleg.maryland.gov/.  OR open your browser, and type, or copy and paste, the same URL into your Search box.  The home page of the Maryland General Assembly will open.
(2) Scroll down the home page until the subtitle "Previous Committee Meetings" appears on the right side of the screen, just under the heading "Committee Meetings".
(3) Click on the subtitle "Previous Committee Meetings".  A web page entitled "Committee Audio and Video" will open.
(4) Scroll down the web page "Committee Audio and Video" to the "Senate" section.
(5) Look for the line headed "Finance".  You will see a date window displayed there.
(6) If that window already says, "Tuesday, February 26, 2019", which is the date of the hearing, click on the bold right-facing arrow at the end of that line, in a blue box to start the video.  The video should begin to play after a pause of several seconds.
(7) If the date above is NOT displayed in that window, click on the tiny arrow pointing downward at the right end of the line on which the date appears, to cause a menu of dates to drop down.
(8) On the drop-down menu of dates, click on "Thursday, February 26, 2019 Session # 1", which is the date of the desired hearing.  That will cause the drop-down menu to close, and the selected date will appear in the window to right of the "Finance" line.
(9) With that date of "Tuesday, February 26, 2019" displayed on the "Finance" line, click on the bold right-facing arrow at the end of that line, in a blue box, to start the video.  The video should begin to play after a pause of several seconds.

If the video fails to begin, you may need to unblock (permit) Pop Ups in your browser just for this purpose, as noted above, and begin again.  If that, too, fails, update your browser and try again.

The hearing lasted 3 hours and 57 minutes (3:57), but you do not have to watch all of it.  Bills SB937 and SB713 are addressed together.  You can pull the blue dot along the time line under the video to reach these locations:

0:00 Hearing begins

2:10:29 The part of the hearing that addresses SB937 and SB713 begins.

Senator Beidle introduces SB713.  Three other Senators co-sponsor this bill.
Senator Klausmeier introduces SB937.  No other Senator co-sponsors this bill.

Many witnesses present testimony in favor and opposed to the bills.

3:57:08  The discussion of both bills ends and the hearing also ends.

Those testifying are in groups up to 6 or so.  Usually all of those in a given group are of the same view about the desirability of a given bill, but not always.  Some of those testifying oppose both bills.

 

Who am I?

I am a retired U.S. Government career scientist (Ph.D. in Applied Physics from Harvard University).  During my Government career, I worked for the Executive Office of the President, the National Science Foundation, and the National Institute of Standards and Technology.  I currently interact with other scientists, with doctors, and with aware individuals worldwide about the impact of radiofrequency radiation on human health.

I have been a resident of Montgomery County since 1979.

Respectfully,

Ronald M. Powell, Ph.D.

Posted by twtpadmin in Legislation, 0 comments

Montgomery County Residents Speaking Out! 5G and its small cell towers threaten public health. Implications for HB654/SB937 and HB1020/SP713 before the Maryland General Assembly

Ronald M. Powell, Ph.D  /  February 25, 2019

5G and its small cell towers threaten public health.  Implications for HB654/SB937 and HB1020/SP713 before the Maryland General Assembly.

This message describes, as briefly as I can, the answers to the questions below.  Kindly read what interests you.  I present these comments as a retired U.S. Government career scientist (Ph.D. in Applied Physics, Harvard University).

  • Why is control of 5G secondary to stopping its deployment?
  • Why are both HB654/SB937 and HB1020/SP713 fatally flawed?
  • What makes Maryland a leader in MANDATING exposure to harmful radiofrequency radiation?
  • What is Maryland's implicit policy on exposure to radiofrequency radiation?
  • Why is human health so vulnerable to harm from radiofrequency radiation?
  • What is the evidence of the harm caused by radiofrequency radiation?
  • What are the advantages and disadvantages of 5G?
  • What should our telecommunications goals be?
  • Who am I?

Why is control of 5G secondary to stopping its deployment?

Control by local government of the deployment of 5G's small cell towers is, indeed, an important goal, because local governments are closer to the people and can better reflect their wishes.  That makes HB1020/SP713 the better approach, as intended by its authors, compared to HB654/SB937 which forfeits local control entirely.

But there is an even more important goal:  STOPPING the deployment of 5G altogether.  The reason, as shown throughout this message, is that there is NO SAFE WAY to implement 5G in our communities; rather, there are only "bad ways" and "worse ways".  So local control means that local governments can have a say in the choice among the "bad ways".

Why are both HB654/SB937 and HB1020/SP713 fatally flawed?

