Visualizzazione post con etichetta Effetti dei Campi Elettromagnetici sulla Salute. Mostra tutti i post
Visualizzazione post con etichetta Effetti dei Campi Elettromagnetici sulla Salute. Mostra tutti i post

martedì 4 agosto 2020

Israele: agricoltori di un kibbutz fanno causa per la esposizione ai sistemi di difesa

I sistemi di controllo e di difesa/contrattacco nei confronti delle postazioni missilistiche di Hammas hanno occupato diversi kibbutz senza avvisare della presenza di forti fonti di radiofrequenze.

Dopo anni alcuni agricoltori hanno collegato malattie 

"L'imputato (IDF ente militare)  ha informato solo di recente  il kibbutz sulla radiazione molto forte emessa dal sistema e che è pertanto severamente vietato impegnarsi in qualsiasi lavoro agricolo nell'area circostante", si afferma nella causa.

I residenti del kibbutz stanno chiedendo un risarcimento di NIS4,5 milioni (oltre $ 1,3 milioni) per danni alla loro salute e per presunti danni ai sistemi agricoli nell'area di 2,5 acri occupati dall'unità Iron Dome.

domenica 31 maggio 2020

Le certezze della scienza 'comunista' sugli effetti delle radiazioni non ionizzanti

Interessante è leggere questo documento de-secretato della Defence Intelligence Agency americana che riporta l'indagine della loro intelligence dello stato dell'arte (anni 1968 - 75)  delle conoscenze nel Mondo Comunista Euroasiatico sugli effetti delle radiofrequenze e microonde.  Hanno ricercato anche informazioni riservate sul trend di ricerca degli effetti sull'uomo per eventuale applicazione militare.

Nelle conclusioni si riporta che i ricercatori comunisti danno maggiore importanza agli effetti non termici delle radiofrequenze (rispetto ai colleghi Occidentali) ! 
Si riconduce gli effetti funzionali sull'uomo come termici, mentre quelli non termici (ovvero quelli che noi individuiamo con elettrosensibilità) sono 'soggettivi'. 
Aggiungono che la ricerca esaminata non sembra collegata a progetti militari. 

venerdì 3 aprile 2020

Magda Havas: cosa ci dicono i numeri sul COVID-19?

Riporto un post della DRsa Magda Havas, grande esperta di ambiente e elettrosmog, che fa un confronto di dati acquisiti da    sui decessi dal 1.1 al 1.4.2020.

Cosa significa tutto ciò? Stiamo reagendo in modo eccessivo a covid-19? Perché non stiamo reagendo alle "altre cause" delle morti in modo simile o forse in modo più misurato?

Ci sono voluti decenni perché i governi vietassero il fumo nei luoghi pubblici nonostante le ampie prove scientifiche che il fumo uccide. Continua a uccidere e più persone sono morte per il fumo che per i covidi-19 quest'anno.

Le persone muoiono a causa dell'esposizione all'elettrosmog e nonostante scienziati, medici e attivisti stiano cercando di ritardare il dispiegamento del 5G (parte del quale include onde millimetriche che non sono state testate per effetti sulla salute a lungo termine) i governi stanno procedendo a tutta velocità. Cosa ha spinto i governi di tutto il mondo ad agire così rapidamente per i covid-19 quando rimangono ciechi, sordi e stupidi sui rischi delle radiazioni a microonde?

Domande concrete ed inquietanti ...

mercoledì 11 marzo 2020

IEEE avverte sulla pericolosità degli smatwatch ed altri 'giocattoli'

Ricordiamo che IEEE  = Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers  associa più di 400.000 ingegneri non solo americani! 
Da persona che oltre dieci anni vive nello associazionismo questi numeri sono ENORMI!   La mission di IEE è sul  loro sito Web:

Lo scopo principale di IEEE è promuovere l'innovazione tecnologica e l'eccellenza a beneficio dell'umanità.

Trovo bellissima questa formulazione. In quanto c'è l'incontro tra sviluppo tecnologico e progresso Umano. 

