Page 1 of 710   Next›  Last» 

Comparison of Contamination: ! A strong article worhy of reading
USA Created: 29 May 2017
Ever worry that that gadget you spend hours holding next to your head might be damaging your brain? Well, the evidence is starting to pour in, and it's not pretty. So why isn't anyone in America doing anything about it?

Earlier this winter, I met an investment banker who was diagnosed with a brain tumor five years ago. He's a managing director at a top Wall Street firm, and I was put in touch with him through a colleague who knew I was writing a story about the potential dangers of cell-phone radiation. He agreed to talk with me only if his name wasn't used, so I'll call him Jim. He explained that the tumor was located just behind his right ear and was not immediately fatal—the five-year survival rate is about 70 percent. He was 35 years old at the time of his diagnosis and immediately suspected it was the result of his intense cell-phone usage. "Not for nothing," he said, "but in investment banking we've been using cell phones since 1992, back when they were the Gordon-Gekko-on-the-beach kind of phone." When Jim asked his neurosurgeon, who was on the staff of a major medical center in Manhattan, about the possibility of a cell-phone-induced tumor, the doctor responded that in fact he was seeing more and more of such cases—young, relatively healthy businessmen who had long used their phones obsessively. He said he believed the industry had discredited studies showing there is a risk from cell phones. "I got a sense that he was pissed off," Jim told me. A handful of Jim's colleagues had already died from brain cancer; the more reports he encountered of young finance guys developing tumors, the more certain he felt that it wasn't a coincidence. "I knew four or five people just at my firm who got tumors," Jim says. "Each time, people ask the question. I hear it in the hallways."
It's hard to talk about the dangers of cell-phone radiation without sounding like a conspiracy theorist. This is especially true in the United States, where non-industry-funded studies are rare, where legislation protecting the wireless industry from legal challenges has long been in place, and where our lives have been so thoroughly integrated with wireless technology that to suggest it might be a problem—maybe, eventually, a very big public-health problem—is like saying our shoes might be killing us.
Except our shoes don't send microwaves directly into our brains. And cell phones do—a fact that has increasingly alarmed the rest of the world. Consider, for instance, the following headlines that have appeared in highly reputable international newspapers and journals over the past few years. From summer 2006, in the Hamburg Morgenpost: are we telephoning ourselves to death? That fall, in the Danish journal Dagens Medicin: mobile phones affect the brain's metabolism. December 2007, from Agence France-Presse: israeli study says regular mobile use increases tumour risk. January 2008, in London's Independent: mobile phone radiation wrecks your sleep. September 2008, in Australia's The Age: scientists warn of mobile phone cancer risk.
Though the scientific debate is heated and far from resolved, there are multiple reports, mostly out of Europe's premier research institutions, of cell-phone and PDA use being linked to "brain aging," brain damage, early-onset Alzheimer's, senility, DNA damage, and even sperm die-offs (many men, after all, keep their cell phones in their pants pockets or attached at the hip). In September 2007, the European Union's environmental watchdog, the European Environment Agency, warned that cell-phone technology "could lead to a health crisis similar to those caused by asbestos, smoking, and lead in petrol."
Perhaps most worrisome, though, are the preliminary results of the multinational Interphone study sponsored by the International Agency for Research on Cancer, in Lyon, France. (Scientists from thirteen countries took part in the study, the United States conspicuously not among them.) Interphone researchers reported in 2008 that after a decade of cell-phone use, the chance of getting a brain tumor—specifically on the side of the head where you use the phone—goes up as much as 40 percent for adults. Interphone researchers in Israel have found that cell phones can cause tumors of the parotid gland (the salivary gland in the cheek), and an independent study in Sweden last year concluded that people who started using a cell phone before the age of 20 were five times as likely to develop a brain tumor. Another Interphone study reported a nearly 300 percent increased risk of acoustic neuroma, a tumor of the acoustic nerve.
As more results of the Interphone study trickled out, I called Louis Slesin, who has a doctorate in environmental policy from MIT and in 1980 founded an investigative newsletter called Microwave News. "No one in this country cared!" Slesin said of the findings. "It wasn't news!" He suggested that much of the comfort of our modern lives depends on not caring, on refusing to recognize the dangers of microwave radiation. "We love our cell phones. The paradigm that there's no danger here is part of a worldview that had to be put into place," he said. "Americans are not asking the questions, maybe because they don't want the answers. So what will it take?"
To understand how radiation from cell phones and wireless transmitters affects the human brain, and to get some sense of why the concerns raised in so many studies outside the U.S. are not being seriously raised here, it's necessary to go back fifty years, long before the advent of the cell phone, to the research of a young neuroscientist named Allan Frey.
By: Christopher Ketcham
Click here to view the source article.
Source: Agnes Ingvarsdottir