Both bills reaffirm the worst aspect of Federal policy:  a prohibition against stopping all deployment.  For example, HB1020/SP713 makes statements like these:

S-703 (C) (1):  "THE APPLICABLE LOCAL LAW AND REGULATION PROVIDED IN SUBSECTION (A) OF THIS SECTION:

(1) MAY NOT GENERALLY PROHIBIT THE INSTALLATION OF ALL WIRELESS FACILITIES OR POLES IN THE PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY OR ON PRIVATE PROPERTY; AND"

S-704 (C):  "THE DESIGN AND AESTHETIC REQUIREMENTS OR STANDARDS OF AN AUTHORITY MAY NOT HAVE THE EFFECT OF PROHIBITING ANY WIRELESS PROVIDER'S WIRELESS SERVICE."

Statements like these write into Maryland law the principal provision of Federal policy that so many efforts are now trying to overturn.  For this reason, in my view, neither HB654/SB937 nor HB1020/SP713 should be made law.

What makes Maryland a leader in MANDATING exposure to harmful radiofrequency radiation?

Wireless Smart Meters for the measurement of electricity have already been forced on virtually every home and business in Maryland.  These meters bring the source of radiation up close and personal to the residents, even to the walls against which children sleep.  They transmit pulses of radiofrequency throughout the day and the night, every day of the year.  To escape the radiation from your own meter, you must pay the electric power company a monthly Opt-Out fee, forever, for a non-radiating meter.  At last report, about 44,000 Maryland homeowners have made this choice.  But there is NO way to escape the radiation from your neighbors' wireless meters.

Wireless Smart Meters for the measurement of natural gas and water are either already implemented in parts of the State, or are contemplated (WSSC), and will worsen the problem already created by the Wireless Smart Meters for electricity.

WiFi is implemented widely in Maryland's schools and bathes the children and teachers in radiofrequency radiation every school day for all their school years.  Parents who don't want their children exposed to such radiation MUST forfeit a public school education for their children.  All this has occurred even though the Maryland Children's Environmental Health and Protection Advisory Council, which reports to the Governor, recommended phasing WiFi out of the schools in favor of much safer wired technology.  (Wifi Radiation in Schools in Maryland, Final Report, December 13, 2016, page 8, https://phpa.health.maryland.gov/OEHFP/EH/Shared%20Documents/CEHPAC/MD_CEHPAC_SchoolWiFi_022017_final.pdf)

The addition of the radiation from 5G's small cell towers, located up close and personal to Maryland residents, and operating 24 hours per day throughout the year, will complete this assault on the health of the public.

What is Maryland's implicit policy on radiofrequency radiation?

The State's implicit policy appears to be this:

"No resident of Maryland shall be permitted to escape 24-hour exposure to radiofrequency radiation, at ever higher levels, even though such radiation has already been shown to be harmful to human health."

"All biomedical research from any source, including the National Institutes of Health, the World Health Organization, and the international biomedical research community more broadly, that shows that exposure to radiofrequency radiation is harmful to human health, will be categorically denied."

Why is human health so vulnerable to harm from radiofrequency radiation?

In the simplest terms, human beings are bioelectrical in nature.  That is why electrocardiograms work when they monitor a beating heart.  And that is why electroencephalograms work when they monitor the activities in the brain.  Humans evolved in levels of radiofrequency radiation far below those produced by human technology today.  We humans are simply not designed to tolerate today's high levels of radiofrequency radiation.

When the radiofrequency radiation from cell towers, including 5G's small cell towers, and other wireless sources, hits the body, that radiation disrupts the bioelectrical workings of the body.  This disruption occurs at levels of radiation far below those set as the FCC's Maximum Permitted Exposure limits.  In response, the body must fight back constantly to regain control.  This battle can lead to a wide range of symptoms.  Here is just a partial list:  sleep disruption, headaches, irritability, ringing in the ears, fatigue, loss of concentration and memory, nerve pain, dizziness, eye problems, nausea, heart palpitations, depression, and cancer.

No one is immune to harm, but vulnerability varies widely with the individual.  That vulnerability does appear to be greatest for pregnant mothers, young children, teenagers, men of reproductive age, seniors, the disabled, and those with chronic health conditions.  A host of major medical conditions are now under study by the international biomedical research community to determine what role exposure to radiofrequency radiation may play in causing, or aggravating, them.  Examples include autism, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), autoimmune diseases, and Alzheimer's disease, among so many others.

The effects of radiofrequency radiation appear to be cumulative; so the longer that exposure continues, the greater the chance that an individual will be overtly affected.  Some individuals will develop a devastating condition called Electromagnetic Hypersensitivity Syndrome, with a host of symptoms, including extreme pain from exposure to even very low levels of radiofrequency radiation.  Just to survive, such individuals must often leave their homes and jobs, where exposure levels were too high, and move to rare locations away from radiation sources.  Such individuals regularly contact scientists (including me), doctors, and other aware individuals for advice on what to do.

What is the evidence of the harm caused by radiofrequency radiation?