Prendere visione delle raccomandazioni su come utilizzare questi 'oggetti' SMART'. 

domenica 1 marzo 2020

Appello di Arthur Firstenberg

Dear EMF Scientists, Medical Doctors, and Activists,

We must all make an effort at communication, cooperation and action, now, if we want to survive. Already there are few insects left on Earth, and birds and bats are starving by the billions. SpaceX’s Starlink satellites, when and if they go into service, threaten to put a sudden end to life on Earth later this year.

Yet people are going about their business as if everything is fine. The human race is accelerating, like lemmings, toward a precipice that it does not even know is there. 

The knowledge necessary to change course is possessed by us. Whether we also possess the power to actually do anything to change the course -- to even slow down the rush toward the cliff -- is unknown to me. I doubt it, but I cannot stand by knowing that life on earth is about to end, without doing what I can to try to prevent it. My own life is worth little. But Life Itself is precious and worth fighting for. I assume that you all care about this earth too. But there are some important questions whose answers we so far have not been able to agree on, which limits our effectiveness.

I offer the following, by way of beginning the discussion.

First, very briefly about myself, for those who do not know me well. I will be 70 years old this year. I have been involved in EMF issues since I was 16 years old as a research fellow in an electrophysiology lab at Downstate Medical Center in Brooklyn when I was in the 11th and 12th grades. I was a winner of the Westinghouse Science Talent Search in 1967 for my work in that lab. I studied mathematics and physics at Cornell University. I went to medical school at the University of California, Irvine. I was injured by X-rays midway through medical school, and had to quit one year short of getting my M.D., in order to save my life.

While still in medical school I studied acupressure, shiatsu and kiatsu, and learned acupuncture theory from Chinese and Korean textbooks. Later I studied and became a certified practitioner of the Feldenkrais and Rubenfeld Synergy Methods of healing, which deal with the structural and energetic systems of the body.


1. Is there a dose response for RF radiation?
2. Is wireless technology safe at any level?
I say no. I have already sent some of you a list of studies that support my opinion. But I know it from personal experience. On November 14, 1996, Omnipoint Communications (now T-Mobile) began commercial service of the first digital (2G) cell phone network in New York City from 600 rooftop installations. Within 4 days I could not eat or sleep, my head was roaring like a train, my eyes felt like they were popping out of my head, and my skin was so sensitive I couldn’t bear to be touched. Three times during the 5th night my vocal cords went into spasm so that I could not take a breath in or out. On the 6th morning I grabbed my sleeping bag, got on the Long Island Railroad, and barely escaped with my life.

I was sure that the radiation levels in my apartment were sky high, but I was proven wrong. I hired EMF consultant Stuart Maurer to go down to my apartment with his spectrum analyzer and take measurements. The peak radiation level that had almost killed me in less than a week was
0.0001 μW/cm2 (microwatts per square centimeter) -- less than the radiation levels on much of the Earth today.

I was certain that people were being killed all over New York City by this low level of radiation, and I was proven right. I telephoned Dr. John Goldsmith in Israel and he instructed me how to get weekly mortality statistics for 121 cities from the Centers for Disease Control. The death rate in New York City rose 17% on the day the Omnipoint antennas began service, and remained that elevated for three months. I analyzed weekly mortality statistics for many U.S. cities. In each city, mortality increased between 15% and 30% on the day that city’s 2G service began, and remained elevated for three to four months in each city. I calculated that the installation of 2G in the U.S. in 1996-1997 had killed at least 10,000 people outright.

Here in Santa Fe, Verizon Wireless upgraded its service last month. When I am near a Verizon antenna now, I have a headache, nausea, and a swelling sensation in my throat. It doesn’t matter what the power level is. I have a headache from a Verizon antenna where the power density is 0.03 μW/cm2, and no headache from an AT&T antenna where the power density is 15.2 μW/cm2.

In addition, I feel normal in the middle of Santa Fe, where there are lots of cell towers and levels of radiation are high, but I am falling-over dizzy in remote locations in New Mexico where cell phones don’t even work and the levels are barely measurable. The explanation has nothing to do with power levels. The earth underneath Santa Fe, all the way down to mid-mantle, is more highly conductive than most other places on earth. What most EMF scientists are missing is that the electrical properties of the earth are as important as the electrical properties of the wireless signals we are bathed in. And of all the properties of wireless signals, power level is the least important for health and environment. Wireless kills, period, at any level. And it is about to kill us all, and all the insects, birds and animals, unless we wake up and put a halt to it, now. Starting with the satellites.