Bidders tune into sale of £6bn mast monopoly Arqiva
United Kingdom Created: 29 May 2017
A multibillion-pound bidding bidding war over the monopoly on Britain’s television masts, as well as thousands of mobile phone masts, is about to get underway as bankers gear up for the sale of Arqiva.
Infrastructure funds and specialist wireless mast owners have been invited to express interest in the company this month, according to City sources.
Arqiva’s owners, a consortium including the Australian investment bank Macquarie and the Canada Pension Plan Investment Board, are understood to be putting it up for sale with a price tag of between £5bn and £6bn. Rothschild is conducting the auction.
The move signals that hopes of a stock market float for the company have been abandoned. Complications surrounding Arqiva’s £3bn debt pile are thought to have made a public offering unfeasible, sources said.
The company is Britain’s biggest independent owner of mobile masts with around 8,000 sites on which it rents space to telecoms operators.
Arqiva also operates the national television broadcast network and most of the country’s radio transmitters, having acquired National Grid Wireless a decade ago for £2.5bn.
The sale is expected to attract interest from consortiums of foreign infrastructure investors of the type who have recently battled it out over the National Grid gas distribution network and City Airport. They are likely to include Chinese funds, sources said, potentially raising questions over Arqiva’s status as an owner of critical national infrastructure.
Chinese ownership of vital British infrastructure is now viewed as politically sensitive in the wake of the controversy surrounding Hinkley Point. Theresa May paused the energy project last year for a national security review that resulted in new safeguards being imposed on future nuclear power stations.
Arqiva is also likely to draw interest from companies that specialise in operating communications masts, a sector undergoing consolidation across Europe. Spain’s Cellnex, one of Europe’s biggest mobile mast owners, recently entered the UK market with the €393m (£337m) takeover of Shere Group, a operator with 540 British masts.
Cellnex sources said the deal was an opportunity to learn about the UK market as a possible prelude to further expansion. A bid for Arqiva would represent a radical move for a company with a market capitalisation of less than £3bn.
The company is on the block following an overhaul under new management, including a refinancing in November that simplified its debts.
Its chief executive, telecoms industry veteran Simon Beresford-Wylie, is targeting growth in the mobile market as revenues from broadcasting are in long, slow decline.
It is expected that Britain will need thousands more mobile masts to cope with demand for internet access on the move and the shift to the 5G technology that will be essential to driverless cars.
Mr Beresford-Wylie has also sold off sideline businesses such as Wi-fi hotspot network, to Virgin Media, and sought to improve Arqiva’s standing with mobile operators by making the company more responsive to upgrade requests.
At its last quarterly financial results, Arqiva reported a 10.3pc increase in sales to £230.2m and an 11.9pc increase in underlying earnings to £109.9 million.
Click here to view the source article.
Source: Chrisoper Willims, Chief Business correspondent , the daily Telegraph/Agnes Ingvarsdottir

Ghaziabad authority plans to relocate mobile towers from residential areas to parks
India Created: 26 May 2017
The Ghaziabad development authority is planning to relocate mobile phone towers installed on residential and commercial buildings to parks where more space is available.

The officials said nearly 30 parks have been identified in developed-and under development colonies where the mobile phone towers can be erected.