There are thousands of archival biomedical research papers, published in peer-reviewed journals, that have shown that radiofrequency radiation is harmful to the body in one way or another.  These have been collected and reviewed in a number of summary documents.  Here are just two examples:  (1) BioInitiative 2012, draws on about 1800 publications (https://bioinitiative.org/); (2) EUROPAEM EMF Guideline 2016 for the Prevention, Diagnosis and Treatment of EMF-Related Health Problems and Illnesses, draws on 308 references (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27454111). ("EMF" stands for electromagnetic fields, a term inclusive of radiofrequency radiation.)

In 2011, the International Agency for Research on Cancer of the World Health Organization classified radiofrequency radiation as a Group 2B Human Carcinogen ("possibly carcinogenic"), naming explicitly "wireless phone" radiation (cellular radiation), based on the increased risk for glioma.  Glioma is a malignant type of brain cancer that is usually fatal.  It most recently took the life of Senator John McCain and Beau Biden, the son of Vice President Joe Biden.  (https://www.iarc.fr/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/pr208_E.pdf)

In 2018, a massive study by the National Toxicology Program at the National Institutes of Health linked cellular radiofrequency radiation (RFR) to cancer of the nerves of the heart (schwannomas), to cancer of the brain (glioma), and to multiple other health effects in test animals.  (https://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/results/areas/cellphones/index.html)

In 2015 and continuing, 247 scientists from 42 nations signed an appeal to the United Nations, described below.  These scientists have "published peer-reviewed papers on the biological or health effects of non-ionizing electromagnetic fields" (which are inclusive of radiofrequency radiation).

"Address the global public health concerns related to exposure to cell phones, power lines, electrical appliances, wireless devices, wireless utility meters and wireless infrastructure in residential homes, schools, communities and businesses."  (https://www.emfscientist.org/)

For more information on the health effects of radiofrequency radiation, please see the website of the Environmental Health Trust, especially the Science tab.  (https://www.emfscientist.org/)

What are the advantages and disadvantages of 5G?

5G has some true advantages.  5G is expected to employ higher radiofrequencies than those currently in use in cellular systems in the United States.  Those higher frequencies will permit more rapid rates of data transfer compared to current WIRELESS technology.  And, as a wireless technology, 5G will support mobility.

But wired technology, especially fiber-optic technology, is superior to 5G in so many other ways.  Fiber-optic technology produces NO radiofrequency radiation, so it poses NO health hazard.  Fiber-optic technology is safer, faster, more reliable, more cyber secure, and more private than any wireless technology, including 5G.  (See https://whatis5g.info/ for a detailed description of the limitations of 5G.)

So users of wireless technology, including 5G, will have to decide if mobility ALONE is more important for their particular application than any other factor, including their own health and the health of their families and colleagues.

When listening to the hype about 5G, consider the following:

Is the hype coming more from potential providers of 5G, who hope to profit from 5G, or from potential users, who will have to pay for 5G?

Is the RUSH to implement 5G more about staking out claims to small cell sites in right-of-ways than about providing services that customers really need?

Is the RUSH to implement 5G driven by the growing awareness of the public and its representatives that radiofrequency radiation is harmful to health, and thus the providers feel that they must act quickly before resistance builds further?

What scientific studies, from impartial sources, can the providers of 5G identify that prove that 5G has NO adverse health effects on humans?  The burden of proof is on the providers.

When questioned by U.S. Senator Richard Blumenthal in a hearing before the Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee (February, 7, 2019), the representatives of industry could name no existing studies and none in progress.  (Story:  https://www.blumenthal.senate.gov/newsroom/press/release/at-senate-commerce-hearing-blumenthal-raises-concerns-on-5g-wireless-technologys-potential-health-risks; Video:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hsil3VQE5K4)

What should our telecommunications goals be?

Let me suggest the following:

Promote the expansion of fiber-optic technology as widely as possible, instead of degrading our environment with more harmful radiofrequency radiation, this time from 5G.

Require that the safety of 5G be proven by impartial studies before 5G can be installed in Maryland, instead of facilitating the use of Maryland residents to be the guinea pigs to test that safety.

Join forces with other state governments, and with local governments, to fight back against Federal laws and regulations that force any potentially harmful technology on the states without adequate PRIOR proof of safety.  Any technology with the potential to harm, and even take, life should not be mandated by the U.S. Government or encouraged by the states.

It will be difficult to stop 5G, but it will be easier to stop it NOW than to get it removed later after huge numbers of Maryland residents have become ill.

Who am I?

I am a retired U.S. Government career scientist (Ph.D. in Applied Physics from Harvard University).  During my Government career, I worked for the Executive Office of the President, the National Science Foundation, and the National Institute of Standards and Technology.  I currently interact with other scientists, with doctors, and with aware individuals worldwide about the impact of radiofrequency radiation on human health.

I have been a resident of Montgomery County since 1979.

Respectfully,

Ronald M. Powell, Ph.D.

 

Posted by twtpadmin in Action Alert, 0 comments