3. Is wireless technology from Space safe at any level?

I say no, again from personal experience as well as academic research. Satellites orbiting in the ionosphere are far more dangerous than terrestrial antennas, not because of the radiation levels at the surface of the Earth, but because the ionosphere controls the global electrical circuit. The global electrical circuit provides the energy of life that is identical to the qi of Chinese medicine and the prana of Ayurvedic medicine. If you pollute the global circuit with millions of pulsed, modulated signals, you will destroy every living thing.

As I document in my book, The Invisible Rainbow: A History of Electricity and Life, even the first 28 military satellites, launched in 1968, caused disease on Earth. And the first set of satellites for cell phone service -- Iridium’s 66 satellites -- sickened people and animals everywhere. Iridium went into service on September 23, 1998. On that morning exactly, people all over the world who call themselves electrically sensitive (ES) became suddenly deathly ill. I know because on October 1, 1998, I conducted a telephone survey of 57 ES people in 6 countries; contacted 2 ES support groups; and interviewed 2 nurses and one physician who served that population. I know because on the morning of
September 23, 1998, I myself became deathly ill. I also lost my sense of smell on that morning and it has not returned to this day. The mortality rate in the United States rose by 5 percent for two weeks after the commencement of Iridium’s service.

Birds were affected too. It was pigeon racing season, and in early October, newspapers reported huge losses of homing pigeons in much of the United States. Pigeon racers whom I contacted told me that not only did they lose all their pigeons, but few wild birds were seen in the sky for several weeks. And the sport of pigeon racing has not recovered.

When Iridium came out of bankruptcy and resumed service on March 30, 2001, it was foaling season, and newspapers reported spontaneous abortions and foal deaths among very expensive race horses in many countries. I also received reports from people far and wide of nausea, flu-like illness, and feelings of oppression. As I did when Globalstar, a second satellite phone service, began operation on February 28, 2000 with 48 satellites. As I did when Iridium added data and Internet to its satellite service on June 5, 2001. Such reports did not only come from people labeled ES.

That was, respectively, 66 and 48 satellites -- still the only low-orbit satellites providing cell phone service today. The prospect of 12,000 or more satellites is a global emergency. Even the first 1,000 of those satellites, if they are put into operation later this year, as SpaceX would like to do, threatens to put an end to all of life.

4. Should you sign or promote the International Appeal to Stop 5G on Earth and in Space (“5G Space Appeal”)?

The EMF Scientists Appeal has only 200 signatures. The 5G Space Appeal has 200 thousand signatures, including 5,000 scientists. Yet many who signed the EMF Scientists Appeal have declined to sign the 5G Space Appeal, some because it is not just for scientists and some because they are not experts on space.

What is happening in space is an emergency. I invite you to sign the 5G Space Appeal if you haven’t already, and to circulate it to your colleagues. It is a meticulous, thoroughly referenced, accurate document. 200 signatures will not halt the rush toward the cliff. Neither will 200 thousand signatures. We need millions of signatures, and we need the climate change community. We need to be the catalysts to wake up this world, before it is too late.

5.  “If not me, who?”

Most people who call me for information are calling on their cell phones. Most people who are signing the 5G Space Appeal are signing it on their cell phones. Everyone wants their cell phone but they want me to stop 5G for them and it is impossible. They need their cell phone when they travel. They need it for their business. They need it for their family. They need it for their friends. Or they think 4G is safe, but not 5G. Or they “only” have a flip phone. Or, thinking they are doing good for the planet, they keep their phone “only for emergencies.” They think their phone is not irradiating the birds and the insects and their neighbors like the towers are. They think that if they keep the phone at some distance from their head, that they are safe, because they believe there is a dose response. They think that if they only keep their phone for emergencies, the towers do not have to be there. But if even one person wants to be able to use a cell phone wherever they go in case of an emergency, the entire wireless infrastructure of the planet has to be there. Which means no insects, no birds, and very shortly no life and no planet. And there is not just one person who wants to be able to use a cell phone in an emergency, there are seven billion.

Can we, the EMF scientists, doctors and activists, lead the way by example? Walking the walk, not just talking the talk? Throwing away our phones.