According to official estimates, the city has over 700 mobile phone towers and the number is increasing by the day.

Such towers are installed on rooftops of residential highrises or other buildings. There are also instances where the towers are installed on school buildings in Ghaziabad.

As per the norms issued in 2006, mobile phone towers are not allowed in residential areas and in no case should it be in a 100-metre radium of schools, hospitals and temples.

“We have identified 30 parks and sent the locations to the horticulture and the engineering departments to conduct a survey for availability of vacant spaces. If space is available, and it is feasible for the cellular operators to relocate the towers, we will allow the relocation,” said Ishtiyak Ahmad, chief architect & town planner, GDA.

The areas where the plan is proposed include localities in Kavi Nagar, Shastri Nagar, Patel Nagar, Indirapuram, Vaishali, Vasundhara, Raj Nagar, Madhuban Bapudham and Govindpuram among others. The authority has already got installed eight mobile towers at their community centres, away from dense population.

According to officials, the building by-laws also permit tower installation in parks and green belts. They added that more than one mobile phone tower can also be allowed but it requires a minimum distance of 250 metres between the two.

“This is planned as residents often complain against the installation of mobile phone towers on their buildings and also adjacent to their houses. Once the survey is completed by our department, we will finalise locations and explore possibilities for relocation,” he added.

In 2015, a committee of GDA officials had finalised guidelines for installation of mobile phone towers and recommended that they be allowed in open spaces, parks and on green belts.

The committee had also decided that for installing towers in properties such as residential, commercial and office space, the permission of the GDA board would be mandatory.

For group housing residential areas, the approval of the local residents’ welfare association was also made mandatory.
Click here to view the source article.
Source: Hindustan Times, Peeyush Khandelwal, 25 May 2017

New records show how state reworked secret cell phone warnings
USA Created: 26 May 2017
SACRAMENTO — Newly released public records show that California public health officials worked for five years on a set of guidelines to warn the public about the potential dangers of cell phones, revising their work 27 times with updated research before abandoning the efforts without ever making their concerns public until ordered by a judge.

The 27 versions of the guidelines, obtained by The Chronicle, show that California health officials deleted a section that warned state employees with work-issued cell phones about the potential increased risk for brain cancer from use of the devices over time. The final version of the guidelines was a broad warning to the public about exposure to electromagnetic fields emitted by cell phones. It included a list of best practices to minimize exposure.

Joel Moskowitz, a public health researcher at UC Berkeley who sued the state to force the release of the records, said state officials should never have withheld the warnings from the public. Lawyers for the state had argued in court that release of the warnings could cause unnecessary panic.

“It would have to be purely political to deny distributing this,” Moskowitz said. “Science supports this.”

Sacramento County Superior Court Judge Shelleyanne Chang ordered the state in March to turn over the final version of the guidelines from 2014. Last week, as part of the lawsuit, the judge forced California health officials to turn over all the previous versions of the guidelines it had kept secret.

It’s unclear what debate went on inside the California Public Health Department over the guidelines — and whether there was any influence from outside the department.

The Chronicle submitted a public records request to the health department in March, asking for emails or documents related to why the cell phone guidelines were never approved to be made public — and to see whether there was any outside influence. The department refused to release records, saying those that existed were protected by attorney-client privilege.

The little information that is known about the state’s efforts to create and then abandon cell phone guidelines can be gleaned from Moskowitz’s lawsuit and the newly released documents.

The first version of the guidelines, from 2009, said recent studies of cell phone and cordless phone use “suggest that after 10 years of heavy use there is an increased risk of malignant brain cancer and a kind of benign tumor in the inner ear, particularly on the side of the head where these phones are usually placed.” The state department reviewing the material, the Division of Environmental and Occupational Disease Control, wrote that following its own “unpublished meta-analysis,” it agreed with the conclusions of the studies. Similar language about long-term effects was included in the later versions, but not the part about a consensus of study findings by the division.

The first version also included this language, which was later removed: “Although most cell phone and cordless phone heavy users would not get brain cancer, the number of brain cancer patients coming to hospitals would increase and would represent a significant cost to society in suffering, medical costs and economic costs that one would want to avoid.”

