Under construction, so please excuse the dust! We are still able to take your story, but please bear with us as we finish polishing the site.

admin

/admin
­

About admin

This author has not yet filled in any details.
So far admin has created 81 blog entries.

On February 6, for the first time health effects of 5G and wireless were mentioned in Senate Commerce Committee Meeting on 5G. The Senate Commerce Committee is the Committee entrusted in overseeing the FCC. 

I was there with less than a handful of us on July 14, 2016 when the FCC announced 5G. The same week we started our efforts to educate Congress about 5G and wireless health effects. Whenever a 5G meeting/hearing was held, we were trying to get the members of the Committee to ask even just one question about the health effects. Yesterday, February 6, two and a half years later, it finally happened.

I got a call an advocates who attended the Senate Commerce Committee meeting and he was excited to tell me that Senator Blumenthal made a comment about the health effects.

In the hearing titled Winning the Race to 5G and the Next Era of Technology Innovation in the United States Senator Blumenthal  asked, “are there any health implications? Are there any safety implications?” to the millions of the small cells that are likely to be located “close to homes, schools work places and closer and closer to the ground” . 

He mentioned  the letter that he had sent to the FCC in December, 2018 asking Commissioner Carr from the FCC to cite him the research on which the FCC relied upon to guarantee the public that 5G is safe. While we still do not have a copy of the FCC’s response, apparently according to Blumenthal, Commissioner Carr “Essentially has failed to do so” and said he referred him to the FDA. In regard to the FDA website Blumenthal said: “if you go to the FDA website, pretty unsatisfactory, there is basically a cursory and superficial citations” and mocked the statement on its website saying that the FDA encourages industry to conduct research and it was on cell phones not 5G. Then he said: “I believe the American people deserve to know what the health effects are.”

Blumenthal also said: “We are flying blind here on health and safety”. That is though inaccurate.  We know that the harms of non-thermal levels of RF/Microwave radiation are proven. We have more than ample scientific evidence and unfortunately also the Human Evidence which is in epidemic scale as the 5G Appeal states. We are flying blind but, to a definite greater disaster. 

To watch the video of the hearing PRESS HERE. Blumenthal starts at 2:04:00

To watch ONLY the part where Blumenthal Speaks, PRESS HERE. 

Since the FCC and the FDA didn’t provide answers he followed the FDA recommendation and asked industry – panelists “how much money has the industry provided for independent research on biological effects? Shouldn’t we scientifically ascertain the health effects? ” One of the panelists replied, “we rely on the expert agencies. There are no industry backed studies underway.  This new infrastructure is designed to be low powered, low interference.”    

So the FDA relies on industry and industry relies on the FDA…how long will this mockery of the American people will continue?

Senator Wicker (R-MISS) who is the new Chairman of the Committee (replaced Sen. Thune (R-SD)) summarized the hearing by mentioning the need to protect privacy but in response to Blumenthal’s comments on health Wicker read a quote from the National Cancer Institute, saying the research shows there is no consistent evidence that non-ionizing electromagnetic radiation increases cancer risk. I wonder why he didn’t mention the Government’s own study, the NTP study the biggest and most expensive study on this issue which found CLEAR EVIDENCE of cancer and DNA damage. 

Interestingly, the FCC did not appear in front of the Committee only industry was there. It is unusual. Considering the bad media the FCC has been getting following the House Commerce Committee accusing the FCC of Colluding with Industry and considering the municipalities lawsuit could it be that the Senate Commerce Committee (or industry which likely was involved in arranging this hearing) thought the FCC presence will contaminate the efforts to push 5G? 

Now we will have to see who will be the next member of the Committee who will do the right thing and speak the truth

Additional Links:

Sen. Blumenthal Press Release

Sen. Bluementhal Letter to the FCC from Dec 3, 2018

FCC Commissioner Carr’s response letter to Sen. Blumenthal from Dec 17, 2018

A Full Transcript of Blumenthal’s Comeents:

Mr. Blumenthal:
Mr. Chairman, thank you for having this hearing. We’ve heard from a lot of witnesses, from you today and others previousy, about the very important potential of 5G technology. It promises to bring us a new era of connectivity with Internet speeds as much as five times faster than what we have today, with much lower latency. And that’s all a good thing, but 5G, as you well know, also uses higher frequency waves that don’t travel as far and will rely on a network of hundreds of thousands — potentially millions — of small cell sites. And the question then is: are there any health implications, any public safety implications, to those additional sites that are likely to be located close to homes, schools, workplaces, and closer and closer to the ground? Correct?
 