It seems to me that this is the most important question, and the only hope for averting catastrophe. If even we can’t do it, no one else will.

It is abundantly clear that we are losing -- losing the fight and losing our planet -- because for almost everyone on earth, the danger from EMFs is an abstraction. It is noise, like the buzzing of a fly, and nothing more. Government officials cannot hear it. Judges cannot hear it. They look at the supplicants before them, who are talking some nonsense that makes no sense to them, and who are also treating it like an abstraction.
So many of the EMF scientists own cell phones. So many of the EMF activists own cell phones.

I went to a public hearing last week, where I testified that a proposed hotel should not be built because there is a cell tower 20 yards away, whose antenna is aimed at where the hotel would be. The neighboring office suites, once filled with lawyers and other businesses, have emptied out since that antenna was installed. The Planning Commissioners ignored me. I gave them an email from the last remaining office tenant, a lawyer who is about to vacate her office because she has severe nosebleeds and dizziness when she is at work. I gave them a doctor’s letter from a woman who is about to close her jewelry shop below those offices because she has headaches, nosebleeds and heart palpitations when she is at work. The Commissioners acted like I was not there, like the documents I had given them did not exist. The lawyer did not testify herself because she was afraid. The jewelry shop owner did not testify herself because she was afraid. Everyone is afraid, and everyone has a cell phone. No one is showing by their actions that they believe what they are saying, except a few people like me who are as rare as pterodactyls.

It doesn’t matter if we get a million signatures, if everyone is signing on their cell phone. It doesn’t matter if we have a million studies, if the researchers act like they don’t believe their results. Who is going to set the example? Who is going lead the world in a different direction?

Hillel said it best: “If not now, when? If not me, who?”

Arthur Firstenberg
P.O. Box 6216
Santa Fe, NM 87502
phone: +1 505-471-0129

domenica 23 febbraio 2020

IEEE: oltre gli effetti termici

"Abbiamo prove sperimentali più che sufficienti per mettere in discussione la validità della formulazione di standard che tengano conto solo degli effetti termici".

Questo pezzo di  Raymond S. Kasevich è stato pubblicato da IEEE Spectrum 18 anni fa. "IEEE Spectrum è la rivista e il sito Web di punta dell'IEEE, la più grande organizzazione professionale del mondo dedicata all'ingegneria e alle scienze applicate.

                            Il nostro statuto è di tenere informati oltre 400.000 membri sulle principali tendenze e sviluppi in tecnologia, ingegneria e scienza. I nostri blog , podcast, storie di notizie e funzionalità, video e infografiche interattive coinvolgono i nostri visitatori con chiare spiegazioni su concetti e sviluppi emergenti con dettagli che non possono trovare altrove ".

Cosa ci vorrà per superare la "profonda negazione" dei governi e dell'industria delle telecomunicazioni?
Quanti anni ancora dobbiamo aspettare per le norme sulle radiazioni elettromagnetiche che proteggono la salute umana e ambientale?

giovedì 13 febbraio 2020

FDA (USA) ancora negazionista

L'agenzia federale americana ha emesso un rapporto di analisi della documentazione scientifica in cui conferma la propria posizione di 'non evidenza scientifica di danni' ...

Qui una prima analisi da parte di Joel Moskowitz

Di seguito sono riportati alcuni commenti preliminari sul rapporto:


Il nuovo rapporto della FDA ha escluso o respinto centinaia di studi peer-review condotti negli ultimi dieci anni che hanno trovato prove che l'esposizione alle radiazioni wireless ha aumentato il rischio di stress ossidativo, danni al DNA o cancro. Inoltre, la revisione della FDA copre solo radiazioni RF inferiori a 6 GHz, quindi non affronta la ricerca sulle frequenze delle onde millimetriche che sono state in parte utilizzate per il 5G. Il rapporto ha escluso tutti gli studi in vitro e molti studi in vivo. Il rapporto afferma che esiste "una mancanza di plausibilità meccanicistica biologica", tuttavia, il rapporto non ha esaminato la ricerca sui meccanismi.

