Safe Schools for Prince George's County

Parents, Neighbors, and Students Against  Cell Towers on School Property

WIFIinSchools.com put together this excellent chart. 



the Question to Ask at Information sessions




1. Is this radiation safe for children? Please provide with the documentation that this radiation is proven safe.

Should it be stated that "safety is declared" by organizations then please ask them for proof. Make sure they are not using outdated materials such as the 2006 World Health Organization Fact Sheet #304!   That Fact sheet is almost a decade old and years before the 2011 Carcinogenic classification. No Medical organization states this radiation is "safe"!


What do scientists think? For the latest science- simply read the 2013  official submissions to the Federal Communications Commission on RF Radiation. 


"In summary, the ten major meta-analyses/pooled analyses. the recent cell phone exposure studies, and the radio transmission exposure studies provide convincing evidence of adverse health effects in humans associated with low-level RF exposure."

David O. Carpenter, MD
http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/view?id=7520940947  
Dr. Carpenter is a public health physician and professor, with a medical degree from Harvard Medical School. His current title is Director of the Institute for Health and the Environment at the University at Albany and Professor of Environmental Health Sciences.  In addition, he is an Honorary Professor, Queensland Children's Medical Research Unit


"It is likely that some of biological effects that have been found at SARs below the current exposure levels for repetitive exposure over long periods of time may turn out to lead to health effects under limited set of conditions such as impaired body defense and repair mechanisms, young rapidly growing children and old age with other adverse health conditions."

Frank Barnes, PhD
http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/view?id=7520922935
Education B.S., Princeton University, 1954 (Electrical Engineering);M.S., Stanford University, 1955 (Electrical Engineering);Engineer, Stanford University, 1956 (Electrical Engineering);Ph.D., Stanford University, 1958 (Electrical Engineering)
In 2008, Frank Barnes chaired the committee that presented a National Research Council Report, "The Identification of Research Needs Relating to Potential Biological or Adverse Health Effects of Wireless Communications Devices,"as requested by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, identifying research gaps and the critical need to increase our understanding of any potential adverse effects of long term chronic exposure to RF energy on children and pregnant woman


"Just as the human body can be ill without a perceptible rise in temperature, EMF damage to human cells can occur long before changes in temperature can be detected. And, indeed, research studies have repeatedly demonstrated that damaging cellular reactions to EMF occur long before any measurable rise in temperature."
​-Martin Blank, PhD
http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/view?id=7520940937
MARTIN BLANK ,PhDs in physical chemistry (1957)  Columbia University and in colloid science (1960) University of Cambridge.






​Want to read more? There are plenty to read. We hope the Board of Education reads them as well. See this link for more submissions. http://www.saferemr.com/2013/11/everything-you-wanted-to-know-about.html


Do Not be Fooled: get the facts


Many of us have no medical background. We just want to know if this radiation is safe or not.  An RF "expert" may hand out  information sheets that seem scientific.  

There is a lot of talk with a lot of numbers and it sure seems like they are saying "it is safe". The word "SAFE" is used repeatedly and websites use the word "wireless safety" despite there being no safety with wireless. 

Have you been told that this radiation at low levels  "IS SAFE"?

It would be scientifically inaccurate to say such a statement. No Proof of Safety exists.





what is stated



 Radio Frequency (RF) radiation is a type of electromagnetic (EM) energy, which is energy that travels through space like the sun.







RF Radiation is non-ionizing: its energy is too weak to remove or add charged particles to an atom.  Non-ionizing radiation such as the microwave radiation from a cell tower cannot change the makeup of an atom.





The effects of Non-ionizing radiation are not cumulative.







The effects of non-ionizing radiation  cease after the exposure is removed.






























The Power is very very low, like a light bulb. 














 The  Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has adopted limits for human exposure based on years of scientific research.







The FCC has set a Maximum Permissible Exposure for the General Population.









There are large safety margins.










​​


In the US the FCC regulates RF Health and Safety.






















Areas around cell towers  are typically much less than 5% of the General Population limit.

Measurements under and in the neighborhood of cell towers are generally less that 0.1% of the limit.
















You may see a list of research studies to back the information  up. However, many time this list is incomplete.

Sometimes it seems like the references are cherry picked.
For example, why don't these information sheets contain anything about the WHO Classification? 


Why don't they link to the long list of research areas the World Health Organization has proposed? 


























what you need to know


Radio Frequency radiation from cell towers is pulsed digital microwave radiation.  It is nothing like the light from our sun in that it is not natural and it is thousands of times higher than the amounts found naturally in the universe.

Never before has our environment had the amount of microwaves currently in the air. The amount we are exposed to from cell towers and new technology is thousands of times higher than the amount our grandparents were exposed to.  

Modulation [not carrier waves] occupies a previous quiet spot in the electromagnetic spectrum to which humans have had no chance to evolve says Dr. Andrew Goldsworthy.


Yes, RF is Non ionizing  and it does NOT change the makeup of the atom. However this does mean that effects can occur through another, yet unknown mechanism.  Some cientists state that perhaps it is the oxidative stress that lead to cancer as significant research shows increased stress parameters in the exposed subjects.

See Martin Pall's research in the Journal of Cellular and Molecular Medicine. 


"these effects are not cumulative" is inaccurate because the World Health Organization showed that it was high cumulative exposure (30 minutes a day for over ten years) that resulted in increased brain cancer.  Most EMF researchers agree that cumulative exposure that is the critical factor when it comes to our health.

Read  Dr. Olle Johansson and Dr. Yury Grigoriev "EVIDENCE FOR EFFECTS ON IMMUNE FUNCTION" Section 8 Bioinitiative Report 





"It's effects cease"Heard this line before?
First, If you live near a cell tower and go to school by a cell tower then I guess you will never know what it is like to have exposure "cease". The radiation will always be present. 

Second. Several studies have shown that even after exposure -effects continue. We could cite hundreds of studies to this end but let's start with these showing effects on the fetus (these effects continued after exposure stopped.)

Aldad et al., Fetal Radiofrequency Radiation Exposure From 800-1900 Mhz-Rated Cellular Telephones Affects Neurodevelopment and Behavior in Mice. Scientific Reports, 2012; 2 DOI:

Mice that were exposed to "safe" cell phone radiation tended to be more hyperactive and had reduced memory capacity.  Authors attributed the behavioral changes to an effect during pregnancy on the development of neurons in the prefrontal cortex .

Hou Q1, Wang M, Wu S, Ma X, An G, Liu H, Xie F., Oxidative changes and apoptosis induced by 1800-MHz electromagnetic radiation in NIH/3T3 cells. Electromagn Biol Med. 2014 Mar 25.

  • Our results showed a significant increase in intracellular ROS levels after EMR exposure. The percentage of late-apoptotic cells in the EMR-exposed group was significantly higher than that in the sham-exposed groups (p < 0.05).  These results indicate that an 1800-MHz EMR enhances ROS formation and promotes apoptosis in NIH/3T3 cells.

Tomruk A1, Guler G, Dincel AS.The influence of 1800 MHz GSM-like signals on hepatic oxidative DNA and lipid damage in nonpregnant, pregnant, and newly born rabbits. Cell Biochem Biophys. 2010;56(1):39-47.

  • “The whole-body 1800 MHz GSM-like RF radiation exposure may lead to oxidative destruction as being indicators of subsequent reactions that occur to form oxygen toxicity in tissues”

Nazıroğlu M, et al Recent reports of Wi-Fi and mobile phone-induced radiation on oxidative stress and reproductive signaling pathways in females and males.J Membr Biol. 2013 Dec;246(12):869-75. doi: 10.1007/s00232-013-9597-9. Epub 2013 Oct 9.

  • Review Paper: “In conclusion, the results of current studies indicate that oxidative stress from exposure to Wi-Fi and mobile phone-induced EMR is a significant mechanism affecting female and male reproductive systems.”

Yakymenko et al., Low intensity radiofrequency radiation: a new oxidant for living cells. Oxid Antioxid Med Sci 2014; 3(1):1-3

A “strong non-thermal character of biological effects of RFR has been documented” and “it is clear that the substantial overproduction of ROS in living cells under low intensity RFR exposure could cause a broad spectrum of health disorders and diseases."More Research HERE.





Critical to health  is the erratic nature of the pulse, not the power. Low power does NOT mean low effects. In fact at 1% of FCC guidelines research shows damaged mitochondria, nucleus of cells in hippocampus of brain, impaired memory and visual reaction time. At 1/1000th of FCC guidelines altered EEG, disturbed carbohydrate metabolism, enlarged adrenals, altered adrenal hormone levels. structural changes in liver, spleen, testes, and brain, slowing of the heart, increase in melatonin, decreased cell growth, increased sterility, childhood leukemia, impaired motor function. See the Bioinitiative Report. http://www.bioinitiative.org/





Actually there was very little pre-market testing done.  The FCC safety guidelines were developed in the 1960s, based on thermal considerations alone, for military personnel operating radar equipment. The standard was developed for industrial and military users, not by health experts .


These standards were adopted by our government. No research was done to evaluate human health and set a "safe" limit for long term exposures. 




These Exposure Standards ONLY protect against heating. They are set for a 30 minute exposure. Yes 30 minutes! 

FCC guidelines are based on an average 30-minute exposure of the general public. When these guidelines were first implemented the public was not exposed to microwave radiation unless they lived near a military base, a shipping route or an airport where radar was used. The only other exposure was from microwave ovens.  Living under a cell tower means hours of exposure each and every day so the 30-minute average reading is no longer appropriate.






Large?  Actually, There are not "large " safety margins like there are with most chemicals per EPA advice. In fact many scientists are stating that it only is 2.5 higher than a potential irreversible effect- not 50! that's an outdated statistic. 

In public health safety factors  for food and drink are commonly set at 100 fold or more. If anything, the safety margins are incredibly low in comparison to other hazardous  chemicals. For more on the safety margin please read  Submission to the FCC by the Environmental Health Trust. 

Worse- children absorb the radiation up to 20 times that of adults. 








Yes, the FCC which is NOT a health and science agency with zero medical staff on board makes sure that guidelines are followed. That is all they do. They do not do health assessments nor understand the science. 

Now for the juicy information:

Did you know the current HEAD of the FCC Tom Wheeler,  is a prior Wireless Industry Top Lobbyist?  Yup. Tom Wheeler headed up the CTIA for years. He actually hired a scientist to run studies on the safety of cell phones. When studies showed genetic damage....he was accused by that very  scientist he hired to manage the research....of stopping the research and covering it up. He was accused of  pulling out funding and the researchers did not complete the work nor publish their results. Corporate cover up?

That  scientist, George Carlo,  wrote a book called CELL PHONES about the whole mess. The name of the book is  Cell Phones: Invisible Hazards in the Wireless Age: An Insider's Alarming Discoveries about Cancer and Genetic Damage.


So check it out. Here (video to the left)  are Americans confronting our FCC Head,Tom Wheeler, in California. People are very concerned that the FCC is not bringing this issue to the EPA. People are concerned that there could be corruption at the highest levels of our government. What do you think? 





5% and 1% sure seems like a small number! Think again.

Many  experts and Doctors state that exposure limits should be 900,000 timesless than current US standards. 

​1% is still higher than many countries exposure limits. Other countries have set exposure limits much lower than the US to protect their citizens. 

There are many resolutions by Scientists and Doctors Calling for more protective exposure standards. Here are just a few. Click to view. 

Russian National Committee on
Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection 2011
Austrian Medical Association 2012
British Doctor Initiative 2013
BabySafe Project 2014:
Joint Statement on Pregnancy and Wireless Radiation
Scientific Declaration to Health Canada 2014

FYI- Canada and the US share similar- very high- exposure limits. 



If you want to read the WHO updated information please see: Non-Ionizing Radiation, Part 2: Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Fields."

The 400+ page monograph is available online at:
http://monographs.iarc.fr/ENG/Monographs/vol102/index.php

An excerpt from p. 421

"Children are particularly vulnerable as “the average exposure from use of the same mobile phone is higher by a factor of 2 in a child’s brain and higher by a factor of 10 in the bone marrow of the skull.”  Also, the child’s brain is developing at a much greater rate than the adult's brain.

Don't want to read the 400 page document? Just read this one page document by Dr Moskowitz detailing the problem with FCC standards. .

 "New Federal Policy Needed for Cell Phone and Wireless Radiation Safety"

http://bit.ly/1cH1Yvf