Additionally, the first version noted that the lifetime risk of getting brain cancer is low, but that longtime heavy use of cell phones and cordless phones is enough to be of “regulatory concern.” That “regulatory concern” was removed in the later versions.

The early document also included the section of state employees, which was deleted. It detailed how state government and its employees could lower the risk of exposure, such as reducing the time workers were required to be on their cell phones, avoiding purchasing cordless phones for office use and ensuring that employees have headsets.

The first version also warned: “Do not allow children to use a cell phone, except for emergencies.” The final version said, “Parents may want to limit their child’s cell phone use to texting, important calls and emergencies.”

“I want to know why this was suppressed,” Moskowitz said, referring to information he feels parents should be aware of.

The California Department of Public Health declined an interview request, releasing only written statements.

“The draft cell phone guidelines attempted to characterize the complex science around radiofrequency electromagnetic field (EMF) and provide options for people who want to reduce their exposure,” the statement read.

The health department told The Chronicle in March that it abandoned the guidelines because the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention issued national guidance on the same subject in 2014. But, even those national guidelines were the subject of controversy.

CDC’s updated guidelines in 2014 read “we recommend caution in cell phone use,” but that language was deleted weeks later.

A New York Times investigation last year, examining more than 500 pages of internal CDC records, found the agency’s new language had been worked on for three years, but soon after it was published, officials grew concerned that it was being mistaken as a policy change. The language was then changed again in 2014 to say: “Some organizations recommend caution in cell phone use. More research is needed before we know if using cell phones causes health effects.”

Moskowitz said he hopes the state will decide to adopt and post the guidelines its own department created.

“It seems to me better late than never to notify the public,” Moskowitz said. “The public has a right to this information paid for with their tax dollars.”

The statement from the California Department of Public Health said there are no plans to post the guidelines on its website.

Melody Gutierrez is a San Francisco Chronicle staff writer. Email: mgutierrez@sfchronicle.com Twitter: @MelodyGutierrez

Guidelines on safe mobile usage

Increase the distance between you and your cell phone by:

Using the speaker phone.

Sending text messages.

Use a headset, and carry your phone away from your body. EMFs from wireless (Bluetooth) and wired headsets are usually weaker than those from a cell phone.

Keep your phone away from your body. A cell phone that is on can emit EMFs even when it is not being used.

Do not sleep with your cell phone near you or carry it in a pocket or directly on your body unless the phone is turned off.

Keep cell phone calls short, even when using a wireless or wired headset.

Take off your headset when you’re not on a call. Wireless and wired headsets emit EMFs even when you are not using your phone.

Do not rely on devices that claim to shield or neutralize EMFs from cell phones. These devices have not been shown to reduce exposures.

Source: California Department of Public Health
Click here to view the source article.
Source: San Fransisco Chronicle, Melody Gutierrez, 19 May 2017

California: Helsemyndighetene ble presset til ikke å informere om helsefarene ved mobilbruk
Norway Created: 26 May 2017
Den amerikanske delstaten har måttet levere ut de omfattende advarslene mot mobiltelefoni og trådløse fasttelefoner som helsemyndigheten laget, men aldri publiserte. Advarslene ble re-formulert hele 29 ganger i årene 2009 – 2015, og så ble hele advarselen lagt i skuffen.

Hvorfor? Jo, det viser seg at politisk ledelse presset Californias helsemyndighet til stadig å svekke teksten til den ble like tannløs som den føderale teksten som etterhvert kom fra Washington DC. Og da trengtes den ikke lenger.

