Physicians for Safe Technology

Wireless Technology and Public Health

Policies, Resolutions, and Testimony

These varied events… linked by a common flaw: the blended ignorance and arrogance that has led us to believe ourselves the master-controllers of a new technological age. We have made the life-threatening error of believing that if we were clever enough to invent new masterworks of technology, we were also capable of controlling them. [Regarding Chernobyl nuclear plant Explosion 1986]

Richard N. Goodwin, former Legislative Oversight Subcommittee of theU.S. House of Representatives and assistant special counsel to President John F. Kennedy,

Updated 6/27/21

Please scroll for Policies, Resolutions, Testimony, Appeals and Letters on EMR or go to tabs.

See also 

Policies

Cyprus, Greece, January 2017: The Ministry of Education and Culture issued a special encyclical banning and/or limiting WiFi networking in public kindergartens and primary schools. “Technology Harming Our Children” MP says  Annual Report Cyprus National Committee on Environment and Children’s Health

 EUROPAEM EMF Guideline 2016 for the prevention, diagnosis and treatment of EMF-related health problems and illnesses gives an “overview of the current knowledge regarding EMF-related health risks and provides recommendations for the diagnosis, treatment and accessibility measures of EHS to improve and restore individual health outcomes as well as for the development of strategies for prevention. EMF Guidelines  

Report of the Standing Committee on Health,House of Commons in the Canadian Parliament (June 2015): Radiofrequency electromagnetic Radiation and the Health of Canadians. Research and testimony was submitted at public hearings looking at safe human exposure to radio frequency (RF) radiation. Several recommendations were made by the standing committee. These included:

  • funding research on EMR and electro-sensitivity
  • developing an awareness campaign relating to the safe use of wireless technology such as cell phones and Wi-Fi both in the home and at school
  • consider marketing policy for advertising to children under 14.  Canadian Report EMR 2015

France: Law on Public Exposure to Electromagnetic Waves Adopted.  Feb 5, 2015. The French National Library along with other libraries in Paris, and a number of universities had already removed all wi-fi networks. The current law includes the following:

  • a prohibition on Wi-Fi installations in nursery schools,
  • Wi-Fi turned off in schools when not in use
  • yearly evaluations of EMR in public places to be available to citizens
  • Wi-Fi hotspots to be labeled
  • advertisements must recommend headsets
  • annual electro-hypersensitivity report updated annually
  • requires the National Agency for Health Food, Environmental and Work Safety to evaluate the risks and consequences of exposure to EMR
  • asks that cell towers be turned to as low a power as possible to function. France Law EMR 2015  or  French government bans Wi-Fi in schools

Ashland Massachusetts Public Schools in 2015 developed a policy to reduce Wi-Fi in schools. A “best practices” policy is posted in every room.  Ashland Public Schools Best Practices to Limit Wi-Fi

The Austrian Medical Association recommendations to the public in 2012 to use wired internet connections instead of Wi Fi as well as how to identify, diagnose and treat electrosensitivity.  Guideline of the Austrian Medical Association for the diagnosis and treatment of EMF- related health problems and illnesses (EMF syndrome)

The 2011 European Parliament Resolution 1815: The potential dangers of electromagnetic fields and their effect on the environment. The goals listed include setting preventable thresholds for long term exposure, raising awareness throughout the community, and protecting “early warning” scientists. European Parliament 2011

European Environmental Agency(EEA) Report 2007. Professor  McGlade. Radiation from everyday devices assessed. A new report raising concerns about the effects of electromagnetic fields (EMF) on human health calls for tougher safety standards to regulate radiation from mobile phones, power lines and many other sources of exposure in daily life. Radiation risk from everyday devices

“There are many examples of the failure to use the precautionary principle in the past, which have resulted in serious and often irreversible damage to health and environments. Appropriate, precautionary and proportionate actions taken now to avoid plausible and potentially serious threats to health from EMF are likely to be seen as prudent and wise from future perspectives. We must remember that precaution is one of the principles of EU environmental policy,” states Professor Jacqueline McGlade,

European Environmental Agency(EEA) Report 2000. Late Lesssons from Early Warnings. The Precautionary Principle 1896-2000. Environmental  issue report No 22. European Environmental Agency(EEA) Report 2000. Late Lessons. Late Lessons Early Warnings

Israel Health Ministry Calls for Parents to Limit Kid’s use of cell phones. July 27, 2008. Israel Health Ministry calls for limiting cell phone use

India bans advertisements of  pregnant women and children in mobile phone ads or near cell antennae. June 2008. India bans cell phone advertisements

For a full list of updated resolutions you can visit Environmental Health Trust Database of Worldwide Policy on Wireless Technology. EHTrust International Policies on EMR

