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, 
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.

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.