Det var Joel Moskowitz, medisiner og direktør for Folkehelseinstituttet (Center for Disease Control) ved University of California, Berkeley, som tvang fram dokumentene ved å stevne delstaten. Dokumentene viser at forvaltningen først utarbeidet retningslinjer og helseadvarsler som ga anvisninger for delstatens innkjøp og restriksjoner på trådløsbruk for statens egne ansatte. De tidlige versjonene ga klare henvisninger til funnene i en rekke forskningsprosjekter. Disse prosjektene påviste DNA-skader og flerdoblet risiko for hjernesvulster etter langvarig bruk av mobiltelefon. Helsefaglige myndigheter ville blant annet anbefale tidsbegrensninger for alle ansatte, bruk av ørepropper, fjerning av ørepropper og hodesett fra hodet når telefonene ikke var i bruk, og at man holdt mobilene unna kroppen.

*SNIP* read the entire article via the source link below...
Click here to view the source article.
Source: Jeg har noe på hjertet (Blog), Einar Flydal, 26 May 2017

Increasing levels of saliva alpha amylase in electrohypersensitive (EHS) patients
France Created: 26 May 2017
Abstract, PURPOSE: To assess the level of various salivary and urinary markers of patients with electromagnetic hypersensitivity (EHS) and to compare them with those of a healthy control group.

MATERIALS AND METHODS:
We analyzed samples from 30 EHS individuals and a matched control group of 25 individuals (non-EHS) aged between 22 and 66. We quantified cortisol both in saliva and urine, alpha amylase (sAA), immunoglobulin A and C Reactive Protein levels in saliva and neopterin in urine (uNeopterin).

RESULTS:
sAA was found to be significantly higher (p<0.005) in the EHS group. uNeopterin and sAA analysis showed a significant difference based on the duration of EHS.

CONCLUSION:
Higher levels of sAA in EHS participants may suggest that the sympathetic adrenal medullar system is activated. However, most of the analyzed markers of the immune system, sympathetic activity and circadian rhythm did not vary significantly in the EHS group. There is a trend to the higher levels of some variables in subgroups according to the EHS duration.

KEYWORDS:
EMF; IEI-EMF; alpha amylase; electromagnetic fields; environmental illness; markers; saliva; symptoms
Click here to view the source article.
Source: Int J Radiat Biol., Andrianome S et al, 17 May 2017

Radiation from wireless technology elevates blood glucose and body temperature in 40-year-old type 1 diabetic male
USA Created: 26 May 2017
Abstract: A type 1 diabetic male reports multiple instances when his blood glucose was dramatically elevated by the presence of microwave radiation from wireless technology and plummeted when the radiation exposure ended.

In one instance, his body temperature elevated in addition to his blood glucose. Both remained elevated for nearly 48 h after exposure with the effect gradually decreasing.

Possible mechanisms for microwave radiation elevating blood glucose include effects on glucose transport proteins and ion channels, insulin conformational changes and oxidative stress.

Temperature elevation may be caused by microwave radiation-triggered Ca 2+ efflux, a mechanism similar to malignant hyperthermia.

The potential for radiation from wireless technology to cause serious biological effects has important implications and necessitates a reevaluation of its near-ubiquitous presence, especially in hospitals and medical facilities.
Click here to view the source article.
Source: Electromagnetic Biology and Medicine, Catherine E. Kleiber, 19 May 2017

French Govt. knew in 2015 that 9/10 phones exceeded SAR on body contact! But didn't warn
France Created: 21 May 2017
Paris, 17 May 2017 (APMnews) – Some standards currently applied to mobile phones are not protective, according to a militant physician, Marc Arazi, who recently took legal action for the public release of the names of devices exceeding thresholds when placed against the body.

The specific absorption rate (SAR) indicates the amount of energy received by the user of a radio-electric device when it is operating at full power for several minutes. The absorption of electromagnetic fields leads to an increase in tissue temperature. In order to prevent this thermal effect, threshold values have been imposed.

In the European Union, the SAR head and SAR trunk must be less than 2 W/kg and the SAR limbs, less than 4 W/kg. The SAR head is “well-defined”. It integrates two standardized postures in contact with the ear and close to the mouth, Gilles Brégant, director of the National Frequency Agency (ANFR), told APMnews on Tuesday. The manufacturer must include this SAR head measurement in all notices about their devices. Overall, the SAR head has decreased. It is on average equal to 1 W/kg, according to the ANFR director.