Mr. Gillen:
Correct, Senator. Yes.
 
Mr. Blumenthal:
So, in December of 2018, I sent a letter to FCC Commissioner Carr asking him to cite for me recent scientific studies demonstrating the safety of this technology: what research has been done, where has it been published and compiled. He has, (inaudible), failed to do so and just echoed the general statements of the FDA — which shares regulatory responsibility for cell phones with the FCC. If you go to the FDA website, pretty unsatisfactory. There basically is a cursory and superficial citation to existing scientific data saying, quote, “The FDA has urged the cell phone industry to take a number of steps, including support additional research on possible biological effects of radiofrequency fields for the type of signal emitted by cell phone.” I believe that Americans deserve to know what the health effects are, not to prejudge what scientific studies may show, and they deserve also a commitment to do the research on the outstanding question. So my question for… for you, particularly, Mr. Gillen, and Mr. Berry: how much money has the industry committed to supporting additional independent research? I stress independent research. Is that independent research ongoing? Has any been completed? Where can consumers look for it? And we’re talking about research on the biological effects of this new technology.
 
Mr. Gillen:
Thank you, Senator. And I thank you for your focus on the issue. Safety is paramount. And as you alluded to, we rely on the expert agencies, rely on the findings of the FDA and others, as to the requirements to keep all of us safe. There are no industry-backed studies, to my knowledge right now. I’m happy to visit with you as to what opportunities you think there needs to be more studies. And we’re always for more science. We also rely on what the scientists tell us.
 
Mr. Blumenthal:
So essentially, the answer to my question how much money: zero.
 
Mr. Gillen:
I can certainly follow up with you, Senator. To my knowledge there’s no active studies being backed by industry today.
 
Mr. Blumenthal:
Anybody else know of industry commitments to back research, fund it, support it, to ascertain, scientifically, the health effects?
 
Mr. Berry:
Senator, I’m not aware either. But I do know that with small cells, especially, you’re going to have lower power levels. And of course, as from a carrier perspective you want to be able to manage interference so that that interference is the lowest interference possible. So I would… I would think that some of those studies, or some of that information, could be utilized in… in looking at the health consequences. But no, I’m not aware of any….
 
Mr. Blumenthal:
So there really is no research ongoing. We’re kind of flying blind here — so far as health and safety is concerned. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

KEEP WORKING, CHANGE IS HAPPENING.  

Dafna Tachover

 

 

In December 2018, the Spanish High Court ratified a court decision determining that the adverse health effects suffered by an employee of the Spanish telecom company Endesa, were caused by his exposure to electromagnetic fields and radiation in his workplace.  

Joaquín Sanz, a senior technician, is the first worker to obtain a judgment in Spain that classifies Electro-Sensitivity as an occupational injury.

The judge determined that the symptoms experienced by Mr. Sanz are a result of central nervous system and limbic system dysfunction caused by his exposure to the high and low electromagnetic frequencies to which he was exposed in his workplace, including exposure to Wi-Fi and cell towers.   

The court determined that Mr. Sanz’s symptoms, which began in 2009, including headaches, tinnitus, muscle pain, asthenia and lack of concentration, were caused by and manifested when he was exposed to electromagnetic fields and radiation in his workplace. The court recognized that his sickness was caused by levels of exposures which are considered “safe”. Clearly they are not.

This is not the first court decision in Spain that recognized Electro-Sensitivity/Microwave Sickness, but it is the first that recognizes it as an occupational injury. 

In 2016, the Superior Court of Justice of Madrid determined that telecommunications engineer Ricardo de Francisco was suffering from Electro-Sensitivity and as a result unable to work. The other electrosensitivity case recognized by the Spanish Courts involved a Professor at the University of Murcia. 

Press Here to read an article in Spanish about the ruling (the automatic translation works well).  

Press Here for the Court’s Ruling in Spanish

Press Here to read about the decision from Stop UMTS.

A new court decision from France, from Sept 27, 2018, recognizes EHS and its correlation to EMFs ( I don’t like the name EHS and prefer to call it Microwave Sickness -the older and more accurate name). Glad to see another judge who has shown commitment to common sense and truth. The French Social Security Court recognized electromagnetic intolerance as a work-related handicap. 
 
