Reasons for Supporting BCCPAC's Resolutions for Choice and Precaution

Reasons for supporting BCCPAC's Resolutions for Choice and Precaution over the use of Wireless Technology in Schools:



1) Not using wireless doesn't mean not using technology. Not using wireless doesn't mean going with dial-up. Broadband wired network provides faster, more secure and more reliable connection, without microwave radiation. If money is to be spent on further upgrade, fibre optics would be the ideal choice. It is magnitude (thousands of times) faster, does not emit RF-EMF radiation and is the preferred connection in Switzerland for their students' 21st Century Learning.


2) Compared to Shaw/Telus or other consumer grade routers, the commercial grade Wi-Fi routers in schools send much stronger signals. More importantly, signal from routers is only the "background" radiation. Each wireless laptop, iPad or other handheld device has a client card which is a live antenna that also emits beacon signals. When students use these devices to connect to the internet via Wi-Fi network, they have a live antenna in direct/close contact with their bodies, emitting continual microwave frequencies (similar to each person holding a router in his hand / on his desk / having one behind his head from another student behind). Multiply that you get 20-30 times of signals in the classroom. Adding the bounced waves from metal surfaces in the room you get additional "reflection" rates.


3) Most parents are careful not to put a cellphone to the child's ear. They have no idea Wi-Fi radiation from an iPad spikes several times HIGHER than an iPhone on talking transmission. Unlike cellphone signal which is continuous during talking, the Wi-Fi signal stops and goes every few seconds, but peaks at much higher measurements. Also, when a cellphone is on standby, it only "pings" about once per minute to the celltower. When a Wi-Fi enabled device has the Wi-Fi function turned on - even NOT being connected to a network and NOT downloading anything - it still radiates with microwave that peaks every few seconds. Watch the following video of the measurements: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n097VN7KB_A http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tVJI-0YogGo


4) Choice - What people use at home is their choice. Most parents who object to wireless in schools do not use Wi-Fi at home. In fact, wired connection at home is faster for browsing and more secure for online banking/shopping or sending personal data. We have measured many schools and most of them do not receive signals form neighbours. For those that do, the signals from neighbours would definitely be weaker than signals that come from the commercial routers inside the school, and way lower than signals coming straight from the tablet or smartphone in direct contact with the student and from the person sitting at the next chair. 


5) EHS - Some children are more sensitive to the microwave signals than others and they have valid physical reaction while attending schools with Wi-Fi routers and devices. This condition, know as Electrohypersensitivity (EHS), is a recognized disability in Sweden where there are about 500,000 patients. It is also recognized by the Canadian Human Rights Commission. Microwave radiation is mandatory and penetrating. Resolution #17 provides the only viable way for EHS students to attend school without feeling sick (headaches, heart palpitation, nausea, dizzeness etc). We have nut-free schools and scent-free schools for the similar reasons. See latest findings on EHS by French Health Research:
http://www.safeinschool.org/2012/06/ehs-electrohypersensitivity-es.html


6) What school boards have received from BC's Chief Medical Officer in referencing the level of Wi-Fi radiation for students was an industry study (Foster 2007) sponsored by Wi-Fi Alliance, the companies that make and sell Wi-Fi products. That study measured laptop radiation from "distances of 1 meter and further". It specifically stated, "The user of a laptop would be exposed to stronger fields than reported here, particularly if the antenna in the client card were close to the user's body. No attempt was made in this study to assess near-field exposures to a user of the laptop itself." (Pg.10 http://www.medfordumc.org/celltower/wifirfexposure.pdf ) The advice that school boards have been given is outdated, irrelevant to current classroom situation, and does not protect the health of children. Actual measurement of "near-field" radiation from a Wi-Fi-enabled device was 700,000 times higher. The probe of our meter was encased inside the speherical casing, about 2cm further in. If in "direct" contact, the levels would be even higher. Children are touching the device directly, in their hands or against their reproductive organs on their laps. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tVJI-0YogGo


7) The World Health Organization and Health Canada are both warning parents to reduce exposure for children. It is up to us as parents to take precaution. The Precautionary Principle according to the United Nations is to protect people from harm, especially irreparable harm (such as cancer, heart disease, infertility and damage in brain function as has been demonstrated to result from microwave radiation in animal studies and studies on occupationally exposed humans). The Precautionary Principle applies to such harm from technology that is "scientifically plausible but uncertain", and states that actions should be take BEFORE the harm occurs, to AVOID or PREVENT that harm. It has taken long latency period for the irreparable harm from DDT, PCB, BPA, tobacco and asbestos to show up and decades before "official" health authority ban them with certainty. Parents should absolutely have the choice to follow the advice for precaution. 
http://www.safeinschool.org/p/precautionary-principle.html

BCCPAC Voted YES to Wi-Fi Resolutions at AGM 2012

Press Release on British Columbia Confederation of Parent Advisory Councils

Citizens for Safe Technology Society

Press Release - May 28, 2012       

                         

PARENTS DEMAND CHOICE & PRECAUTION

The BC Confederation of Parent Advisory Councils (BCCPAC) passed two strong resolutions concerning microwave wireless radiation technology in schools at their May 26th AGM, designed to protect children and support parental rights and choice. 