Sul suo sito web (aggiornato il Feb/10/2020), la FDA afferma che "non esistono prove scientifiche coerenti o credibili dei problemi di salute causati dall'esposizione all'energia a radiofrequenza emessa dai telefoni cellulari (vedere Revisione della letteratura pubblicata tra il 2008 e il 2018 del Rilevanza per le radiazioni e il cancro con radiofrequenza - PDF 1,3 MB: vedete il link qui sopra), ma il loro nuovo rapporto affronta solo la ricerca sul rischio di cancro e danni al DNA. dall'esposizione alle radiazioni dei telefoni cellulari.

martedì 4 febbraio 2020

Attenzione alla luce blu, di notte!

“Quando vedi la  luce blu come prima cosa al mattino, queste lunghezze d'onda impostano l'orologio circadiano su 24 ore precise. Il problema è che se vedi la luce blu di notte, dai tuoi telefoni, TV, computer e luci fluorescenti compatte, stai distruggendo il tuo sistema circadiano per tutta la notte. Quelle luci ci sembrano bianche, ma francamente, sono per lo più blu ", ha spiegato Nelson, che - insieme a DeVries - riceve il supporto del West Virginia Clinical and Translational Science Institute.

La sua ricerca  ha associato la luce blu notturna a tassi più elevati di obesità, disturbi metabolici e depressione.

venerdì 3 gennaio 2020

National Institutes of Health – agenzia governativa US per la ricerca biomedica fa il punto sulla ricerca su 5G

Importante 'news' sul sito del National Institutes of Health – agenzia governativa statunitense per la ricerca biomedica   

Michael Wyde, Ph.D.,  ricercatore presso il famoso NTP (National Toxicologic Program, ente di ricerca tossicologica che paralellamente al nostro Istituto Ramazzini hanno consolidato con sperimentazione su animali la relazione causale tra CEM e tumori)  ha analizzato la tecnologia cellulare di ultima generazione e i suoi potenziali effetti sulla salute umana.


Dati alcuni dei problemi che ho appena menzionato, è difficile confrontare il 5G con le precedenti generazioni di reti wireless. Gli scienziati NTP stanno ancora lavorando per comprendere l'impatto dell'esposizione alla RFR sui tessuti biologici, indipendentemente dalla generazione.

È noto che le onde millimetriche, come quelle utilizzate nel 5G, non viaggiano tanto lontano e non penetrano nel corpo così profondamente come la RFR alle frequenze più basse utilizzate nelle attuali reti 2G, 3G e 4G. Gran parte dell'assorbimento a frequenze più elevate si verifica nella pelle.

Alle frequenze più basse, è stato dimostrato che la RFR penetra almeno tre o quattro pollici nel corpo umano. Nei nostri studi sui ratti, l'esposizione alla RFR a 900 MHz ha indotto tumori nel cuore, nel cervello e nella ghiandola surrenale. Tuttavia, la frequenza RFR alle frequenze delle onde millimetriche 5G non penetrerebbe abbastanza in profondità per raggiungere quei tessuti.

Inoltre, poiché le frequenze più elevate nella rete 5G raggiungono distanze più brevi e non penetrano nelle barriere fisiche, sono necessari sostanzialmente più trasmettitori e antenne per fornire copertura ai consumatori. Pertanto, la vicinanza dell'uomo alle antenne potrebbe aumentare, il che potrebbe potenzialmente portare a esposizioni più elevate

NTP sta valutando la letteratura esistente sulle frequenze più alte destinate all'uso nella rete 5G e sta lavorando per comprendere meglio le basi biologiche per i risultati del cancro riportati in precedenti studi sulla RFR con tecnologie 2G e 3G.

Inoltre, sono in corso lavori per sviluppare camere di esposizione RFR più piccole per studi a breve termine sui roditori che richiederanno settimane e mesi per essere completati anziché anni. Il nuovo sistema di esposizione sarà anche in grado di valutare le nuove tecnologie nel settore delle telecomunicazioni.

L'obiettivo di NTP è anche quello di ripetere gli studi sul danno al DNA nelle camere di esposizione RFR più piccole e di identificare i biomarcatori di danno da esposizione a RFR.
I biomarcatori sarebbero cambiamenti fisici misurabili, come i cambiamenti molecolari, che possono essere visti in tempi più brevi di quelli necessari per sviluppare il cancro e che potrebbero essere predittivi della malattia.