A reminder, in 2016 another French court awarded disability payments for a woman who the court acknowledged to be suffering from “Allergy to W-Fi”
 
Unfortunately courts have been failing especially on the wireless issue however, this decision and a few others keep me still hoping that courts may be of help nevertheless. That some judges are left with common sense and who are brave enough to see the truth and act upon it.  
 
My feelings remind of a quote from the movie Philadelphia when Andrew Beckett, who was an attorney says  “It’s that every now and again – not often, but occasionally – you get to be a part of justice being done. That really is quite a thrill when that happens” This is the quote I put on my law school’s notebooks. 
 
Summary of the French Case
  
The Plaintiff, a technical assistant in the service department  was diagnosed with EHS. The company’s doctor asked twice – once in 2011 and once in 2012 to allow him to work in a low EMF environment. But the employer didn’t accommodate him. 
 
 In Nov. 2013 a meeting took place in the office and many wireless devices were used – cell phones and tablets. The P didn’t feel well, his heart rate increased, he was dizzy fell and got injured. 
 
He claimed that the cause for the symptoms and therefore the injury was the EMFs. 
 
The insurance company refused to pay him claiming there was no casual link between the EMFs and the fall. 
 
He appealed the decision. The court appointed a medical examiner, a neurosurgeon who claimed that there is no causal relationship and that the cause of the fall is psychiatric – the Ps anxiety of EMFs ie, not the EMFs themselves. 
 
The court was not convinced by the report of the medical examiner and asked for another expert to be appointed.  Dr. Pons – senior lecturer in cervicomaxillo-facial surgery at the university was appointed. 
 
Dr. Pons, the second medical examiner determined that there was no external cause to the accident and that the casual link between the exposure to the EMFs and the accident should not be excluded.  He said that even if it is not possible to scientifically prove it, because the P was already recognized as suffering from EHS by the doctor in 2011, the accident could have been caused by his exposure to the EMFs. 
 
The court rejected the suggestion that the P suffers from a psychiatric condition – anxiety because he just believe that EMFs are harmful. The court said no other external cause can explain the symptoms and the fall and that a causal relationship between his EMF exposure and the accident is possible especially as he was diagnosed with EHS and was forced to continue and work in an unsuitable environment. 
 
The decision is important for the following reasons:
 
1) Just like in the US, in France EHS/Microwave Sickness is not an officially recognized medical diagnosis. Nevertheless, doctors DO diagnose patients with it and the courts are acknowledging the diagnosis. 
 
2) Just like in the US – the court in France did conclude in the past that EHS is real and can be caused by exposure to non-thermal EMFs 
 
3) The court rejected the court’s appointed medical examiner opinion. The medical examiner didn’t accept the doctor’s diagnosis of EHS and claimed that P doesn’t suffer from EHS but from a psychiatric problem of being afraid of EMFs which leads to an anxiety. The court rejected the medical examiner report, appointed another expert and accepted the diagnosis of the doctor of EHS.
Hi All,
 
 
NATOA Webminar on Oct 10 – FCC Actions’s Impact on Municipalities
 

Following is the Newsletter of NATOA – the Nationally Recognized Local Government Association. They discuss the impact of the FCC Sept 26 vote to limit the power of local municipalities to regulate 5G.  As a result, NATOA will hold a Webminar on Oct. 10 “A Review of the FCC’s Actions to Preempt Local Authority”. Those who are actively fighting 5G on the local level, may want to register to the Webminar to learn and understand the issue faced by municipalities, their point of view and to use this information to find common grounds to collaborate.

Additional 2 pages from their website that may be of interest: Their (1) FCC Page & (2) NATOA HILL Page
 
 
The FCC Proposed Action
 
 
The rulemaking is scheduled to be voted on Sept 26. Since the FCC vote is a sham the rulemaking is likely to pass.
 
The rulemaking “would implement a federal law to blocks municipal rules that would prohibit deployment of wireless service, and would only allow municipalities to charge fees on small cell deployments limited to covering the municipality’s costs. The plan would also require approval or disapproval of applications to attach small cells to existing structures within 60 days and to applications to build new poles within 90 days, and places “modest guardrails” on rules like aesthetic reviews that may slow down service.” Press HERE for an article that summarizes the essentials of the FCC’s Sept. 26 rulemaking.
 