Resolution 17 "calls on each Board of Education to have one public school at each education level (elementary, middle, secondary) that is free of Wi-Fi, cordless phones and cell phones. This school will only be equipped with wired computers and wired telephones for personal, educational and administrative purposes."

Resolution 18 calls on Boards of Education to "cease to install Wi-Fi and other wireless networks in schools where other networking technology is feasible." Both resolutions were passed with a clear majority (131-93; 130-77) and many attending members verbalized their support during the discussion period. 

These resolutions referenced the WHO classification of Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Fields as a Type 2B Possible Human Cancer Risk in May 2011, and Health Canada's subsequent warning for reduced microwave radiofrequency radiation exposure for children because "children are typically more sensitive to a variety of environmental agents."

There are more calls for protection of children from around the world, including the American Academy of Environmental Medicine, which states, "Chronic exposure to wireless radiofrequency radiation is a preventable environmental hazard that is sufficiently well documented to warrant immediate preventative public health action.... Children are placed at particular risk for altered brain development, and impaired learning and behaviour." 

It also noted that "some students in different school districts have reported adverse biological reactions such as headaches, dizziness, rapid heart rate, fatigue, and impaired concentration when exposed to radiofrequency emitted Wi-Fi and wireless devices in the school environment." This condition is known as Electrohypersensitivity (EHS), which is recognized by the Canadian Human Rights Commission. EHS students in BC, however, currently have no alternative to avoid such exposure while attending schools."

Peter Milne, owner of an IT consultant firm in Victoria, is convinced "innovative wired solutions can be achieved in a cost effective way. When parents demand safety first - the industry will respond with safer solutions."  Susan McFee from Langley pointed out that this is the first time in history a 2B carcinogen is being forced onto children. "Schools are taking the liability away from Wi-Fi manufacturers."

Michelle Wong of the Wi-Fi Subcommittee complained about Perry Kendall, Chief Medical Officer's advice to school boards. "He referenced radiation levels with a study sponsored by the Wi-Fi Alliance - companies that make and sell Wi-Fi products. They measured laptop radiation at distances of 1 meter and further from the laptop. That study does not assess near-field exposures to a user of the laptop itself." Using an audible microwave radiofrequency meter, Wong showed the attendees the strong and continual "near-field" microwave signals from an iPad. "It is comparable to cellphone (microwave radiation). We need to know what we are putting in the hands and laps of our children."

Ingrid Truow of Richmond District Parents' Association encouraged other parents "to consider the safety of these children who are affected by Wi-Fi as we do to the children who have peanut allergy." Gwen Giesbrecht, Chair of Vancouver's District Parent Advisory Council, felt strongly that "the present circumstances could really be detrimental to the next generation." Since it's a health issue, she preferred to cease the installation of Wi-Fi in all schools rather than creating only one wired school in the district.

BCCPAC represents a membership of 821, including Parent Advisory Councils and District Parent Advisory Councils from every school district in the province. Collectively, BCCPAC represents the parents of over 500,000 students in BC.

Media Contacts:

Una St.Clair, Executive Director, Citizens for Safe Technology Society

una@citizensforsafetechnology.org 

Susan McFee, Director, Citizens for Safe Technology Society

susan@citizensforsafetechnology.org

Deleterious Effects on Growing Rat Testes of WiFi Radiofrequency Waves

Turkey (2012)

Departments of Pediatrics, Abant Izzet Baysal University School of Medicine, Turkey.

Immunohistopathologic Demonstration Of Deleterious Effects on Growing Rat Testes of Radiofrequency Waves Emitted from Conventional Wi-Fi Devices.
“OBJECTIVE: To investigate effects on rat testes of radiofrequency radiation emitted from indoor Wi-Fi Internet access devices using 802.11.g wireless standards.
RESULTS: We observed significant increases in serum 8-hydroxy-2'-deoxyguanosine levels and 8-hydroxyguanosine staining in the testes of the experimental group indicating DNA damage due to exposure (p < 0.05). We also found decreased levels of catalase and glutathione peroxidase activity in the experimental group, which may have been due to radiofrequency effects on enzyme activity (p < 0.05).
CONCLUSIONS: These findings raise questions about the safety of radiofrequency exposure from Wi-Fi Internet access devices for growing organisms of reproductive age, with a potential effect on both fertility and the integrity of germ cells.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22465825

Vote YES to BCCPAC Wireless-Free School of Choice Resolution #17 at upcoming AGM on May 26, 2012

Vote  YES ! 