Concerning the SAR trunk, up until April 2016, it was the manufacturer who chose the distance at which it was measured. This was between 0 and 2.5 cm. This value and the distance at which it has been measured are not usually included in the notices.

In its July 2016 report « Exposure to Radiofrequencies and Child Health », the National Agency for Food, Environmental and Occupational Health and Safety (ANSES) considered it “unlikely that people, especially children, are aware of the conditions of use close to the body, as defined by manufacturers”. In most cases, the notice specifies keeping the phone 15 mm from the body. Yet, the separation distance between the body and a phone placed in a shirt pocket is well below this figure, ANSES emphasized in the report.

Since 2006, ANFR has been checking the manufacturers’ claims. The agents collect about 100 phones each year at sales outlets and have them analyzed by accredited laboratories which recalculate the SAR.

In 2015, the SAR trunk of 9 out of 10 phones exceeded the limit value on contact.

The July 2016 ANSES report presented the results of the SAR trunk measurements in contact with the device, carried out by ANFR on 95 mobile phones on sale in France in 2015. 89% of the phones measured on contact by ANFR had a SAR greater than the limit value of 2 W/kg and 25%, a SAR greater than 4 W/kg. This means that, in contact with the body, the SAR trunk of 9 out of 10 phones exceeded protective values.

Since publication of these results, Marc Arazi, physician and former national coordinator of the association Priartem (For the regulation of mobile phone antennas), asked ANFR to publish the list of phones whose SAR trunk values exceeded 2 W/kg on contact.

But despite a favorable opinion from the Commission for Access to Administrative Documents (CADA), ANFR did not disclose this list. Marc Arazi tried in vain to win his case in court. On 20 April, the Administrative Tribunal of Melun rejected the militant’s request.

Gilles Brégant explained to APMnews why ANFR has not published this list.

According to the rules in force in 2015, all phones collected that year and evaluated by the agency respected the standards because they did not impose a measurement in contact with the body. “These phones respected the standard at the distance specified by the manufacturers, most often, 15 mm”, commented the director of the agency. The law does not allow disclosure of information collected as part of the monitoring activity of this agency, said Gilles Brégant. The agency could also not sanction the manufacturers because their devices complied with the standards in force.

If ANFR has chosen to measure the SAR trunk of devices on contact, this is not to better reflect the reality of their use, but “for convenience”. In order to have a “common standard”, the manufacturers sometimes delayed specificying at what distance they had measured the SAR trunk, said Gilles Brégant.

The European Commission revises the standard

For wireless communication devices held in the hand or carried close to the body, ANFR asked the European Commission in 2015 to change the maximum distance of the SAR trunk measurement from 25 mm to 5 mm. “We have taken advantage of the new directive to change the standard,” said Gilles Brégant. This European directive 2014/35/UE called RED, applicable from June 2016, will be fully incorporated in France from July, according to ANFR.

Moreover, by a decision of 5 April 2016, the Commission acknowledged that the standard did not meet safety requirements and specified that for SAR measurements of the trunk (limit 2 W/kg), the separation distance should not exceed “a few millimeters”.

Citing this text as reference, ANFR now applies a distance of 5 mm for the SAR trunk to the devices it measures.

An unacceptable distance for Marc Arazi who pleads in favor of “protective standards” with a SAR trunk measured in contact with the body.

In its July 2016 report, ANSES recommended “ensuring in all circumstances compliance with the regulatory limit values for exposure”, regardless of the mobile transmitters and their conditions of use, especially in contact with the body.

vib/ab/APMnews

Autor Virgine Bagouet for APMnews
Click here to view the source article.
Source: APM News, via Marc Arazi / PRIARTEM blog, 17 May 2017

Airline pilot has nowhere to escape from wireless radiation (2012)
Canada Created: 19 May 2017
Professional pilot Melissa Chalmers has moved twice in 10 months to escape wireless radiation and worries she’s running out of places to hide.

The commercial pilot of 20 years is on sick leave. She suffers from sensitivity to electromagnetic waves — the invisible waves given off by almost everything electric, in particular, those emitted by communication towers that are popping up across Canada.

Chalmers, who lives near Grand Bend on Lake Huron, may be moving again because of a new a cell tower not far from her forested home.

“They have put a tower up down the road. I’m just waiting for it to be turned on and then I will probably have to leave the home,” she said.

Chalmers first noticed, about two-and-a-half years ago when she lived in London, that the nausea she felt when she was in her apartment subsided when she left.

Cellphones, cellphone towers, wireless internet routers, cordless phones and power lines have all been recognized as possible contributors to electromagnetic hypersensitivity (EMS), which is caused by significant exposure from radio waves.

EMS symptoms include poor sleep, fatigue, headache, nausea, dizziness, heart palpitations, memory impairment and skin rashes.

Dr. Riina Bray, medical director, Environmental Health Clinic, Toronto’s Women College Hospital, is a leading physician on EMS and its symptoms.

“I’m just basically seeing more and more folks with electro hypersensitivity . . . there is a small fraction of the population who are hypersensitive and the WHO (World Health Organization) supports that phenomenon as being real,” she told the Star.

“With the continuous onslaught of this stuff in our society it is very hard for these folks . . . to get better faster.”

“If I have to move again,” Chalmers told the Star, “it will be three times since Christmas, so I am getting pretty tired of moving and I really don’t know where I am going to go at this point.”

Critics say if Industry Canada, which has total control over telecommunications, has its way there will be no place for people such as Chalmers to live.

Industry Canada did not respond to a Star request for an interview.

Bray said the public should not have to prove harm. “It should be done by industry and government,” she says.

Municipalities that have tried to control the number and location of cells towers say Industry Canada has told them it would block any attempt to usurp its powers.

The municipality of Lambton Shore near Lake Huron found out where it stood when it mused about creating a community, Port Franks, free of wireless radiation as did Oakville when it introduced its own protocol calling for a 200-metre setback.

“I went to that meeting in Oakville where it was discussed and it became very clear from Industry Canada and Health Canada that they were not going to change, they were not listening. They were there to dictate,” said Frank Klegg, a retired Microsoft Canada president, who is now head of Citizens For Safe Technology (C4ST).

Klegg said C4ST wants to work with the federal government to establish so-called white zones across the country where people who are sensitive to wireless radiation can seek refuge.

Oakville Mayor Rob Burton said the federal government doesn’t even consult the municipality on 95 per cent of the applications to erect cell towers and for the remaining 5 per cent he suggested the consultation is little more than lip service.

“What shocks me is the federal government pretending that we have a say,” Burton said.

“Our protocol is designed to get us out of the line of fire . . . we have turned away seven or eight now (but) then the proponent then goes to Industry Canada (which) gives them the go-ahead,” he said.
Click here to view the source article.
Source: Toronto Star, Richard J. Brennan, 17 Oct 2012

Smart-Attack!! (a must-watch)
United Kingdom Created: 17 May 2017
*WARNING - HEAVY IRONY AHEAD - USE CRITICAL THINKING*.

Watch 4½ minute video here: https://youtu.be/N29AtA3VodU

Please donate to help us make more: https://goo.gl/6YmSwS

Ever wondered why your energy supplier and governments are so keen to give you a smart meter?

We lay out some not-so-good reasons in this 4 minute animation. Your private data, lifestyle and behavioural choices can be amalgamated into a data-set that is monetised and sold to 3rd party companies. Our usual satire of dark subjects aim to entertain and inform you.

Please download and upload to your own channel. We ask you to not change, edit or cut it short in anyway. If you upload it please link back to our channel here and our website so others can grab it.

Get it from: http://infomaticfilms.com/download.htm

We've covered the costs of music, actors and given 9 months of work for free so consider donating $5/£5 towards our next animation here : https://goo.gl/6YmSwS
Click here to view the source article.
Source: Infomaticfilms, 15 May 2017

 Page 1 of 710   Next›  Last»