|Page 1 of 759  Next› Last»|
|11,000 Pages of Evidence Filed in Landmark 5G Case Against the FCC, Hearing Set for Jan. 25|
|USA||Created: 22 Jan 2021|
After the FCC last month found no evidence of harm caused by wireless technology, CHD and other groups sued — and included 11,000 pages of evidence refuting the FCC’s conclusion.
For decades, the public has been told there is no evidence that wireless technology is harmful. Claims of 5G harms have been dismissed as “conspiracy theory.”
A landmark case against the Federal Communication Commission (FCC) contests these statements and asserts that the harms are proven and that an epidemic of sickness exists.
Recently, the leading environmental and health advocacy organizations that filed the case submitted 11,000 pages of evidence in support of their claims. (Links to the evidence are provided below).
The case is being heard by the U.S. Courts of Appeals of the DC Circuit. Oral arguments are scheduled for Jan. 25 at 9:30 a.m. EST. The public can listen to it on YouTube.
In December 2019, the FCC closed an inquiry it initiated in 2013 in which the commission asked the public to submit comments to the inquiry’s docket as to whether or not the FCC should review its 1996 health guidelines for Radio Frequency (RF) radiation emitted by wireless devices and infrastructure.
About 2,000 comments — an exceptionally large number — were filed with the FCC. These comments were filed by scientists and science organizations, such as the BioInitiative and EMF Scientist, by doctors and medical organizations, by cities, such as Boston and Philadelphia, and by hundreds of individuals including parents of children who were injured by this technology. The comments referenced thousands of studies showing clear and profound evidence of harm.
Nevertheless, the FCC order, published on Dec. 4, 2019, concluded there is no evidence that wireless technology causes harm, and no need to review the guidelines. The FCC decision didn’t provide an analysis of the science, disregarded the evidence of sickness and didn’t defend its decision with evidence.
Consequently, two lawsuits were filed against the FCC. One by the Environmental Health Trust (EHT) and Consumers for Safe Cell Phones, and one by the Children’s Health Defense (CHD) and additional petitioners including Prof. David Carpenter who is the co-editor of the BioInitiative Report, the most comprehensive review of the science by 29 leading scientists and public health experts.
CHD’s case was also joined by physicians who see the sickness in their clinics and by parents of children who have become sick with radiation sickness. One petitioner is a mother whose son died from a glioblastoma, the same brain tumor that killed Beau Biden, President Joe Biden’s son.
The petitioners of both the EHT and CHD cases filed joint briefs. They argued that, considering the overwhelming evidence that was submitted to the FCC’s docket, and since the FCC’s order lacked evidence of reasoned decision-making, the FCC violated the Administrative Procedures Act and that the commission’s decision is capricious, arbitrary, abuse of discretion and not evidence-based.
The petitioners also argued that the FCC violated the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) because the Agency failed to consider the environmental impacts of its decision, and didn’t comply with the 1996 Telecommunications Act (TCA) because it failed to consider the impact of its decision on public health and safety.
The Opening Brief was filed by petitioners on July 29, 2020. The FCC filed its brief on Sept. 22, 2020; and the petitioners filed their Reply Brief on Oct. 21, 2020.
The court has ordered that in the oral arguments scheduled for Jan. 25, only one attorney will present the case for all the petitioners. It allocated 10 minutes for oral arguments for the petitioners as well as for the FCC.
EHT and CHD have agreed to have CHD’s attorney, Scott McCullough, former Assistant Texas Attorney General and a seasoned telecom and administrative law attorney, present the petitioners’ joint argument.
The three-judge panel in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit that presides over the case includes the Honorable Karen Henderson, Patricia Millett and Robert Wilkins.
EHT is represented by attorney Edward B. Myers, who intervened in the successful case against the FCC with the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) and several Native American tribes when the court upheld the relevance of NEPA in FCC proceedings.
The NRDC filed an amicus brief in the case. An amicus brief was also filed by the Building Biology Institute, and by an executive from the telecom industry, Joe Sandri. Sandri’s brief included a statement of Dr. Linda Birenbaum, director of the National Institute of Environmental and Health Services (NIEHS) from 2009-2019, stating that the evidence of carcinogenic effects of wireless technology has been established.
The evidence referenced in the case shows profound harmful effects and widespread sickness from wireless technology. The evidence (called the “Joint Appendix”) was recently filed and includes 11,000 pages of scientific and human evidence, yet, it is only the tip of the iceberg.
In this type of case only evidence that was submitted to the FCC’s docket can be used. There s much evidence that wasn’t submitted.
The Joint Appendix contains 440 documents. The table of contents alone is 54 pages. Because of the sheer volume of evidence, it had to be divided into 27 volumes. The court requires seven sets of the Joint Appendix, and therefore, 189 binders each containing approximately 500 pages were shipped to the court. The printing and shipping costs for the Joint Appendix amounted to more than $15,000.
The Joint Appendix includes references to thousands of peer-reviewed scientific studies showing DNA damage, reproductive harm, neurological effects such as ADHD, and radiation sickness, which seems to be the most widespread manifestation of wireless harms.