Dear Parents and Grandparents,

Please support Resolution #17 "Parent Choice Regarding Exposure to EMF Emissions" at the upcoming BCCPAC (BC Confederation of Parent Advisory Councils) Annual General Meeting on May 26, 2012. This resolution is not asking to remove Wi-Fi from all schools, but to provide wireless-free schools of choice. (Similar to French immersion, Montessori, or schools that emphasize a certain subject/sport, which are already available in BC.) It has taken hundreds of hours of work and debate in the BCCPAC Safety Committee to advance this resolution to the table. This is a much-needed opt-out solution for parents who want to follow the advice for precaution, as well as for children who have negative biological reaction to the pulsed microwave radiation emitted by Wi-Fi and wireless electronic devices in schools. These children are currently suffering physical symptoms while attending classes, or have to be withdrawn from schools because they are unable to take personal measures to avoid such exposure in campuses with Wi-Fi installed. http://www.bccpac.bc.ca/UserFiles/File/2012AGM-Spring/2012_Resolution_Book_Updated.pdf

Votes can be cast by all paid-up BCCPAC member PACs and DPACs, either by attending the AGM or by proxy votes. 

Voting Information & Proxy Rules:

http://www.bccpac.bc.ca/UserFiles/File/2012AGM-Spring/AGM_Voting_Info_Proxy_Form.pdf

Voting Instructions: 

http://www.bccpac.bc.ca/UserFiles/File/2012AGM-Spring/2012_Resolution_Voting_Instructions.pdf

Authorized Proxy Vote Form:

http://www.bccpac.bc.ca/UserFiles/File/2012AGM-Spring/Authorized%20Proxy%20Vote%20Form.pdf

Spring Conference Registration & Program:

http://www.bccpac.bc.ca/index/event_calendar/2012%20Spring%20Conf.aspx

If you would like to support this resolution, please contact your PAC or DPAC to communicate your concern, and please share the info with other parents and grandparents.

Resolutions # 17 

Parent Choice Regarding Exposure to EMF Emissions 

from SRC Safety Wi-Fi Subcommittee

http://www.bccpac.bc.ca/UserFiles/File/2012AGM-Spring/2012_Resolution_Book_Updated.pdf

Submitted by: BCCPAC Board of Directors

Be it resolved that

BCCPAC calls on each Board of Education to have one public school at each education level (elementary, middle, secondary) that is free of Wi-Fi, cordless phones and cell phones. This school will only be equipped with wired computers and wired telephones for personal, educational and administrative purposes. This will not be required in cases where there is only one school available of that type in that district.

N.B. The above resolution was supported by some members of the Safety committee. Other members of the committee do not consider Wi-Fi a significant health risk and believe there is no need to exclude the use of Wi-Fi in any school until it is conclusively declared as being harmful by Health Canada and the World Health Organization. The committee is divided and consensus was not achievable. We refer this resolution to the membership for their consideration and decision.

Rationale:

In British Columbia, many school districts have installed Wi-Fi in recent years and other schools are now contemplating its use. At the same time, more children are using wireless technology, bringing their own cell phones and smart phones to schools.

In May, 2011, the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) of the World Health Organization (WHO) has classified "Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Fields" "emitted by wireless communication devices" as Type 2B Possible Carcinogen (possible cancer risk to humans). The WHO report concluded that "additional research is important"; and advised the public, particularly young adults and children, to "take pragmatic measures to reduce exposure". This classification also includes Wi-Fi emissions as so affirmed by IARC experts as follows:

“So the classification 2B, possibly carcinogenic, holds for all types of radiation within the radiofrequency part of the electromagnetic spectrum, including the radiation emitted by base-station antennas, radio/TV towers, radar, Wi-Fi, smart meters, etc." ”"This is what the Working Group discussed and decided last year. Of course, because the exposure levels for many of these other devices and exposure situations are so much lower than the exposure to someone who has a functioning cell phone against her/his ear, the risk will be considerably less (although the hazard still exists)."  http://www.iarc.fr/en/mediacentre/pr/2011/pdfs/pr208_E.pdf

Further information and clarifications from the WHO on this classification is here:

http://tinyurl.com/7fync2w http://goo.gl/77ztt

In October, 2011, Health Canada encouraged, “…parents to reduce children's RF (radiofrequency radiation) exposure from cell phones since children are typically more sensitive to a variety of environmental agents" and "there is currently a lack of scientific information regarding the potential health impacts of cell phones on children"; (http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/ahc-asc/media/advisoriesavis/_2011/2011_131-eng.php )

In January, 2012, the American Academy of Environmental Medicine published, "Chronic exposure to wireless radio frequency radiation is a preventable environmental hazard that is sufficiently well documented to warrant immediate preventative public health action... Children are placed at particular risk for altered brain development, and impaired learning and behaviour."

http://aaemonline.org/images/CaliforniaPublicUtilitiesCommission.pdf

Some parents are concerned about the long-term health effects of wireless devices on children, given the long hours that children spend in schools and the fact that it is not feasible for children to take personal measures to avoid such exposure. These parents prefer to adopt the “Precautionary Principle“ by using proven wired technology solutions. In recent years some students in different school districts have reported adverse biological reactions such as headaches, dizziness, rapid heart rate, fatigue and impaired concentration when exposed to the radiofrequency emitted by Wi-Fi and wireless devices in the school environment. These students currently have no alternative to avoid such exposure while attending schools. The causal relationship of these claims is disputed by some scientists while other scientists are convinced that the symptoms experienced by these patients are valid, and that such exposure should be avoided.