The rulemaking is supposed to save the industry about 2$ billion…A few days ago a good article was published that critisizes the FCC rulemaking  “FCC’s 5G masterstroke little more than big biz cash giveaway“ and says correctly that this action by the FCC will expand not narrow the digital divide..Clearly the FCC actions are not well thought of no matter how one looks at them and clearly do not aim to act in the best interest of public. The FCC actions seem to be in the service of industry only not surprising though as it is a Captured Agency. 
 
A reminder – a few months ago, a mayor who was sitting on an FCC committee on Broadband deployment resigned saying that the FCC is controlled by the industry. 
 
I think the FCC’s actions may qualify as racketeering under RICO.
 
Letter of NATOA & Other Municipal Organizations to FCC
 
 
On Sept. 19th NATOA with the National League of Cities and the National Association of Cities, submitted a letter to the FCC objecting the FCC Rulmaking  to remove “barriers” to wireless deployment and investment (WT Docket 17-79 & WC Docket 17-84).
 
 
Conference of Mayors Announced It Will Sue FCC Over Legislation
 
 
The US Conference of Mayors published a statement on Sept. 10 announcing that if the FCC will pass the legislation to it will sue the FCC.
 
 
They said in their statement:
 
 
“The U.S. Conference of Mayors strongly opposes recent proposals by the Federal Communications Commission to grant communications service providers subsidized access to local public property and to dictate how local governments manage their own local rights-of-ways and public property.”
 
 
They mention concern over safety issues:
 
 
“This unprecedented federal intrusion into local (and state) government property rights will have substantial adverse impacts on cities and their taxpayers, including reduced funding for essential local government services, as well as an increased risk of right-of-way and other public safety hazards.”
 
 
They clearly stated that unless the FCC will change its policy they will sue the FCC:
 
“The Conference of Mayors strongly opposes these proposals and calls on the agency to change them; absent such changes, the Conference and its members will seek relief in federal court to overturn this unprecedented overreach by the FCC.”
 
Thank you, 
 
Dafna
 
natoa logo
 
Register today for this free eNATOA:
 
Double Whammy: A Review of the FCC’s Actions to Preempt Local Authority
Wednesday, October 10, 3:00 PM Eastern
 
Registration closes as soon as capacity is reached so reserve your spot today.
 
 

Regular
eNATOA sessions are held on a Monday, last one hour and are offered at 2:00 pm eastern. 

 

The cost for each seminar is $45 for members, $90 for non-members.

Or, save money and register for a series!  The more you buy, the more you save!

– Three seminars: $130 (members) $260 (non-mem)

– Six seminars:

$240(members) $485(non-mem)

– Nine seminars:

$345(members) $705(non-mem)

– Twelve seminars: $430(members) $890(non-mem)

 
 
 
Wednesday, October 10, 3:00 PM Eastern
 
Double Whammy: A Review of the FCC’s Actions 

to Preempt Local Authority 

On September 26th, the FCC is scheduled to vote on two items that will significantly limit local governments’ control

over their rights of way and municipal property, impact local budgets, and target local PEG channels.
 
The proposed Declaratory Ruling and Third Report and Order, aimed at small wireless facility deployments, will impose caps on permits fees, right of way use fees and municipal attachment fees, set arbitrary “shot clocks” for approving small wireless deployments (including negotiating right of way franchises or licenses) and restrict local control over the aesthetics of these deployments.
 
The Second Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, which relates to cable franchising, proposes new rules that would allow cable operators to deduct from their franchise fee payments almost any cable-related franchise requirement, including PEG channel capacity, and limit local authority over cable operators’ non-cable services.
 
Join us to learn about the impacts of these dual assaults on local authority and next steps for local governments.
 
Non-members that register will receive a special code for half price membership rates for 2019 following the webinar!
Purchase a package deal today 
on these exciting topics for 2018 and SAVE BIG: 
 
October 15th
The Impact of Video Streaming on Cable Franchising
Press reports abound regarding cable subscribers “cutting the cord” and opting for video streaming services. What are the consequences for local governments? Our panelists will discuss the impact on franchise revenues and what the options are for replacing revenue losses.  They will address the consequences for PEG channels and I-Nets, and will focus on how franchising authority may still be used to advance policy objectives for local governments. Don’t miss this in-depth look at the future of cable franchising.
November 13th – TUESDAY
High Quality, Low Budget Productions
Money doesn’t always talk. While having a large budget is helpful when producing programming, having the right talent and a penchant for creative thinking can go a long way. We’ve invited some award-winning channels to share with you how they compete with the big guys and refuse to let their small budget hold them back.
December 10th
The Courts, The Hill and The FCC – A Year in Review and Setting the Stage for 2019

Our panel of experts will assess how 2018 affected policy and practice on key communications issues and will provide their views of what may be coming in 2019 – and how local governments can prepare.
 