The evidence shows effects on the brain, including impaired blood flow and damage to the blood-brain barrier, cognitive and memory problems and effects on sleep, melatonin production and mitochondrial damage. Causal mechanism of harm was also established. Oxidative Stress, a mechanism of harm that can lead to cancer, non-cancer conditions and DNA damage, was found in 203 out of 225 studies.
Unlike industry statements, both the majority of the studies and the weight of the evidence leave no doubt that the harms are proven.
The Joint Appendix also includes reports of leading expert scientists such as the BioInitiative Report; opinions of medical associations such as the California Medical Association and the American Academy of Pediatrics; appeals of leading expert scientists; U.S. government agencies’ reports (U.S. Access Board, NIBS, the Department of Interior, U.S. Navy, the Military, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency; government studies including the recent National Toxicology Program (NTP), a $30 million study that found clear evidence of cancer and DNA damage; as well as acknowledgement of harm by U.S. government agencies and scientists contradicting the FCC position.
In December 2020, the National Academy of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine (NAS) issued a report determining that the most likely cause of the symptoms suffered by the U.S. diplomats in Cuba and China is Radio-Frequency (wireless) weapons. The NAS was appointed by the Department of State. The report references much of the same evidence filed in the case against the FCC.
The NAS invited Prof. Beatrice Golomb, M.D., Ph.D., to present to the committee. Golomb’s 2018 paper was the first to show that pulsed RF is the most likely explanation for the diplomats’ symptoms. She pointed out the diplomats likely suffer from the same condition experienced by growing segments of the population from wireless technology known as radiation sickness/ microwave sickness/ electrosensitivity. Golomb’s paper was referenced in the case.
Hundreds of testimonials of people who have become sick like the diplomats and statements of doctors were filed to the FCC’s docket. The petitioners argued that the FCC guidelines that deny sickness are being used to deny accommodation for the injured, in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act.
Nevertheless, the FCC denied the evidence, the sickness and did not address the accommodation issue. For those who have been injured this case has profound consequences.
“Environmental Health Trust has worked for over a decade to protect the public from radiofrequency radiation, testified to Congress and published critical research on why children are more vulnerable,” said Devra Davis Ph.D., MPH, president and founder of Environmental Health Trust. “The FCC has ignored our extensive submissions to the FCC over the years which clearly document harm. As the legacies of lead, asbestos, and tobacco teach us, this issue deserves the immediate attention of our federal government in order to protect our children’s healthy future.”
“This is a landmark case and it is of the utmost importance to the Children’s Health Defense which works relentlessly to eliminate the epidemic of sickness in children,” said the organization’s chairman, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. “The American public has been poorly served by the FCC. The FCC’s guidelines are decades-old and are based on scientific assumptions that were proven false. Its failure and disregard of public health is evident in the growing and widespread conditions involving brain damage, learning disabilities, and a host of complex neurological syndromes.”
Kennedy added: “The overwhelming experimental and human evidence which the FCC has ignored leaves no doubt that wireless technology is a major contributory factor to this epidemic. The FCC has shown that its chief interest is protecting the telecom industry and maximizing its profits, and its position as put forward in its brief is simply indefensible.”
The oral arguments are the final stage of this case. After the hearing, all that will be left is to wait for the court’s decision, said Dafna Tachover, director of CHD’s Stop 5G and Wireless Harms Project, who has initiated and led the case for CHD. “We have invested significant resources in this case and all of us worked very hard for the past 13 months. We believe that we have a strong case. Now it is up to the court. As William Wilberforce, who fought slavery said, ‘You may choose to look the other way, but you can never say again that you didn’t know.’”
Find all the evidence for download at the source link below...
|Click here to view the source article.|
|Source: Children's Health Defense Team, 21 Jan 2021|
|Call for Temporary Moratorium on 5G Deployment|
|Finland||Created: 20 Jan 2021|
The currently ongoing deployment of the fifth generation of the wireless communication technology (5G) is being met with a great enthusiasm by the telecommunication industry, national governments and portion of the general public. However, there is also some resistance from the part of the population, caused by the uncertainty whether radiation emitted by the 5G networks and devices will have any effects on human health and environmental impact on fauna and flora.
The 5G wireless communication technology that is being deployed comprises of parts of the used already 3G and 4G technologies. The radiation emitted by the predecessors of the 5G, the radiation frequencies emitted by the 3G and 4G technologies, has been classified by the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), as a possible human carcinogen. IARC evaluation did not concern the frequencies above 6 GHz, especially the currently prepared for use 26 and 28 GHz bands and the whole spectrum of 30–300 GHz frequencies that will be used by 5G in coming years.
Recently published safety guidelines by the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP), claiming that mm-waves radiation exposure limits are protecting all users, are only an assumption that is not sufficiently based on science, because the research on effects of mm-waves on skin has not been done yet. ICNIRP’s claim that the safety limits protect all users, no matter of their age or their health status, are only assumption with insufficient scientific basis.