Destination:

Ministry of Education

BC School Trustees Association (BCSTA)

BC Boards of Education

BC Chief Medical Officer Dr. Perry Kendall's Letter on Wi-Fi for Schools: Erroneous Representation of Radiation Data.

Using a study sponsored by Wi-Fi Alliance (companies that manufacture and sell Wi-Fi products), medical authorities are assuring parents that Wi-Fi is not dangerous. This study has nothing to do with classroom exposure. The locations measured (coffee shops, train stations, hospitals etc.) were hand-picked by the Wi-Fi Alliance members. When they measured a laptop, they measured at least 1 meter away (at least 3.3 feet; did not specify the maximum distance). This does not take into account that children are using laptops, tablets and wireless hand-held devices in close/direct contact with their bodies, and accessing the internet simultaneously in the classroom. Every one of these devices has a client's card which is a live antenna. Actual measurement of the Wi-Fi radiation signals from these devices (see videos below) are magnitudes - up to 700,000 times - higher than what's reported by the industry study.
Read full post: http://www.safeinschool.org/2012/04/bc-chief-medical-officer-dr-perry.html

Wi-Fi and Cellphone Radiation Comparison

Here are 2 videos to illustrate the comparison between an iPad on Wi-Fi mode and an iPhone on talking mode:iPhone on Talking mode:
-Peaked at 19 μW/cm2 (microwatts/cm2)

-Continuous signal, but duration of use in talking mode likely shorter than internet browsing.

-Phone will be in direct contact with the ear and head (unless handsfree or headset are used).
-Wi-Fi was turned off on this phone.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n097VN7KB_AiPad on Wi-Fi mode:
-Peaked at 70 μW/cm2; several times higher than iphone on talking mode

-Continual signals. Stop and spike every few seconds. 
-Duration of use for iPad is likely longer than talk-mode on cellphone.

-iPad will be in direct contact with the student's hands or/and lap/abdomen.
-Note that there is no Wi-Fi network available. The iPad is not even logged onto any Wi-Fi network and not downloading anything. The signals are simply from the Wi-Fi feature being turned on.
-The iPad is not on airplane mode but there is no SIM card in it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tVJI-0YogGo
-In this other video, the airplane mode is on and Wi-Fi is turned on. This one peaked at 39 microwatts/cm2.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s0qU2ov2U1w

N.B. The measuring “probe” of the RF meter is actually inside the middle of the spherical casing, about 1-2 cm away from the interior of the shell (i.e. not "touching" the devices). In real life, the radiation level in direct contact with the devices (like what the children could be doing) would be even higher.

What do the above numbers mean?

Health Canada's exposure limit is at an extremely high level of 1000 μW/cm2, while studies have found at:
0.002 μW/cm2 - Sleep disturbance and fatigue. Altpeter et al. (1995, 1997, 2005)
0.168 μW/cm2 - Progressive decrease in number of newborns and irreversible infertility in
mice after 5 generations exposure. I.N. Magras and T.D. Zenos (1997)

0.32-16.43 μW/cm2 - Attention, memory and motor function of school children significantly affected in comparison to control groups. A.A. Kolodynski and V.V. Kolodynska (1996) 
2.5 μW/cm2 - Damage to blood-brain barrier. Salford et al., (1997)

China/Russia/Italy/Poland have exposure limits at 10 μW/cm2. Switzerland's general limit is 9.5 μW/cm2 and 4.25 for sensitive areas (children, elderly, medically-challenged). The Swiss doctors' group - Physicians for the Environment - recently issued a public statement calling for reduction of their limit by 10 times, i.e. to 0.95 μW/cm2. Luxembourg/Bulgaria at 2.4 μW/cm2. Salzburg Health Department in Austria recommends only 0.001 μW/cm2 for outdoor and 0.0001 for indoor exposure. This is 10 million times more stringent than our outdated Canadian Safety Code 6 of 1000 μW/cm2. http://goo.gl/4pzyE 

Minister of Education Promoting Smartphones, Tablets and Other Electronic Devices in the Classroom. 

http://goo.gl/mByBt

March 22, 2012 - Switzerland: Physicians for the Environment (MfE)

Founded 25 years ago, 1,500 physicians in Switzerland.