Resolutions 

International EMF Scientist Appeal is the most prominent initiative to date. Initiated in 2015 it has over 220 signatures from scientists in the field of EMR who  are calling upon the United Nations and its sub-organizations, the WHO and UNEP, and all U.N. Member States, for greater health protection on EMF exposure. The The Appeal urgently calls upon them to “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.  International EMF Scientist Appeal

Vienna Resolution from Workshop on possible biological and health effects of RF electromagnetic fields, 1998:  “The currently used national and international practiced strategy to determine limit values is extremely conservative, it urgently demands replacement by the precautionary principle, similar to strategies in many other sciences. The “Salzburg-model” showed, that neighbor involvement and a precautionary limit value of 1 mW/m2 EMF-flux-density can be achieved even for the sum of all GSM frequencies without technically compromising the quality of the GSM net.” Vienna EMF Resolution 1998

Salzburg Resolution(Austria) on Mobile Telecommunications Base Stations: In 2000 the Salzburg, Austria Resolution was passed with recommendations for siting of telecommunications base stations. They stated “Presently the assessment of biological effects of exposures from base stations in the low-dose range is difficult but indispensable for protection of public health. There is at present evidence of no threshold for adverse health effects. It is recommended for existing and new base stations to exploit all technical possibilities to ensure exposure is as low as achievable (ALATA-principle). In addition the protocol should include considerations on existing sources of HF-EMF exposure. Salzburg Resolution 2000

Benevento Resolution 2002 (Italy)

“More evidence has accumulated suggesting that there are adverse health effects from occupational and public exposures to electric, magnetic and electromagnetic fields, or EMF1, at current exposure levels. What is needed, but not yet realized, is a comprehensive, independent and transparent examination of the evidence pointing to this emerging, potential public health issue. Resources for such an assessment are grossly inadequate despite the explosive growth of technologies for wireless communications as well as the huge ongoing investment in power transmission. There is evidence that present sources of funding bias the analysis and interpretation of research findings towards rejection of evidence of possible public health risks.” Benevento Resolution

The Porto Alegre Resolution 2009: Co sponsored by the Brazilian Health Ministry and the International Commission for Electromagnetic Safety, May 18, 2009.

“ We agreed that the protection of health, well-being and the environment requires immediate adoption of the Precautionary Principle… for the establishment or modification of non-ionizing radiation exposure standards.

We recognize that, in Brazil as well as all over the world, where there has been an unprecedented explosion in the availability and use of non-ionizing electromagnetic fields for electrical and wireless communications technologies (mobile and cordless phones, WiFi and WIMAX networks, RFID, etc,), as well as major electrical grid and wireless broadband infrastructure changes, this assessment should inform risk management to take proper steps to protect the public from long- term, low-level exposure to extremely-low frequency as well as radiofrequency electromagnetic fields that have substantially increased in the ambient environment in recent years.

The exposure levels at which these effects have been observed are many times lower than the standards promulgated by the International Commission for Non-Ionizing radiation Protection (ICNIRP) and the IEEE’s International Committee on Electromagnetic Safety (ICES). These standards are obsolete and were derived from biological effects of short-term high intensity exposures that cause health effects by temperature elevation and nerve excitation discovered decades ago.

We are deeply concerned that current uses of non-ionizing radiation for mobile phones, wireless computers and other technologies place at risk the health of children and teens, pregnant women, seniors and others who are most vulnerable due to age or disability, including a health condition known as electromagnetic hypersensitivity.

We strongly recommend these precautionary practices:

  1. Children under the age of 16 should not use mobile phones and cordless phones, except for emergency calls;
  2. The licensing and/or use of Wi-Fi, WIMAX, or any other forms of wireless communications technology, indoors or outdoor, shall preferably not include siting or signal transmission in residences, schools, day-care centers, senior centers, hospitals or any other buildings where people spend considerable time;
  3. The licensing for siting and installation of infrastructure related to electrical power and wireless broadband telecommunications, particularly, cellular telephony, Wi-Fi and WIMAX, should only be approved after open public hearings are held and approval granted with full consideration given to the need to apply the Precautionary Principle. Sensitive areas should be avoided to protect vulnerable populations;
  4. Mankind shall be encouraged to continue to discover new means of harnessing non-ionizing electromagnetic energy, aiming at bringing benefits to society, through definition of new standards of human exposure, which are based on the biological realities of nature and not solely on the consideration of economic and technological needs.” Porto Alegre Resolution

Testimony and Court Cases 

No American court has yet ruled that cell phones can cause brain cancer either generally or specifically, nor have the courts prohibited the use of Wi-Fi in schools. There  have been at least 14 cases that have gone through the courts on brain tumors. This provides lengthy but interesting reading. In April, 2017 an Italian judge ruled that excessive cell phone use can result in cancer. The judge notably did not allow any admittance of research funded by industry.  It appears to be the first time a judge has ruled there may be link between cell phones and brain cancer.