The notion, often presented by industry and in the news media, that mm-waves will not be of health concern because they are entirely absorbed by skin, is absolutely misleading. Skin is not just a “physiologically inert overcoat”. Skin is involved in regulation of the immune response, cardiovascular functions, or neurological functions.
Skin is the only organ of the human body, besides the eyes, that will be directly exposed to the mm-waves of the 5G technology. As I presented in recent review of science, the whole scientific evidence on the possible effects of mm-waves on skin and skin cells consists of only some 99 studies, where 11 are human volunteer studies, 54 are animal in vivo studies (rats & mice) and 34 are in vitro laboratory studies using human and animal cell cultures. These studies examined only short-term acute effects of the exposure that do not provide any information about the possible delayed or long-term-exposure effects. Furthermore, the effects of mm-waves were examined in separation from other frequencies used by 5G and in separation from other environmental stressors (chemicals and radiations). Possibility of any co-effects and/or synergistic effects were not yet examined at all.
There is an urgent need for research on the biological and health effects of mm-waves because, using the currently available evidence on skin effects, the claims that “we know skin and human health will not be affected” as well as the claims that “we know skin and human health will be affected” are premature assumptions, lacking sufficient scientific basis.
In this situation, it would be prudent to place temporary moratorium on 5G deployment, while progressing with health research.
|Click here to view the source article.|
|Source: BlogBRHP, Dariusz Leszczynski, 20 Jan 2021|
|5G Satellite Protest Rally March 19 at SpaceX, Hawthorne, CA.|
|USA||Created: 20 Jan 2021|
A number of Safe Technology, Pro-Health and Environmental organizations have come together to plan a national protest rally at the headquarters of SpaceX in Hawthorne, CA on Friday, March 19th, 2021. This event will “kick off” the next 5G Global Protest Day, scheduled for the following day, March 20th.
Protestors are calling for an immediate halt to SpaceX and other 5G satellite approvals due to inadequate assessment of the impacts of launching tens of thousands of satellites into the earth’s atmosphere. Approvals for satellites must be given only after thorough safety assessment.
5G is currently being rolled out around the world at breakneck speed. An “all things connected” world will wirelessly connect every “thing”, “event”, and place on the planet to the internet. To do so will entail a huge increase in radio frequency exposure, energy consumption, and greenhouse gas emissions from the manufacturing, use, and disposal of trillions of IoT “things”, devices and accompanying infrastructure. More and more people are questioning the harms to health, wildlife, climate, human rights, privacy and cyber security.
SpaceX and other companies are deploying thousands of low orbit satellites (potentially 100,000 or more) and complementary earth base stations, none of which have been tested for environmental safety. Dangers include depletion of the ozone layer, pollution from rocket launches and from “dead” satellites burning up in the atmosphere, radiation levels that exceed even the FCC’s antiquated maximum exposure limits, mega energy consumption, projected tripling or more of energy, permanent compromise of the night sky, space debris accumulation and likely satellite collisions, interference with astronomical research and weather forecasting, and effects on wildlife and humans.
Unfortunately, SpaceX is not the only company launching satellites. One Web, Telesat, Amazon, Facebook and Lynk all have plans to join the global 5G race. Many other countries also have their own satellite programs.
Wired technology such as fiber or coaxial cable is safer, faster and far more reliable and cyber secure than wireless. Wired connections should be used for the vast majority of all internet and telecommunications technology, reserving wireless for emergency use, and recognizing that the cultivated demand for always-on wireless data harvesting, under the guise of connectivity, is unnecessary, unsustainable and a breach of privacy.
Collaborating organizations include Stop 5G International, the International Appeal to Stop 5G on Earth and in Space, Environmental Health Trust, Americans for Responsible Technology, Children’s Health Defense, Moms Across America, and 5G Free California
For questions contact David Goldberg, 5G Colorado Action at email@example.com
For more information, visit https://stop5ginternational.org/5g-spacex-satellite-protest-march-19-2021/
Facebook – https://www.facebook.com/groups/548912049259423/
Twitter – https://twitter.com/Stop_5G_Intl
Instagram – https://www.instagram.com/stop5ginternational/
Consider also signing and sharing the Healthy Heavens Trust Declaration, https://www.5g-ilan.com
|Click here to view the source article.|
|Source: Stop 5G International, 17 jan 2021|
|Going for broke: 5G Rivals Face an $81 Billion Tab After Spectrum Buying Spree|
|USA||Created: 19 Jan 2021|
AT&T, Verizon expected to turn to bond markets and banks to finance bids in record-setting FCC airwaves auction.
Bidders spent a record $80.9 billion in a U.S. government airwaves-license sale, capping a frenzied auction that will demand a commensurate wave of borrowing in an already-indebted telecom sector.
AT&T Inc., Verizon Communications Inc. and others competed in the Federal Communications Commission’s sale of C-band spectrum rights—a hot commodity for cellphone carriers seeking more frequencies for 5G services. The sale ended Friday ahead of a second phase that determines the specific frequencies each company will receive.