Se gli scienziati sono in grado di comprendere meglio i cambiamenti biologici negli animali, sapranno di più su cosa cercare nell'uomo.

mercoledì 9 ottobre 2019

WHO vuole aggiornare la sua monografia sugli effetti delle radiofrequenze sulla salute umana

Come ben spiegato in

la monografia sulle radiofrequenze è addirittura del 1993 !  quindi con le conoscenze dell'epoca e quando la telefonia cellulare era basata sul 'molto meno dannoso'  GSM ...

Sono chiamati tutti quelli che hanno competenze tecnico scientifiche a portare il proprio contributo.

E' una opportunità che non va assolutamente persa. 

The World Health Organization’s (WHO) Radiation Programme has an ongoing project to assess potential health effects of exposure to radiofrequency (RF) electromagnetic fields in the general and working population. To prioritize potential adverse health outcomes, WHO conducted a broad international survey in 2018. Ten major topics were identified for which WHO will now commission systematic reviews to analyze and synthesize the available evidence.

Through this Call, WHO invites eligible teams to indicate their interest in undertaking a systematic review on one (or more) of the following topics:
                     SR1 – Effect of exposure to RF on cancer (human observational studies)
                     SR2 – Effect of exposure to RF on cancer (animal studies)
                     SR3 – Effect of exposure to RF on adverse reproductive outcomes (human observational studies)
                     SR4 – Effect of exposure to RF on adverse reproductive outcomes (animal and in vitro studies)
                     SR5 – Effect of exposure to RF on cognitive impairment (human observational studies)
                     SR6 – Effect of exposure to RF on cognitive impairment (human experimental studies)
                     SR7 – Effect of exposure to RF on symptoms (human observational studies)
                     SR8 – Effect of exposure to RF on symptoms (human experimental studies)
                     SR9 – Effect of exposure to RF on biomarkers of oxidative stress
                     SR10 – Effect of exposure to heat from any source and pain, burns, cataract and heat-related illness

Teams intending to respond to this Call for Expression of Interest are invited to visit
The closing date for this Call of Expression of Interest is 4 November 2019.

martedì 10 settembre 2019

Polarizzazione: differenza tra CEM artificiali e naturali


Nel presente studio analizziamo il ruolo della polarizzazione nell'attività biologica dei campi elettromagnetici (EMF) / radiazione elettromagnetica (EMR).
Tutti i tipi di EMF / EMR artificiali - in contrasto con EMF / EMR naturali - sono polarizzati. Gli EMF polarizzati / EMR possono avere una maggiore attività biologica, a causa di:
1) Capacità di produrre effetti di interferenza costruttiva e amplificare le loro intensità in molti luoghi cellulari.
2) Capacità di forzare tutte le molecole cariche / polari e in particolare gli ioni liberi all'interno e intorno a tutte le cellule viventi per oscillare su piani paralleli e in fase con il campo polarizzato applicato.

 Tali oscillazioni forzate ioniche esercitano forze elettrostatiche additive sui sensori dei canali ionici elettro-sensibili della membrana cellulare, con conseguente loro gating irregolare e conseguente interruzione del bilancio elettrochimico della cellula.
Queste caratteristiche rendono gli EMF / EMR artificiali più bioattivi degli EMF / EMR naturali non ionizzanti. Ciò spiega il crescente numero di effetti biologici scoperti negli ultimi decenni da indurre dai campi elettromagnetici artificiali, diversamente dai campi elettromagnetici naturali nell'ambiente terrestre che sono sempre stati presenti nel corso dell'evoluzione, sebbene l'esposizione umana a questi ultimi sia normalmente di intensità / energia significativamente più elevate e durate più lunghe. Pertanto, la polarizzazione sembra essere un fattore scatenante che aumenta in modo significativo la probabilità di innescare effetti biologici / sulla salute

vedi anche

sabato 27 luglio 2019

Due Stati Americani si pongono delle domande ...

Gli Stati USA NewHampshire ed Oregon hanno approvato delle leggi che prevedono delle commissioni tecniche alle quale è stato richiesto di capire quali danni possono venire alla popolazione dal 5G e dal wifi a bambini, a scuola.