Italian Supreme Court, April 21, 2017 ruled that excessive, work-related use of a mobile phone caused an executive from Telecom Italia to develop a benign brain tumor. American Article Newsweek

Judge Frederick H. Weinberg,  2014. -MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER ON EXPERT WITNESS ADMISSIBILITY.  Bret and Laura Bocook versus Motorola,Inc., et al., 2014.  He notes “It is not the court’s role to resolve disputes within the scientific community. The very existence of a dispute precludes admission.” Court Order Expert Witness Testimony Admittance

 Dr. Jerry L. Phillips, January 14, 2013, expert testimony for the Maine Public Utilities Commission in opposition to Smart Meters.  Dr. Phillips Testimony

Lloyd Morgan, US District Court. Portland Schools vs David Morrison. In support of an injunction enjoining Portland School’s use of Wi-Fi.
December 22, 2011. Amended Testimony

Judge Frederick H. Weinberg. 2001. Superior Court District of Columbia. Multiple Plaintiffs vs Motorola, Inc., Qualcomm, Inc., Nokia, Inc.,  Audiovoxx communications, Inc.  Dismissal of first court case on brain tumors and cell phones, with plaintiffs  suing for damages from illness and loss. Judges Decision

Former High level Government Official Provides Robust Scientific Testimony That Cell Phones Likely Cause Brain Tumors and is Prevented from Being an Expert Witness

Christopher Portier, PhD., former director of the National Center for Environmental Health at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR),  and currently a scientific advisor for the World Health Organization (WHO), provided expert scientific testimony in a long standing cell phone court case, Murray vs Motorola.  His 176 page research summary includes gliomas, acoustic neuromas, carcinogenicity studies, initiation and promotion studies, oxidative stress, genotoxicity and co-carcinogenesis. He notes, “The evaluation of whether RF exposure can cause brain tumors in humans requires the review and synthesis of scientific evidence from studies of human  populations (epidemiology), animal cancer studies, and studies investigating the mechanisms through which chemicals[exposures] cause cancer.”   His report  provided 441 references  with an additional appendix of 291  of his own published peer reviewed references.  Dr. Portier concluded, “In my opinion, RF exposure probably causes gliomas and neuromas and, given the human and experimental evidence, I assert that, to a reasonable degree of scientific certainty, the probability that RF exposure causes gliomas and neuromas is high.”

For years industry attorneys have opposed expert witnesses in Murray vs Motorloa, citing the ” Daubert” clause distinguishing methodology from conclusion for expert witnesses.  Despite his glowing and irrefutable research Mr Portier was rewarded for his diligence and honesty by being  barred from being an expert witness.   Judge Irving stated in a court motion filed  3/31/21. “[A]llowing Dr. Portier’s testimony four months before the Daubert hearing is scheduled to begin would disrupt the existing schedule and detrimentally affect the orderliness and efficiency of any trial,”   The Expert Report testimony  to the court  by Dr. Christopher Portier can be found here-Expert report Christopher J Portier Murray v Motorola 3-1-2021   or at  https://drive.google.com/file/d/1we0YEJslnrmQkr2qzSFnQyqdsTqXbqSd/view

 

Letters

Dr. Beatrice Golomb, UCSD Professor of Medicine,writes to the California Legislature to oppose SB649 to fast track placement of small cell antennas throughout neighborhoods. August 2017.   Golomb SB649 Letter of opposition  8-22-2017

Physician Letter to the Commonwealth of Massachusetts Joint Committee on Education, in testimony in support of Massachusetts bills H.2030 An Act relative to best management practices for wireless in schools and public institutions of higher education   and  S.2079 An Act reducing non-ionizing radiation exposure in schools.The physician discusses her children’s sensitivity to the wireless networks in school.  Testimony H.2030 and S.2079 MD Education Testimony

Dr. Martin Pall, Letter Opposing SB649 and includes 134 references on non-thermal effects of  radio frequency radiation from wireless devices and infrastructure. August 2017.  134 References on Non-Thermal Effects of Wireless Radiation

Dr. Martha Herbert, Harvard pediatric neurologist and neuroscientist to Los Angeles Unified School District regarding placement of Wi-Fi networks in schools.  Feb 8, 2013. Dr. Herbert Letter

American Academy of Pediatrics Letter to Federal Communications Commission (FCC) regarding “Reassessment of Exposure to Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Fields Limits and Policies” .  August 29, 2013, urging the FCC to adopt radiation standards that 1) protect children’s health and well-being from radiation emitted by cell phones and other wireless devices; 2) reflect how people actually use their cell phones; and 3) provide sufficient information that enables consumers to make informed decisions when they purchase mobile phones.   AAP Letter Reevaluation Safety Standards EMR

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to Janet Newman on clarification of adequacy of Federal Communications Commission (FCC) radio frequency guidelines for non-thermal and long term health effects. 2002.  EPA letter 2002 http://www.humboldtgov.org/DocumentCenter/View/2858

Local City Appeals Opposing Cell Towers