The public won’t likely learn the names of the auction’s winners for several weeks, but Wall Street is already taking cues from traditional network operators seeking loans or issuing bonds that could be used to foot the bill.
AT&T is in talks with banks about a possible one-year loan of around $14 billion and recently borrowed about $3.5 billion in the short-term commercial-paper market, according to people familiar with the matter. T-Mobile US Inc. raised $3 billion through a high-yield bond sale earlier this month. Verizon is widely expected to issue bonds in the coming weeks, analysts said.
The new debt this year adds to several billion dollars in bonds that carriers issued in 2020 before the auction started. AT&T’s discussion with banks was earlier reported by Bloomberg News...
|Click here to view the source article.|
|Source: Wall Street Journal, Drew Fitzgerald & Sam Goldfarb, 17 Jan 2021|
|Electromagnetic fields, 5G and health: what about the precautionary principle?|
|United Kingdom||Created: 19 Jan 2021|
Abstract: New fifth generation (5G) telecommunications systems, now being rolled out globally, have become the subject of a fierce controversy.
Some health protection agencies and their scientific advisory committees have concluded that there is no conclusive scientific evidence of harm. Several recent reviews by independent scientists, however, suggest that there is significant uncertainty on this question, with rapidly emerging evidence of potentially harmful biological effects from radio frequency electromagnetic field (RF-EMF) exposures, at the levels 5G roll-out will entail.
This essay identifies four relevant sources of scientific uncertainty and concern: (1) lack of clarity about precisely what technology is included in 5G; (2) a rapidly accumulating body of laboratory studies documenting disruptive in vitro and in vivo effects of RF-EMFs—but one with many gaps in it; (3) an almost total lack (as yet) of high-quality epidemiological studies of adverse human health effects from 5G EMF exposure specifically, but rapidly emerging epidemiological evidence of such effects from past generations of RF-EMF exposure; (4) persistent allegations that some national telecommunications regulatory authorities do not base their RF-EMF safety policies on the latest science, related to unmanaged conflicts of interest.
The author, an experienced epidemiologist, concludes that one cannot dismiss the growing health concerns about RF-EMFs, especially in an era when higher population levels of exposure are occurring widely, due to the spatially dense transmitters which 5G systems require. Based on the precautionary principle, the author echoes the calls of others for a moratorium on the further roll-out of 5G systems globally, pending more conclusive research on their safety.
Read the entire article (open access) via the source link below...
|Click here to view the source article.|
|Source: Journal of Epidemiology & Community Health, Prof. John William Frank|
|5G roll-out should stop while ‘suspected adverse health effects’ investigated, expert claims|
|United Kingdom||Created: 19 Jan 2021|
The global roll-out of 5G should be halted while further investigations are conducted into potential risks associated with the next-generation network technology, a health expert has warned.
Professor John William Frank from the Usher Institute at the University of Edinburgh claimed that no more transmitter towers should be built in order to limit public exposure while safety standards are reviewed.
In an opinion piece published in the Journal of Epidemiology & Community Health, Professor Frank wrote that the radio frequency electromagnetic fields (RF-EMFs) emitted by 5G towers could be linked to “suspected adverse health effects”, though he emphasised that there is no scientific evidence linking 5G to the spread of Covid-19, as some conspiracy theorists have claimed.
“A growing number of engineers, scientists, and doctors internationally [are] calling on governments to raise their safety standards for RF-EMFs, commission more and better research, and hold off on further increases in public exposure, pending clearer evidence of safety,” he wrote.
“It is highly likely that each of these many forms of transmission causes somewhat different biological effects – making sound, comprehensive and up-to-date research on those effects virtually impossible.”
The introduction of 5G coverage offer users radically faster download speeds and the ability to conduct lag-free ultra-HD video chats with other users, however only a handful of high-end devices currently offer the service in a limited number of areas.
Its roll-out has been accompanied by baseless conspiracy theories linking it to the coronavirus pandemic, which have been fuelled by online misinformation disseminated across social media platforms.
Facebook groups sharing fake reports about the alleged dangers of 5G reached tens of thousands of users in 2020, prompting the social network to crack down on such content.
Professor Frank dismissed these conspiracy theories in his article, writing: “There are knowledgeable commentators’ reports on the web debunking this theory, and no respectable scientist or publication has backed it… The theory that 5G and related EMFs have contributed to the pandemic is baseless.”
He added that other possible side effects should be looked at more closely, and called for “a moratorium on that exposure, pending adequate scientific investigation."
There have been numerous studies in recent decades that have sought to understand the potential risks associated with mobile phones and electromagnetic radiation from phone towers, though no adverse effects have yet been established.
According to the World Health Organisation’s International Electromagnetic Fields Project, there is yet to be any concrete proof of negative health outcomes from electromagnetic fields.
|Click here to view the source article.|
|Source: Independent, Anthony Cuthbertson, 19 Jan 2021|
|IPhone12 will stop your implantable defibrillator|
|USA||Created: 10 Jan 2021|
In a recent paper in the journal Heart Rhythm, doctors describe how they turned off the potentially life-saving cardiac defibrillator function of an implanted Medtronic device simply by holding an iPhone 12 near it. The authors had nothing personal against Medtronic, or for that matter, against the new iPhone. The main reason they singled the phone out here was because it is compatible with some of the most advanced new technologies available for various magnetic-based communications and charging.
This technology, known as MagSafe, is basically harmless. It typically integrates charger, magnetometer and NFC reader into a compact package that depends on fairly decent alignment for efficient operation. The problem, at least for Medtronic, is the magnets that facilitate the positioning and docking. The iPhone 12, for example, has a ring of them around its central charging coil. In a nutshell, permanent magnets are never going away, they are simply a perfect solution to many gadget problems. Applications including securing cochlear implant links, joining cables and fastening wristbands now make extensive of use of strong, miniature magnets.
Unless companies like Medtronic get on board and move to smarter device configuration options, they will continue to butt heads with consumer devices—and they will continue to lose. Smarter options don't have to be expensive; just look at your cheap IR TV remote or ultrasonic receiver-emitter pair. These devices simply work. They use an uncomplicated code to make sure there is no interference from all the other ambient sources that are invariably present. A couple of secure ultrasonic bits superimposed on your basic 40 khz carrier waves is all that is really needed. It is likely that companies like Medtronic are working on solutions like this; for example, a Medtronic programming head of some sort can be had on Ebay at the moment for a mere $34.99.
In the larger scheme of things, having a handy iPhone, iWatch, fitbit, or even JUUL vape pen in your pocket to turn off inappropriate pulses or change stimulation modes is not such a bad thing, considering the alternative. Note that all these devices have accidentally toggled pacemakers. For example, if you have say, a standard issue Medtronic c Implantable Cardioverter Pacemaker or Resynchronization Defibrillator, they don't give you a tiny pen. Instead, you lug around their giant 3" diameter,5/8" thick donut magnet that gives a field of 90 Gauss at 1.5."
Perhaps now is a good time to look a little closer into what different implantable pacemaker/defibrillators actually do, and why inappropriately triggering them—or not triggering them, as the case may be—is undesirable. Inappropriate triggering is nothing unusual; it is, in fact, the central preoccupation for these devices. In other words, choosing when to force a contraction, or rhythm, and when to let the heart try to take some responsibility. There are different ways to implant, record from, and stimulate an ailing heart. You can do it externally to the heart chambers, inside the atrium, the ventricle, or both depending on the condition or pathology.
For example, with permanent chronic atrial fibrillation you might get by with a single atrial lead, while with intermittent or paroxysmal fibrillation, you likely want dual atrial and ventricular leads. In pacemaker vernacular, common control modes have names like AOO (asynchronous atrial pacing), VOO (asynchronous ventricular pacing), or DOO (asynchronous A+V pacing). More advanced modes, like DDD mode, have additional logical if-then control, something like the following: "dual-chamber anti bradycardia pacing; if atria fails to fire, it is paced. If the ventricle fails to fire after an atrial event (sensed or paced) the ventricle will be paced."
For the case of the accidental activation by a smartwatch, researchers replicated the misbehavior using a Medtronic Visia AF MRI S DF-1 single chamber ICD defibrillator. In the case of the accidental activation by a JUUL case, a man with a prolonged H-V interval had a dual-chamber Medtronic Evera MRI XT DR DDMB1D1. The reporting authors noted that although in this case, he was fine after reverting to magnet mode and halting emergency stimulation, there is clear potential for unintentional temporary programming and arrhythmic complications with these devices as they stand now.
|Click here to view the source article.|
|Source: Medical Xpress, John Hewitt, 08 Jan 2021|
|Stories of Hope: a teen's foggy brain, rash, itch, fatigue, nausea|
|USA||Created: 9 Jan 2021|
"I threw up most days; I felt like the life was being sucked out of me; It was like my body was exploding".
Starting in grade 8, Solveig's life became a nightmare.
"I was the most itchy you've ever been times 100. I would have to dig my nails into my skin to distract myself in class. By noon I had to call my mom in tears to pick me up from school."
Hear her EHS story by watching the video at the source link:
|Click here to view the source article.|
|Source: JessHerman.com, 14 Dec 2020|
|Breakthrough in case law on radiation risks|
|Holland||Created: 29 Dec 2020|
Administrative judge acknowledges increased health risks to wireless technology well below exposure limits.
Message from Wilma de Jong:
With great gratitude I address you the day before Christmas with great news! The administrative judge declared my appeal well-founded  . On the basis of my notice of appeal  and the hearing of October 20, 2020  , the court classified me as an interested party and ruled that increased health risks, when installing an antenna mast approximately 650 meters from my home, cannot be excluded.
This means we can speak of a huge breakthrough since more than two decades ago citizens started asking the courts for attention for the health risks of antenna installations. In other words, the administrative judge has given us citizens back our voice in the radiation debate. A "Christmas present" that I didn't want to keep from you the day before Christmas.
What does this ruling of the administrative judge mean?
If the law that speaks of this verdict is victorious, this verdict will have a huge impact. This statement means in any case that:
Municipalities must consider the health interests of citizens who are sensitive to radiation in their local antenna policy.
"The health interests of local residents who are sensitive to radiation must also be included in the weighing of interests to be made by the respondent."
(ECLI ruling: NL: RBGEL: 2020: 6702  , claim 8, with reference (in consideration 4.2.) To the decision on my appeal: ECLI: NL: RBGEL: 2020: 6699  , consideration 4.4.)
The (false) safety claim for exposure limits ICNIRP has been removed.
“In the opinion of the court, considering all arguments, with reference to scientific literature, it cannot be ruled out that even at a field strength lower than 1 V / m, and therefore also in the plaintiff's case, there will be increased health risks. ”
(ECLI verdict: NL: RBGEL: 2020: 6699  , consideration 4.4.) As you may know, the ICNIRP exposure limits run up to 61 V / m (volts per meter).
From which it follows that:
The national determination of the ICNIRP limits in the intended 'Amendment to Frequency Decree 2013 to protect public health against radio frequency fields'  is contrary to this ruling.
Even if a fictitious safety margin of a factor of 50 is used, the ICNIRP limits are well above 1 V / m, while the administrative judge has ruled (see 2.) that increased health risks at a field strength below 1 V / m are not excluded. .
In addition, if the ICNIRP limits are set nationally, the municipalities are denied the opportunity to weigh up and promote the health interests of citizens locally (which is also contrary to the decision of the administrative judge, see 1.). After all, if this amendment decision is adopted, municipalities may not deviate locally from the ICNIRP limits by applying lower exposure limits  , even if the health interests of citizens demand this.
Recommendations Health Council inadequate
Already during the session on 20 October 2020, the administrative judge, on the basis of the recent report of the EMV Committee of the Health Council , came to the conclusion that the Health Council 'simply does not know'   .
According to the Scientific Council for Government Policy, ignorance indicates 'uncertain risk problems' that require precaution  . We also find this point of view repeatedly in EU case law on the precautionary principle.  Although the Health Council suggests that it recommends precaution with regard to EMF, this is not actually the case.
In the first place, the recommendation of the Health Council to continue to take the ICNIRP exposure limits as a starting point, in view of the scientific and social controversy surrounding these limits, is contrary to precaution.  Second, the recommendation to apply the ALARA principle (ALARA is abbreviated from 'As Low As Reasonably Achievable') is meaningless, given the extreme height of the field strengths allowed under the ICNIRP limits. As early as 2003, RIVM reported the controversy surrounding this principle, because ALARA can be translated into 'As Large As Regulators Allow'.  The energetic way in which 5G is currently being rolled out nationally as if there were no risks whatsoever is illustrative of not taking protective measures by the government.
Local and national antenna policy must be overhauled
I cannot yet foresee how the verdict will affect at national level. But I do see, as law and truth winning over power politics and technocracy, that antenna policy must be overhauled both locally and nationally. Violations of integrity, such as the Health Council's conflict of interest with the ICNIRP and the obfuscation (defactualization) of scientific evidence  , must be brought to light.
I would like to express the wish - also a nice Christmas thought - that the governments and other involved (medical) institutions take not only their legal, but also their moral responsibility as a result of this decision and recognize that there are limits to ignoring or fighting the rights of citizens.
Regardless, I feel great gratitude that my research over the past 4 years and the appeal I was able to write has paid off. I would like to thank everyone who supported me in this.
On Monday December 28 I will be sending a press release to the media. In addition, I will also offer this information, in modified form, in response to the internet consultation (draft regulation) 'Amendment to Frequency Decree 2013 to protect public health against radiofrequency electromagnetic fields', so that the government can adjust its decision making accordingly.
I wish you a Merry Christmas. May the light (of consciousness) dissipate the darkness (of ignorance). I would like to continue to make my contribution.
Wilma de Jong
 ECLI verdict: NL: RBGEL: 2020: 6699. https://uitspraken.rechtspraak.nl/inziendocument?id=ECLI:NL:RBGEL:2020:6699&showbutton=true .
 https://stralingsbewust.info/wp-content/uploads/Beroepschrift-WJ-de-Jong-zaaknummer-ARN-19-2184-WABOA-Rechtbank-Arnhem.pdf . For 'Further explanation and substantiation: https://stralingsbewust.info/wp-content/uploads/Nadere-toelichting-en-onderbouwing-WJ-de-Jong-ARN-19-2184-WABAO-Rechtbank-Arnhem.pdf .
 https://stralingsbewust.info/2020/10/27/verslag-van-beroep-wilma-de-jong-bij-de-bestuurswacht-in-arnhem/ .
 ECLI verdict: NL: RBGEL: 2020: 6702. https://uitspraken.rechtspraak.nl/inziendocument?id=ECLI:NL:RBGEL:2020:6702&showbutton=true .
 https://www.internetconsultatie.nl/emvbesluit .
See also: https://stralingsbewust.info/2020/12/18/mona-keijzer-wil-discutabele-icnirp-limieten-landelijk-vastreken-en-gemeenten-buitenspel-stellen/ .
 'In Article 1.4. However, the Environmental Act stipulates that the Environmental Act will withdraw if a specific act provides for an exhaustive regulation in the field of the physical living environment. Such an exhaustive regulation is intended with this amendment decision. This means that local authorities such as provinces, municipalities and water boards will not be able to impose deviating or additional regulations with regard to electromagnetic fields under the Environmental Act. ' Article 5.2., Draft scheme. Consultation version 'Decision to amend the Frequency Decree 2013 in connection with the establishment of national rules for the protection of public health against the electromagnetic fields resulting from the use of frequency space'. (See also article 5.1. Draft scheme.)https://www.internetconsultatie.nl/emvbesluit .
 https://www.gezondheidheidsraad.nl/documenten/adviezen/2020/09/02/5g-en-gezondheid .
 See also: https://stralingsbewust.info/2020/10/11/gezondheidheidsraad-versluiert-stralingsrisicos-chter-moet-burgers-stem-terugvragen/ .
 Scientific Council for Government Policy (2008). Uncertain security. Responsibilities around physical safety. Pages 119–120.
 Commission Notice on the Precautionary Principle, Section 6.3.1. Proportionality. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/NL/TXT/?uri=celex%3A52000DC0001 .
 The Scientific Council for Government Policy writes in its report 'Uncertain security. Responsibility for physical safety '(page 121):
' Ambiguous risks arise where scientific or social controversies about risks arise. ' Precaution is necessary for ambiguous risks, according to the WRR. Since the ICNIRP limits are controversial, this precaution cannot be based on these limits at the same time.
 RIVM (2003). Dealing with risks soberly. Environment and Nature Plan (MNP). RIVM report 2510701047/2003, page 35.
 See my appeal: https://stralingsbewust.info/wp-content/uploads/Beroepschrift-WJ-de-Jong-zaaknummer-ARN-19-2184-WABOA-Rechtbank-Arnhem.pdf . For 'Further explanation and substantiation: https://stralingsbewust.info/wp-content/uploads/Nadere-toelichting-en-onderbouwing-WJ-de-Jong-ARN-19-2184-WABAO-Rechtbank-Arnhem.pdf .
|Source: Wilma de Jong, via email, 24 Dec 2020|
|Plane-Crash Risk Seen Rising on FCC Expansion of 5G Spectrum|
|USA||Created: 29 Dec 2020|
A plan to redeploy spectrum for super-fast 5G wireless networks is sparking concern among aviation safety experts that it could result in interference with the electronics on aircraft, potentially leading to crashes.
The U.S. Federal Communications Commission is scheduled to begin an auction on Tuesday for airwaves in the so-called C-band frequencies that are used by satellite providers but the agency wants to re-assign for 5G. The agency says the sale is an important step in maintaining U.S. leadership in the next generation of wireless service.
But some fear that assigning the frequencies to ground transmitters near airports that will be used for 5G networks could interfere with electronics used by aircraft as they land.
“I see a very significant safety issue here unless we find a way to mitigate it,” said Terry McVenes, president of RTCA Inc., a Washington-based nonprofit that studies technical issues involving aviation.
The FCC says there’s enough of a buffer between the spectrum used by 5G and the altimeters aboard aircraft for them to safely co-exist. “We continue to have no reason to believe that 5G operations in the C-band will cause harmful interference,” said FCC spokesman Will Wiquist.
But the RTCA, formerly known as the Radio Technical Commission for Aeronautics, produced a 217-page study laying out potential hazards, including the potential for planes to crash near airports such as Chicago’s O’Hare International.
“It takes a lot to wind me up,” said McVenes, a former safety chief for the Air Line Pilots Association. “If left to go the way it is, our data shows very serious problems.”
McVenes didn’t recommend what steps should be taken to mitigate the problem, and said a solution might emerge from more talks with the communications industry. He said it would take years to design and replace altimeters.
Airlines for America, a trade group for large U.S. carriers, said it “appreciates the RTCA’s findings.”
“We encourage the FCC to reassess and better understand the interference risks associated with their proposal and make sure safety-critical aviation systems will continue to be protected,” the trade group said in a statement.
A coalition of 15 aviation-industry groups representing airline pilots, private business-jet operators and cargo carriers sent a letter to the FCC on Monday, saying they’d been raising concerns since 2017 and asking the agency to suspend the auction.
Moving ahead “would be a disservice to the safety of the traveling public and put our nation’s airlines, business and general aviation, and helicopter operations at risk,” the group said in the letter.
Representative Peter DeFazio, chairman of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, echoed those sentiments in a letter to the FCC on Monday, calling the RTCA findings “alarming.”
“There is no question that additional study is needed to understand the full extent and severity of 5G interference with radio altimeters and whether any mitigations are feasible—or even possible—to ensure flight safety,” the Oregon Democrat wrote.
The U.S. Federal Aviation Administration says it is concerned about potential interference with altimeters “and is working closely with our interagency partners at the National Telecommunications and Information Administration and the Federal Communications Commission on this important issue.”
Aviation regulators in France have gone further and have slowed the deployment of 5G around airports while they study the matter.
The Waves Around Us
The portion of the electromagnetic spectrum known as the C-Band offers the best mix of coverage and capacity to carry 5G wireless communications, which promise data speeds 100 times faster than those of recent years.
The dispute comes as the FCC prepares for an auction that’s something of a capstone for Chairman Ajit Pai. The Republican, who is leaving office in January, has made it a priority over his four years as chairman to reassign frequencies from long-established communications to mobile uses.
Under Pai’s guidance satellite providers such as Intelsat SA and SES SA agreed to give up the C-band frequencies and operate in a smaller swath. In return they are to receive a portion of the billions of dollars expected to be bid for them by mobile providers such as Verizon Communications Inc. and AT&T Inc.
The sale would dedicate a large chunk of airwaves considered particularly suitable to 5G operations, ones that travel far and can carry rich information streams. That makes them useful for the lightning-fast “internet of things” coming to factories, offices, homes, farms, roadways and airports.
The auction is an “important milestone,” Meredith Attwell Baker, president of the CTIA trade group representing carriers, said in an Aug. 6 blog post. “Promoting American leadership in 5G is a national priority, and keeping the C-Band auction on schedule is critical to making sure we have the mid-band spectrum we need to lead the emerging 5G economy.”
The FCC considers the auction, which begins Tuesday and could last for weeks, to be “a very important event for American consumers and U.S. leadership in 5G,” Wiquist, the agency spokesman, said. “The FCC is paving the way for Americans to receive fast 5G wireless services.”
The airwaves to be reassigned, however, are near in frequency to those used by radar altimeters -- devices that calculate an aircraft’s height above the ground. According to the RTCA study, 5G signals from base stations on the ground would confound the altimeters during crucial phases of landing, when commercial aircraft are descending at 600 to 800 feet each minute.
“It just creates these totally inaccurate signals,” McVenes said. “It would do it any time the airplane went into the area where the 5G signal was happening. It would happen pretty much every time.”
For its report, RTCA plotted the landing approach to Chicago O’Hare’s Runway 27L, the most-used for arrivals. The group analyzed the effect on altimeters if existing telecommunications base stations below the incoming aircraft were converted to the new 5G signals.
It found “significant impacts throughout the approach with the potential for catastrophic effects.”
The result could be altimeter failures, including one like the fault that doomed a Turkish Airlines that crashed and killed nine people near Amsterdam in 2009, according to the report. In that crash the altimeter erroneously concluded the Boeing Co. 737-800 had reached ground level and the plane’s equipment automatically reduced engine thrust. Pilots didn’t notice and the jet plunged into a field.
The issue also raises safety concerns with helicopters, which operate at low altitudes where the radar altimeters are critical. The U.S. National Transportation Safety Board has cited issues with the altimeters in several copter crashes.
The FCC and CTIA have asserted that interference isn’t likely because there is plenty of buffer between the envisioned 5G uses and the airwaves assigned to the altimeters.
The RTCA’s study was “severely lacking” and reached “unsupported” conclusions, CTIA, with members including AT&T and Verizon, said in a filing.
“The test criteria that aviation created is more exacting than existing altimeter standards, and some tested altimeters, operating to manufacturer specifications, would not pass even without any external C-Band operations present,” CTIA said in a Nov. 17 filing.
In a statement, CTIA said the FCC had concluded there’s no issue with “well-designed” aeronautical equipment. “Nothing in RTCA’s report changes that determination,” CTIA said.
The FCC concurred.
The U.S. plan for the airwaves offers more separation between altimeters and 5G than is the case in some other countries, Wiquist said. He cited CTIA’s concerns with the RTCA study and said, “the commission’s experts have concerns with this study as well.”
French regulators are on a different tack. The country’s aviation authority, DGAC, has told operators to slow mobile 5G deployment while it reviews its impact on aerial navigation. The delay has affected the start of 5G deployments around Nice airport and Paris-Charles de Gaulle, north of the capital. The DGAC consulted the RTCA report for its study, which continues.
The FCC in its February order establishing the auction called for a working group that included telecommunications and aviation experts to examine the altimeter issue. Meetings began in May, but the group ceased operating in November after its members failed to reach consensus and decided more talks wouldn’t serve a useful purpose.
The FCC in the February order said it expects the aviation industry “take appropriate action, if necessary, to ensure protection” of electronic devices.
Mitigation might include new altimeter designs and changes to 5G base stations, Lee Nguyen, an FAA official, said in a comment appended to the RTCA report. Nguyen was among three dozen aviation-industry representatives who joined the committee that issued the report.
McVenes said it would take years to design and replace altimeters.
“I’m not against 5G. I want 5G out there so my cell phone has more capability,” McVenes said. “We just wanted to make sure they did it safely.”
|Click here to view the source article.|
|Source: Bloomberg, Todd Shields, Alan Levin and Helene Fouquet, 07 Dec 2020|
|Page 1 of 759  Next› Last»|