 
 
 
 

orem Ipsum is simply dummy text of the printing and typesetting industry. Lorem Ipsum has been the industry’s standard dummy text ever since the 1500s, when an unknown printer took a galley of type and scrambled it to make a type specimen book. It has survived not only five centuries, but also the leap into electronic typesetting, remaining essentially unchanged. It was popularised in the 1960s with the release of Letraset sheets containing Lorem Ipsum passages, and more recently with desktop publishing software like Aldus PageMaker including versions of Lorem Ipsum.

Why do we use it?
It is a long established fact that a reader will be distracted by the readable content of a page when looking at its layout. The point of using Lorem Ipsum is that it has a more-or-less normal distribution of letters, as opposed to using ‘Content here, content here’, making it look like readable English. Many desktop publishing packages and web page editors now use Lorem Ipsum as their default model text, and a search for ‘lorem ipsum’ will uncover many web sites still in their infancy. Various versions have evolved over the years, sometimes by accident, sometimes on purpose (injected humour and the like).

orem Ipsum is simply dummy text of the printing and typesetting industry. Lorem Ipsum has been the industry’s standard dummy text ever since the 1500s, when an unknown printer took a galley of type and scrambled it to make a type specimen book. It has survived not only five centuries, but also the leap into electronic typesetting, remaining essentially unchanged. It was popularised in the 1960s with the release of Letraset sheets containing Lorem Ipsum passages, and more recently with desktop publishing software like Aldus PageMaker including versions of Lorem Ipsum.

Why do we use it?
It is a long established fact that a reader will be distracted by the readable content of a page when looking at its layout. The point of using Lorem Ipsum is that it has a more-or-less normal distribution of letters, as opposed to using ‘Content here, content here’, making it look like readable English. Many desktop publishing packages and web page editors now use Lorem Ipsum as their default model text, and a search for ‘lorem ipsum’ will uncover many web sites still in their infancy. Various versions have evolved over the years, sometimes by accident, sometimes on purpose (injected humour and the like).

What is Lorem Ipsum?

Lorem Ipsum is simply dummy text of the printing and typesetting industry. Lorem Ipsum has been the industry’s standard dummy text ever since the 1500s, when an unknown printer took a galley of type and scrambled it to make a type specimen book. It has survived not only five centuries, but also the leap into electronic typesetting, remaining essentially unchanged. It was popularised in the 1960s with the release of Letraset sheets containing Lorem Ipsum passages, and more recently with desktop publishing software like Aldus PageMaker including versions of Lorem Ipsum.
Read More

What is Lorem Ipsum?

Lorem Ipsum is simply dummy text of the printing and typesetting industry. Lorem Ipsum has been the industry’s standard dummy text ever since the 1500s, when an unknown printer took a galley of type and scrambled it to make a type specimen book. It has survived not only five centuries, but also the leap into electronic typesetting, remaining essentially unchanged. It was popularised in the 1960s with the release of Letraset sheets containing Lorem Ipsum passages, and more recently with desktop publishing software like Aldus PageMaker including versions of Lorem Ipsum.

What is Lorem Ipsum?

Lorem Ipsum is simply dummy text of the printing and typesetting industry. Lorem Ipsum has been the industry’s standard dummy text ever since the 1500s, when an unknown printer took a galley of type and scrambled it to make a type specimen book. It has survived not only five centuries, but also the leap into electronic typesetting, remaining essentially unchanged. It was popularised in the 1960s with the release of Letraset sheets containing Lorem Ipsum passages, and more recently with desktop publishing software like Aldus PageMaker including versions of Lorem Ipsum.
Read more…

Richard Kimberley, an IT business owner, had to give up his business and live in a van because of ES. He blogs about what he is going through at Beyond the Van.

Press here for the Story

© Copyright We are the Evidence 2016. All Rights Reserved.