“From the medical point of view, it is urgent to apply the precautionary principle for mobile telephony, wifi, power lines, etc.”
http://www.safeinschool.org/2012/04/switzerland-physicians-for-environment.html

Brain Tumours

Apr 24, 2012 - UK Office of National Statistics shows a 50 per cent increase in frontal and temporal lobe tumours between 1999 and 2009.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2134382/Risks-biggest-technological-experiment-history-species-Calls-research-links-using-mobile-phones-brain-cancer.html#ixzz1tShA4PPV Dec 15, 2011 - Brain Tumour Increase in Denmark by 40% between 2001-2010
http://newsvoice.se/2011/12/15/brain-tumour-increase-in-denmark-by-40-between-2001-2010/Apr 26, 2009 - Child Cancer Deaths Led by Brain Tumours
http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2009/apr/26/brain-tumour-child-cancer-deaths

Brian Tumours in the Interphone Studies:

• For acoustic neuroma (Swedish Interphone), a 3.9-fold risk of acoustic neuroma was found for 10 or more years of cellphone use on the same side of the head where the cellphone was held (OR=3.9, 95% CI: 1.6 to 9.5). http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15475713
• For parotid gland tumors (Israeli Interphone), a 1.5-fold risk of parotid gland tumors was found for >266.3 cumulative hours of use (above the median) on the same side the head where the cellphone was held (OR=1.49, 95% CI: 1.05 to 2.13). http://aje.oxfordjournals.org/content/167/4/457.long
• For glioma within the volume of brain where the tumor was located (Japanese Interphone), a 5.8-fold risk of glioma was found for >10 maxSAR-hours2 of exposure (OR=5.84, 95% CI: 0.96-35.60, p=0.051). http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2410122/

New Studies Show Laptops and Cellphones Adversely Affect Children and Fetuses

USA - Yale University (2012)

Fetal Radiofrequency Radiation Exposure From 800-1900 Mhz-Rated Cellular Telephones Affects Neurodevelopment and Behavior in Mice

“Here we demonstrate that fetal exposure to 800–1900 Mhz-rated radiofrequency radiation from cellular telephones leads to behavioral and neurophysiological alterations that persist into adulthood...The significant trend between the groups treated for 0, 9, 15, and 24 hours/day demonstrates that the effects are directly proportional to usage time... ”

http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120315/srep00312/full/srep00312.html

ITALY (2012)

Dept of Pediatrics, Obstetrics and Reproduction Medicine, University of Siena.

ASL 7 (Local Health Agency), Prevention Dept Physical Agents Laboratory, Siena.

CNR (Italian Research Council), Institute of Applied Physics (IFAC), Florence, Italy.

Exposure to Electromagnetic Fields From Laptop Use of “Laptop” Computers

Exposure to Electromagnetic Fields From Laptop Use of “Laptop” Computers

“In the LTCs analyzed, EMF values (range 1.8–6 μT) are within International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation (NIR) Protection (ICNIRP) guidelines, but are considerably higher than the values recommended by 2 recent guidelines for computer monitors magnetic field emissions, MPR II (Swedish Board for Technical Accreditation)

and TCO (Swedish Confederation of Professional Employees), and those considered risky for tumor development... the power supply induces strong intracorporal electric current densities in the fetus and in the adult subject, which are respectively 182–263% and 71–483% higher than ICNIRP 98 basic restriction recommended to prevent adverse health effects.”

https://docs.google.com/open?id=17Z-BgRE0Ib-YtEnGFLLO5dmOgrudovBj8mfHLFrzzFkbLkZiwV1Lmth_TtxI

RUSSIA (2011)

Russian National Committee on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection 

Psychophysiological Indicators for Child Users of Mobile Communication. Message 1: Present State of the Problem

Message 2: Results of Four-year Monitoring

"It has been shown that the children’s organism is more sensitive to this kind of exposure than the adult one. We have identified the following major trends of the psychophysiological indicators for child users of mobile communication: an increased number of phonemic perception disorders, abatement of efficiency, reduced indicators for the arbitrary and semantic memory, and increased fatigue. A steady decline of the parameters from high values to bottom standards has been found."

http://electromagnetichealth.org/electromagnetic-health-blog/russian-res-children-emf/

GREECE (2012)

University of Athens

Brain proteome response following whole body exposure of mice to mobile phone or wireless DECT base radiation (* Note DECT cordless phone bases emits the SAME 2.4 GHz frequency as Wi-Fi routers and devices)

"The observed protein expression changes may be related to brain plasticity alterations, indicative of oxidative stress in the nervous system or involved in apoptosis and might potentially explain human health hazards reported so far, such as headaches, sleep disturbance, fatigue, memory deficits, and brain tumor long-term induction under similar exposure conditions."
Summary: http://electromagnetichealth.org/electromagnetic-health-blog/mice-proteome/

TURKEY (2012)

Departments of Pediatrics, Abant Izzet Baysal University School of Medicine, Turkey.

Immunohistopathologic Demonstration Of Deleterious Effects on Growing Rat Testes of Radiofrequency Waves Emitted from Conventional Wi-Fi Devices.
“OBJECTIVE: To investigate effects on rat testes of radiofrequency radiation emitted from indoor Wi-Fi Internet access devices using 802.11.g wireless standards.
RESULTS: We observed significant increases in serum 8-hydroxy-2'-deoxyguanosine levels and 8-hydroxyguanosine staining in the testes of the experimental group indicating DNA damage due to exposure (p < 0.05). We also found decreased levels of catalase and glutathione peroxidase activity in the experimental group, which may have been due to radiofrequency effects on enzyme activity (p < 0.05).
CONCLUSIONS: These findings raise questions about the safety of radiofrequency exposure from Wi-Fi Internet access devices for growing organisms of reproductive age, with a potential effect on both fertility and the integrity of germ cells.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22465825

Wireless Radiation Damages Fertility
http://www.safeinschool.org/2011/11/wi-fi-decreases-human-sperm-motility.html#uds-search-resultsInfertility near doubled since 1992 for couples with women aging 18-44:
http://www.globalnews.ca/pages/story.aspx?id=6442582741

Read more scientific studies on the health effects of electromagnetic radiation: SafeinSchool.Org/p/scientific-studies.html 

CitizensforSafeTechnology.org

Powerwatch.org.uk

Wifiinschools.org.uk

Emfacts.com 

MicrowaveNews.com 

EMRabc.ca
Wiredchild.org

European Parliaments
The Council of Europe is comprised of 47 countries and the European Parliament (EU) represents 27 countries. These two separate institutionsof European leaders have examined the issue thoroughly and come to the same conclusion regarding the need to protect citizens from electromagnetic radiation, particularly, "pregnant women, newborn babies and children." http://www.safeinschool.org/2011/05/europes-may-2011-report-calls-for-ban.html

Updated! 2012 Expert Witness Testimonies to U.S. Court concerning Removal of Wi-Fi in Public Schools

Updated: Below are Expert Witnesses' testimonies provided under threat of perjury to the U.S. District Court of Portland, concerning removal of Wi-Fi equipment from the public schools. There is a lot of valid information in the testimonies for parents and educators to consider. These witnesses include Scientific Advisor to the European Space Agency, Presenter to the American President's Cancer Panel, Former UK Military Microwave Specialist and Physicist, University Professor in Environmental Studies, Electrical and Electronic Engineers. They all have the expertise to provide informative and qualified explanation on this issue. Their credentials are included in the testimonies.

Please share with other parents and teachers!

The following documents outline the current case...

• [1] Second Amended Complaint
• [2] Exhibits A and B to Second Amended Complaint
• [3] Amended Declaration of Dr David Carpenter
• [4] Declaration of Dr. Andrew Goldsworthy, Ph.D
• [5] Declaration of Dr. Magda Havas, Ph. D
• [6] Havas - Addendum A - Studies
• [7] Havas - Addendum B - Boston Petition
• [8] Havas - Addendum C - International Appeals
• [9] Havas - Addendum D - Presentation
• [10] Amended Declaration of Lloyd Morgan
• [11] Morgan - Addendum A - WI-FI Survey
• [12] Morgan - Addendum B - Mount Tabor Log Book
• [14] Morgan - Addendum D - BEMS presentation 6-12-08
• [15] Morgan - Addendum E - Poster - Re-evaluation of the Interphone Study
• [16] Morgan - Addendum F - Poster - Exposure Limits The underestimation . . . especially in children
• [17] Morgan - Addendum G - Poster - 108 How Many Brain Tumors v3 6-8-09 [Compatibility Mode]
• [18] Morgan - Addendum H - Poster - Incidence Rate Model 5-8-11
• [19 ] Morgan - Addendum I - Mobile Phone Use and Brain Tumors in Children and Adolescents
• [20] Amended Declaration of Barry Trower
• [21] Trower - Addendum A
• [22] Second Amended Declaration of Curtis Bennett
• [23] Expert Report of David Savitz (Portland Public Schools)
• [24] Reply of Dr David Carpenter, M.D.
• [25] Amended Reply of Dr. Magda Havas, Ph. D.
• [26] Amended Reply of L. Loyd Morgan
• Deposition-of-David-Savitz
• L.-Loyd-Morgan-Reply
• Reply-of-Dr-David-Carpenter, M.D.
• NEW! Plaintiffs’ Reply - June 4, 2012

Mobile Phones are NOT! Safe, Interview with Dr Annie Sasco, MD MPH MS Dr PH

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2JyAlO_UdSk

Mobile Phones are Safe, NOT! Interview with Dr Annie Sasco, MD MPH MS Dr PH


Despite the voices of industry-funded scientists saying otherwise there is concrete evidence that mobiles/cellphones and wifi cause cancer in humans.


In 2011 the IARC reclassified them as Class 2B, possibly carcinogenic, yet they actually had enough evidence if not the balls to go further and classify them as Class 2A, probably carcinogenic.


Here Dr Annie Sasco, Harvard Doctorate, ex-Head of the IARC on cancer research, ex-cancer specialist for the WHO and now group leader of an INSERM, programme on cancer prevention in France, talks frankly in an exclusive interview about why we should be concerned - especially for children. Even if you don't use a mobile phone or wifi you are still affected. Watch this video for true facts, not industry-funded hype that there is no evidence of  harm. It could save your life.



At the 2010 Canadian Parliamentary committee hearing on Health Impacts of Microwave, Dr. Annie Sasco tesitifed, "If we want to wait for final proof, at least in terms of cancer, it may still take 20 years and the issue will become that we will not have unexposed population to act as control... But we have enough data to go ahead with a Precautionary Principle to avoid exposures which are unnecessary if our goal is to reduce somewhat the burden of cancer in the years to come and other chronic diseases."


Annie J. Sasco,  MD MPH MS Dr PH: Two Masters and a Doctoral degree in Epidemiology from Harvard University. Teaching fellow of Harvard University. Director of Epidemiology for Cancer Prevention in an Inserm (NIH) research unit, School of Public Health of the Victor Segalen Bordeaux 2 University in France. Training at the Bordeaux Medical School.  22 years at the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) in Lyon, France, including 9 years as Group Leader and then Unit Chief of Epidemiology for Cancer Prevention and 2 years as Acting Chief of the Cancer Control Programme of the World Health Organization (WHO).

BC Chief Medical Officer Dr. Perry Kendall's Letter on Wi-Fi for Schools: Erroneous Representation of Radiation Data.

Using a study sponsored by Wi-Fi Alliance (companies that manufacture and sell Wi-Fi products), medical authorities are assuring parents that Wi-Fi is not dangerous. This study has nothing to do with classroom exposure. The locations measured (coffee shops, train stations, hospitals etc.) were hand-picked by the Wi-Fi Alliance members.

When they measured a laptop, they measured at distances of "1 meter or more" away (3.3 feet or more; did not specify the maximum distance). This does not take into account that children are using laptops, tablets and wireless hand-held devices in close/direct contact with their bodies, and accessing the internet simultaneously in the classroom. Every one of these devices has a client's card which is a live antenna. Actual measurement of the Wi-Fi radiation signals from these devices (see videos below) are magnitudes - up to 700,000 times - higher than reported by the industry study.

Dr. Perry Kendall's letter sent to the Ministry of Education and all the School Districts included a statement that Wi-Fi exposure is "less than 1% [ WRONG ] of what is received during typical cellphone use." http://www.sd62.bc.ca/portals/0/PDFs/IT/WiFi_Letter.pdf

He quoted a study by Foster (2007):
"Foster measured Wi-Fi radiofrequency levels at 53 sites in Europe and the US, and found that levels were below those contributed by other radiofrequency sources (typically including cell phone base stations, FM radio transmissions, and radiofrequency emissions from microwave ovens).
Also, in an interesting comparison with a pre-cell phone world, Foster showed that the median power density measured over 70-3000 MHz was similar to what was measured over 50-900 MHz in 1980 in US cities (Foster, 2007)".

Dr. Kendall's "less than 1%" is inaccurate. Using the Foster study to back up his assurance to school trustees, school administrators and parents makes no sense. 
This is Foster's 2007 study: http://www.medfordumc.org/celltower/wifirfexposure.pdf

P.2 "This study, supported by the Wi-Fi Alliance [companies that manufacture and sell Wi-Fi products]...
"The locations were chosen... in part to benefit from assistance of employees of member firms of the Wi-Fi Alliance to help with local arrangements.

"No attempt was made to provide a statistically valid sample of RF energy from WLANs in all environments in which a person might be located, however that may be defined.

P.7 "If there were a scientific need to obtain a statistically valid sample of all WLAN fields in the environment, that would require a study of different design than the present survey.

Measuring routers: P.3  "an access point [router] could be identified protruding from the ceiling or mounted on a wall, and measurements were made... usually by holding the meter at waist height while standing near the AP. In other cases [how many?]... no APs were visible and measurements were made in a convenient [unspecified] location.

Measuring laptop: P.10 "All of the present measurements were conducted at distances of approximately 1 m  [1 meter / 3.3 feet; maximum distance not specified]  or more from the client card in a laptop computer... The user of a laptop would be exposed to stronger fields than reported here, particularly if the antenna in the client card were close to the user’s body. No attempt was made in this study to assess near-field exposures to a user of the laptop itself.
P.9 "if the AP or client card were transmitting with a high duty cycle, its output would be comparable to that of a mobile telephone in use."

First, this study (survey?) was not conducted with children in mind. 

Second, this study was not done for a classroom scenario** where there are multiple wireless laptops close to students' bodies, where there are iPads in their hands and smart phones in their faces. In the study they measured ONE METER OR MORE FROM A LAPTOP. Obviously our children do not have arms longer than one meter (3.3 feet) to type on the keyboards of their laptops, tablets and iPodTouches. Even adults would not be sitting "1 meter or more" from their laptops/ Laptops and tablets often rest right on their laps.

This is a ridiculous way to measure radiation. While public health officials preach about the need for proper study-design, they seem to have no problem accepting this kind of industry-supported psuedoscience, and cite it repeatedly to the unaware public. Is children's safety really their priority? 

Third, the Foster study only presented "average" measurements. They did not mention any peak level radiation (which can damage cell membrane). This is like saying that driving a car at 200 km/hr for 5 mins every hour is not dangerous, because the "average" speed including when the car is slow and when it stops at the red light comes to only 25km/hr. Similarly, if you stab at someone with a knife, can you claim the force of the knife averaged over 6 mins is low, therefore the harm is negligible? This study is an industry-sponsored and designed study to let the industry advertise that Wi-Fi emission levels are very low. These reported figures are not applicable to the exposure on our children in schools. 

This study was done in 2006 when the use of wireless was a lot less extensive than now, 6 years later. Nowadays, we are not able to predict nor quantify how much the children are touching the devices, how often they load a page or whether they will be streaming videos with non-stop signals, whether they are using laptops or iPad, iPodTouch, smart phones etc. With the Ministry of Education encouraging students to use more tablets and electronic devices in the classrooms ("BYOD" - bring your own device), we need to be realistic that transmission duty cycles are getting higher and higher. 

So Foster said it: "Comparable to that of a mobile telephone in use"!

Dr. Kendall, please correct your numbers.

Here are 2 videos to illustrate the comparison between an iPad on Wi-Fi mode and an iPhone on talking mode:

iPhone on Talking mode:
-Peaked at 19 μW/cm2 (microwatts/cm2)
-Continuous signal, but duration of use likely shorter.
-Phone will be in direct contact with the ear and head (unless handsfree or headset are used).
-Wi-Fi was turned off on this phone.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n097VN7KB_A

iPad on Wi-Fi mode:

-Peaked at 70 μW/cm2; several times higher than iphone on talking mode

-Continual signals. Stop and spike every few seconds. 

-Duration of use for iPad is likely longer than talk-mode on cellphone.

-iPad will be in direct contact with the student's hands or/and lap/abdomen.
-Note that there is no Wi-Fi network available. The iPad is not even logged onto any Wi-Fi network and not downloading anything. The signals are simply from the Wi-Fi feature being turned on.
-The iPad is not on airplane mode but there is no SIM card in it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tVJI-0YogGo
-In this other video, the airplane mode is on and Wi-Fi is turned on. This one peaked at 39 microwatts/cm2.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s0qU2ov2U1w

N.B. The measuring “probe” of the RF meter is actually inside the middle of the spherical casing, about 1-2 cm away from the interior of the shell (i.e. not "touching" the devices). In real life, the radiation level in direct contact with the devices (like what the children could be doing) would be even higher.

What do the above numbers mean?

Health Canada's exposure limit is at an extremely high level of 1000 μW/cm2, while studies have found at:
0.002 μW/cm2 - Sleep disturbance and fatigue. Altpeter et al. (1995, 1997, 2005)
0.168 μW/cm2 - Progressive decrease in number of newborns and irreversible infertility in
mice after 5 generations exposure. I.N. Magras and T.D. Zenos (1997)
0.32-16.43 μW/cm2 - Attention, memory and motor function of school children significantly affected in comparison to control groups. A.A. Kolodynski and V.V. Kolodynska (1996) 
2.5 μW/cm2 - Damage to blood-brain barrier. Salford et al., (1997)

China/Russia/Italy/Poland have exposure limits at 10 μW/cm2. Switzerland's general limit is 9.5 μW/cm2 and 4.25 for sensitive areas (children, elderly, medically-challenged). The Swiss doctors' group - Physicians for the Environment - recently issued a public statement calling for reduction of their limit by 10 times, i.e. to 0.95 μW/cm2. Luxembourg/Bulgaria at 2.4 μW/cm2. Salzburg Health Department in Austria recommends only 0.001 μW/cm2 for outdoor and 0.0001 for indoor exposure.  http://goo.gl/4pzyE 

Read more:

Minister of Education Promoting Smartphones, Tablets and Other Electronic Devices in the Classroom 

http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/news/westcoastnews/story.html?id=dbbb0c19-7993-4170-87f0-d9304f9300c2

iPad iPhone Wi-Fi Radiation and Magnetic Fields
http://www.safeinschool.org/2012/01/ipad-iphone-wi-fi-radiation-and.html

21st Century Learning: Higher Radiation from iPads on WiFi than Cellphones that are Actively Transmitting

http://www.safeinschool.org/2013/03/health-canadas-wifi-myth.html

iPad User Manual's Safety Warning and Disclaimer. Have You Read It?
http://www.safeinschool.org/2013/04/ipad-user-manuals-safety-warning-and.html

Scientific Studies on the Biological Effects of pulsed microwave radiation:
http://www.safeinschool.org/p/scientific-studies.html


** Out of those 55 locations selected for the study, 35 were coffee shops, fast food outlets, general merchants, tourist visitor center; 6 were homes and hotel rooms; 4 were office areas; 6 were train stations and outdoor environments. Only 4 locations were categorized under a combined heading of  "Hospitals/health care facilities, universities" but no mentioning of classroom at all. This study has absolutely nothing to do with students using Wi-Fi in the classroom, and yet it has been cited by the Ontario Agency for Health Protection and Promotion, the Chief Medical Officer of BC, the Chief Medical Officer of Richmond and more, as an unfounded reference for the use of Wi-Fi in schools.