Archive | WiFi RSS feed for this section

Tell the FCC to strengthen its EMF-RF standards

15 Nov

Deadline is Nov. 18th, so do it today or this weekend!

You can also sign the Environmental Working Group’s “Strengthen Cell Phone Radiation Standards!” Petition at: http://action.ewg.org/p/dia/action3/common/public/?action_KEY=2039&tag=201308CellFB

While our City updates its wireless facilities ordinance, due to the concerns and recommendations of its residents, the FCC is asking for input about updating its outdated EMF/RF exposure guidelines in its Proceeding Number 13-84.  So here’s your opportunity to give your input and tell the FCC to make its guidelines more protective of human health and our environment.

Due to the recent government shut-down, the FCC  has extended its deadline for accepting public Comments, so if you haven’t already, write and submit your Comments today or this weekend on-line to the FCC.

DEADLINE: The FCC must receive your Comments by Monday, November 18th.

HOW TO SUBMIT YOUR COMMENTS: Submit your Comments on-line to the FCC Proceeding Number 13-84 in one of two ways:

1) Express Comments can be filed at http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/hotdocket/list  (click the “click here” at the ECSF directions paragraph area at the top of the page to manually type in 13-84 in the proceeding number area, and write and submit your Comments)

2) Standard Comment with an attached document or letter at http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/upload/display?z=kcz1n

Some reasons you can include in your Comments:

* The FCC’s EMF/RF exposure guidelines should be more protective of human health and our environment because, in May 2011, the World Health Organization’s International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) classified EMF/RF exposure as a Class 2B possible carcinogen, based on an increased risk of developing a malignant form of brain cancer associated with cell phone use.  Thus, the WHO’s IARC has put non-ionizing radiation from cell phones, WiFi, wireless routers, and wireless smart meters, on the same Class 2B Possible Human Carcinogen agent list with lead, DDT and gasoline car exhaust.  We would not expose our friends, family or community to such possible carcinogens 24/7.  The FCC should not allow the public to be exposed to this possible carcinogen without proper warnings, labels, recommendations, and alternatives.

* The FCC’s  EMF/RF exposure guidelines should be more protective of children, pregnant mothers, men’s fertility, and our public health, due to an increased number of research that has found DNA changes, sperm damage, increased oxidative stress, and increased risk of childhood behavior problems (attention and addiction) and memory problems, and abnormal neurological and brain development, associated with exposure to EMF/RF, including cell phone use.

For citations, the FCC can refer to:”Why the FCC Must Strengthen Radiofrequency Radiation Limits in the U.S.,” by Joel M. Moskowitz, Ph.D., Director, Center for Family and Community Health, The UC Berkeley Prevention Research Center, School of Public Health, University of California, Berkeley, November 5, 2013, Submitted to the Federal Communications Commission re: Proceeding Number 13-84, which can be found on-line at: https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B14R6QNkmaXuendOZXlzTUh4MFE/edit?pli=1

The FCC can also refer to Medscape’s eye-opening “Smartphone ‘Addiction’ May Affect Adolescent Development,” by Deborah Brauser, May 23, 2013, found on-line at: http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/804666

Just so you know, it’s important that your voice be heard because our Congress (that’s right, including our own Senators Feinstein and Boxer from California) recently unanimously approved the appointment of Tom Wheeler to head our FCC — even though Wheeler is a former CEO of the wireless industry (CTIA, 1992-2004).  With such a major conflict of interest, how tough will he regulate the wireless industry to protect our health concerns?

LAUSD approves $50 million first phase of WiFi-wireless tablet project

13 Feb
Thanks for Working for Safe Technologies for Nurseries, Schools and College for creating this helpful brochure.  Click this link for a PDF to share with your community: http://wifiinschools.org.uk/resources/safeschools2012.pdf

Working for Safe Technologies for Nurseries, Schools and College created this helpful brochure. For a PDF to share with your community, click: http://wifiinschools.org.uk/resources/safeschools2012.pdf

To update you on our previous post about this issue, LAUSD Board Members at their meeting yesterday  approved  the allocation of $50 million toward the WiFi/wireless tablet proposal, despite the district’s $557 million deficit.

According to eyewitness reports, it was disturbing to watch 6 of the 7 LAUSD Board Members support this Phase 1 of the wireless program.

We’re told that Board Member Bennett Kayser abstained. According to those who saw the meeting, Mr. Kayser felt there were outstanding issues that needed to be dealt with BEFORE moving on to approve Phase I of the wireless program implementation; he also mentioned one of the concerns was whether RF emissions would be harmful and whether hard wired internet would be necessary.

FYI: LAUSD Office of Environmental Health and Safety (OEHS) contracted the URS Corporation to prepare its health report, “RADIOFREQUENCY (RF) EVALUATION REPORT: Use of Wireless Devices in Educational Settings” (2013) to justify the RF safety of this proposed program.

However, according to the URS Corp website, URS seems to represent infrastructure building and industry interests; it also has a board that represents more corporate interests than public health.

In addition, the URS RF report was NOT included in the Board Meeting Materials packet (see Tab 12 that begins on page 111) — i.e., so the Public could not view it prior to today’s board meeting.  This did not allow the Public to prepare Comments or concerns about the URS report in advance of Tuesday’s Board Meeting.  So was transparency and due diligence followed?

Thank you to all of you, from across the state, nation and around the world, who wrote LAUSD Board Members advising them against it and also providing the science and rationale why.

We will create a page of letters from experts entered into the LAUSD public record at Tuesday’s meeting that you can share with local school officials to support healthier school environments in your area.

Kudos and serious thanks also to LAUSD parent Kevin Mottus, and Miss Shane Gregory, administrator of Smart Meter Health Alert, who we’ve been informed did a stellar job representing your concerns and scientific data at the Tuesday LAUSD Board Meeting.

We’ll post additional updates, and video and story links, as we get more info.

%d bloggers like this: