[2007 BioInitiative Report – Antennas – Benefits – Bills – Catherine McKenna – Cindy Sage Summary of Jerrold Bushberg NextG Small Cells Report – Darren Praznik – Elaine MacDonald, Ecojustice – Gary Olhoeft – Health Canada – Itron – Jane Philpott – Ken Rubin – Landis+Gyr – Opposition Testimony by Child re Ben Hueso & Bill Quirk SB 649 Microcells / Small Cells Public Right-of-way Siting Legislation – RF – Studies – Telus Microcells – Wi-Fi in Schools – Wireless Devices Interference with Medical Implants & Smart Meters | Canada – Simcoe, Ontario – EU – California, USA] & (video)
1) A prime example of how Health Canada bends to the wishes of industry – even ones with far less money and influence than the telecoms, such as the cosmetic industry.
A ‘flawed understanding’ of regulations
““You can try and frame it any way you want, but to me it looks like the government did bend to pressure from the industry to extend the phase-out,” she said. “Given the European phase-out that happened two years earlier, there’s no way they would have been blindsided…chemical regulations are quite international; when one country does something, other countries look at it closely.”
2) Cindy Sage is warning that the radiation level from a single microcell, even at a distance of 530 feet, can be higher than the level recommended by the BioInitiative Report. The microcells being installed by Telus are designed to hold multiple transmitters using various frequencies, which will increase the RF levels dramatically and also will confound your body’s cells even more.
At What Distance Does a Small Cell Mounted at 26′ height produce greater than the BioInitiative 2007 recommendation of 0.1 microwatt/cm2 (green highlight)?
Or ten times higher at 1.0 microwatt/cm2 (yellow highlight)?
This summary has been compiled by Cindy Sage, Sage Associates (July 2017) from a report by Jerrold Bushberg that was prepared for NextG small cell rollout in Santa Barbara County in 2009.
Bushberg provides an approximation of radiofrequency radiation emissions of one type of small cell wireless installation mounted on power poles in residential neighborhoods. Note that Bushberg presents his running tables of RF power density vs distance in milliwatts/cm2, so you will need to multiply his predicted RF levels by 1000 times to see microwatts/cm2 for comparison to scientific studies reporting health impacts from chronic, low-intensity RF exposures.
Bushberg’s calculations of RF are based on what a 6′ tall person at ground level would be exposed to from a wireless small cell antenna mounted at 26′ height like on a power pole. He did not calculate RF levels for second-story occupants, nor from multiple wireless antennas on a pole. There would be far higher RF at a second-story home or multiple antennas on one pole. Or, if the small cell has an effective radiated power (ERP) of greater than 48.6 watts with greater down tilt.
Think about the power pole outside your home. How far is it from your bedroom window? Your child’s bedroom window? Do you have a one-story or two story home? What if the power pole is located downslope as might be the case if your home sits on a hilly street? When you directly face the antenna rather than having it high above you, your RF exposure levels will be higher. Green highlighted parts adapted from tables by Bushberg (2009) exceed the 2007 BioInitiative recommendation of 0.1 uW/cm2 (green doesn’t mean safe, it is a color choice that allows you to see the underlying numbers). The yellow highlight is ten times higher – but useful to address the questionable assertion that indoor RF levels will be ten times lower than Bushberg’s tables indicate. Even so, look at how many distances away from the power pole are yellow highlighted – indicating that at these distances a small cell is calculated to produce RF levels indoors that could exceed the 2007 BioInitiative recommended threshold of 0.1 uW/cm2.
Source – Bushberg Appendix A-3
3) I sent this YouTube the other day as one of several with testimony given in opposition to the microcell Bill in California. The version I sent the other day did not have this child speaking about the effect of Wi-Fi on his heart. This is similar to what many children experience in schools, such as the one in Simcoe, Ontario, where young children suffered serious heart problems until the Wi-Fi was removed.
4) Wireless devices, such as smeters, cell/smart phones, security monitors, can interfere with implanted medical devices like pacemakers and deep brain implants when frequencies are too close. When this happens, a severe health incident could occur. Imagine having to live in a home with a smeter that has the capability of turning your device off. I’ve often wondered if wireless devices like Wi-Fi modems or cordless phones could interfere with smeters, causing them to run fast resulting in higher bills. This seems logical to me – but how to prove it? Any wireless device is vulnerable to interference….
Why People with Brain Implants Are Afraid To Go Through Automatic Doors.
“In 2009, Gary Olhoeft walked into a Best Buy to buy some DVDs. He walked out with his whole body twitching and convulsing. Olhoeft has a brain implant, tiny bits of microelectronic circuitry that deliver electrical impulses to his motor cortex in order to control the debilitating tremors he suffers as a symptom of Parkinson’s disease. It had been working fine. So, what happened when he passed through those double wide doors into consumer electronics paradise? He thinks the theft-prevention system interfered with his implant and turned it off.”
5) Smeter company seeking funds to fuel growth after smeter market has slowed down—due to uncertainties. And they don’t even mention cybersecurity.
Smart meter maker Landis+Gyr plans IPO, sale still an option
“In recent years, smart metering adoption has been stunted by lack of standards, uncertainty over whether new laws will support the technology and consumers wary of actual benefits.”
Director, Coalition to Stop Smart Meters
“Those who have the privilege to know have the duty to act.”
~ A. Einstein