Bene.   E' quello che chiediamo ... passare dalla certezza che  < non ci rilevanze scentifiche> al dubbio legato alla conoscenza!

Two states establish commissions to study wireless radiation health effects
New Hampshire commission to study 5G health effects; Oregon to study wireless radiation in schools

July 25, 2019

New Hampshire: House Bill 522 establishes a commission to study the environmental and health effects of 5G technology

Completed Legislative Action
Spectrum: Bipartisan Bill
Status: Passed on July 24 2019 - 100% progression
Action: 2019-07-24 - Signed by Governor Sununu 07/19/2019; Chapter 260; I. Sec. 2 Eff: 11/01/2020 II. Rem. Eff: 07/19/2019
Text: Latest bill text (Enrolled) [HTML]

In the Year of Our Lord Two Thousand Nineteen
Be it Enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives in General Court convened:
1  New Subdivision; Commission to Study the Environmental and Health Effects of Evolving 5G Technology.  Amend RSA 12-K by inserting after section 11 the following new subdivision:
Commission to Study the Environmental and Health Effects of Evolving 5G Technology
12-K:12  Commission Established.  There is established a commission to study the environmental and health effects of evolving 5G technology, which includes the use of earlier generation technologies.  Fifth generation, or 5G, wireless technology is intended to greatly increase device capability and connectivity but also may pose significant risks to humans, animals, and the environment due to increased radiofrequency radiation exposure.  The purpose of the study is to examine the advantages and risks associated with 5G technology, with a focus on its environmental impact and potential health effects, particularly on children, fetuses, the elderly, and those with existing health compromises.
12-K:13  Membership.
I.  The members of the commission shall be as follows:
(a)  Three members of the house of representatives, including one member from the house science, technology, and energy committee, and one member from the health, human services and elderly affairs committee, appointed by the speaker of the house of representatives.
(b)  Two members of the senate, appointed by the president of the senate.
(c)  A member of the public, appointed by the governor.
(d)  The attorney general, or designee.
(e)  Two members of the New Hampshire High Technology Council, appointed by the council.
(f)  One member representing the Business and Industry Association, appointed by the association.
(g)  One member of the New Hampshire Medical Society who specializes in environmental medicine and is familiar with electromagnetic radiation, appointed by the society.
(h)  One member representing the university system of New Hampshire knowledgeable in radiofrequency radiation, appointed by the chancellor.
(i)  One member of the cell phone/wireless technology industry, appointed by the president of the senate.
(j)  The commissioner of the department of health and human services, or designee.
(k)  One public member with expertise in the biological effects of radiofrequency radiation, appointed by the speaker of the house of representatives.
II.  Legislative members of the commission shall receive mileage at the legislative rate when attending to the duties of the commission.
III.  The members of the commission shall elect a chairperson from among the members.  The first meeting of the commission shall be called by the first-named house member.  The first meeting of the commission shall be held within 45 days of the effective date of this section.  Seven members of the commission shall constitute a quorum.
12-K:14  Duties and Reporting Requirement.  
I.  The commission shall:
(a)  Examine the health and environmental impacts from radiofrequency (RF) radiation emitted from the waves in the 30-300 gigahertz (GHZ) range of the electromagnetic spectrum, which falls somewhere between microwaves and infrared waves, and which are required with the rollout of 5G technology.
(b)  Assess the health and environmental impacts of 5G technology, which requires small cell towers to be placed at a distance of 250 meters from each other at telephone pole height from the ground and will operate in conjunction with the 3G and 4G technology infrastructure.
(c)  Receive testimony from the scientific community including but not limited to physicists and electrical engineers, the medical community including but not limited to cellular experts and oncologists, the wireless technology industry including but not limited to cell phone businesses and businesses working on the development autonomous vehicles which will rely on 5G technology, as well as other organizations and members of the public with an interest in 5G technology.  
(d)  Consider the following questions and the impact on New Hampshire citizens, municipalities, and state government of:
(1)  Why the insurance industry recognizes wireless radiation as a leading risk and has placed exclusions in their policies not covering damages caused by the pathological properties of electromagnetic radiation?
(2)  Why do cell phone manufacturers have in the legal section within the devise saying keep the phone at least 5mm from the body?
(3)  Why have 1,000s of peer-reviewed studies, including the recently published U.S. Toxicology Program 16-year $30 million study, that are showing a wide-range of statistically significant DNA damage, brain and heart tumors, infertility, and so many other ailments, being ignored by the Federal Communication Commission (FCC)?
(4)  Why are the FCC-sanctioned guidelines for public exposure to wireless radiation based only on the thermal effect on the temperature of the skin and do not account for the non-thermal, non-ionizing, biological effects of wireless radiation?
(5)  Why are the FCC radiofrequency exposure limits set for the United States 100 times higher than countries like Russia, China, Italy, Switzerland, and most of Eastern Europe?
(6)  Why did the World Health Organization (WHO) signify that wireless radiation is a Group B Possibly Carcinogenic to Humans category, a group that includes lead, thalidomide, and others, and why are some experts who sat on the WHO committee in 2011 now calling for it to be placed in the Group 1, which are known carcinogens, and why is such information being ignored by the FCC?
(7)  Why have more than 220 of the worlds leading scientists signed an appeal to the WHO and the United Nations to protect public health from wireless radiation and nothing has been done?
(8)  Why have the cumulative biological damaging effects of ever-growing numbers of pulse signals riding on the back of the electromagnetic sine waves not been explored, especially as the world embraces the Internet of Things, meaning all devices being connected by electromagnetic waves, and the exploration of the number of such pulse signals that will be created by implementation of 5G technology?
II.  The commission shall prepare and publish an interim and final report of its findings and recommendations.  The reports shall:
(a)  Outline the advantages of, and risks associated with, 5G technology running in conjunction with the 3G and 4G technology infrastructure.
(b)  Develop a strategy, if deemed necessary, to limit RF radiation exposure from 5G or lesser generation technology relying upon electromagnetic waves.
(c)  Include a public policy statement on 5G wireless systems, which either declares the technology safe or outlines actions required to protect the health of its citizens and environment.
(d)  Consider alternatives to 5G technology that will accelerate information flow speeds and volumes without the use of electromagnetic waves that emit high levels of radiation.
(e)  Provide any recommendations for proposed legislation developed by the commission.
III.  The commission shall submit the interim report required under paragraph II to the speaker of the house of representatives, the president of the senate, the house clerk, the senate clerk, the governor, and the state library on or before November 1, 2019, and shall submit the final report on or before November 1, 2020.
2  Repeal.  RSA 12-K:12 - 12-K:14 and the subdivision heading preceeding RSA 12-K:12, relative to commission to study the environmental and health effects of the evolving 5G technology, are repealed.
3  Effective Date.
I.  Section 2 of this act shall take effect November 1, 2020.
II.  The remainder of this act shall take effect upon its passage.

Oregon Senate Bill 283: An act relating to exposure to radiation in schools in this state; and declaring an emergency

Directs Oregon Health Authority to review peer-reviewed, independently funded scientific studies of health effects of exposure to microwave radiation, particularly exposure that results from use of wireless network technologies in schools and to report results of review to interim committee of Legislative Assembly related to education not later than January 2, 2021.


80th OREGON LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY--2019 Regular Session

Senate Bill 283: Enrolled Bill Text

AN ACT Relating to exposure to radiation in schools in this state; and declaring an emergency.

Be It Enacted by the People of the State of Oregon:

SECTION  1. (1)(a) The Oregon Health Authority shall:

(A) Review peer-reviewed, independently funded scientific studies of the health effects of exposure to microwave radiation, particularly exposure that results from  the use of wireless network technologies in schools or similar environments; and

(B) Report the results of the review to an interim committee of the Legislative Assembly related to education not later than January 2, 2021.

(b) The review described in paragraph (a) of this subsection must, at a minimum, consist of a literature review of peer-reviewed, independently funded scientific studies that examine the health effects of exposure to microwave radiation on children.

(2) The Department of Education shall develop recommendations to schools in this state for practices and alternative technologies that would reduce students’ exposure to microwave radiation that the review described in subsection (1) of this section identifies as harmful.

SECTION  2. This 2019 Act being necessary for the immediate preservation of the public peace, health and safety, an emergency is declared to exist, and this 2019  Act takes effect on its  passage.