5G and Small Cell Threats to Public Health

Sample Letter for Opposing 3rd Cell Tower Near Blair High School – There are Other Possible Sites for this Public Safety Radio Equipment

Sample Letter You Can Personalize

Send Comments to Planning Board by Noon Wednesday March 4

Send to: OCEMail@montgomerycountymd.gov, Councilmember.Katz@montgomerycountymd.gov, County.Council@montgomerycountymd.gov, MCPChair@mncppc-mc.org. Gwen.Wright@montgomeryplanning.org, Joshua.Penn@montgomeryplanning.org

Re: Mandatory Referral 2020013 PSSM at FS 16

Dear County Executive Elrich, Members of the County Council and Planning Board Commissioners:

I’m writing to request that the application for the 199’ Macro Tower adjacent to Blair High School be withdrawn.  This would be a second tower within 50 feet of the Blair campus and less than 300 feet from homes and a child care. This new tower would be on the same property as an existing tower that will remain and would be a third tower that is within 200 feet of the campus. The existing two towers that will remain have a combined 70 antennas within 200 feet of the campus. More antennas will likely be added by right to those two towers in the coming years.

The proposed third tower with at a height of 199’ can have dozens of commercial wireless antennas and other equipment added after the County constructs the tower.  The construction of the tower by the County provides a loophole and allows the wireless companies to avoid the special exception/conditional use public hearing process with an objective hearing examiner, a review process that is required for new macro telecommunications towers in Montgomery County. Even though the tower would not meet the required setback and other standards, the antennas could be added by right without notice or public hearing through the permit process once the County’s tower is constructed.

There is no other school in Montgomery County with two cell towers in such close proximity.  A third and oversized tower at this location would be an excessive over-concentration of wireless facilities in a small area where thousands of young people, including child care and elementary school students are gathered.  This is unjustified and not equitable.

As you may know, wireless carriers previously applied to locate a 170’ tower at the same location but since the tower was not in compliance with the Zoning Ordinance and was too large for the site, the application was withdrawn. If this larger proposed tower at the same location was submitted as a special exception/conditional use it would likely be denied because it doesn’t comply with the Code.

There are numerous alternatives for the County to co-locate the seven public safety radio antennas on support structures and towers that already exist in both the immediate and adjacent areas.  I urge you to co-locate the County’s antennas on one of those structures.

Thank you for your attention to this very important matter that would affect our students for many years to come.  I hope you will withdraw the application and continue to support the primary mission of MCPS to provide a safe and supportive environment for the academic success of every student.

Sincerely,

 


See also: Facts about the Blair High School Cell Tower

Posted by twtpadmin in Action Alert

Facts about the Blair High School Cell Tower

A new 199 foot cell tower is about to be placed right near Blair High school.

Reposted with permission from Small Cells in Montgomery County

The 12 MCPS schools with cell towers are almost all lower income schools and every high school in the Downcounty Consortium (which has higher farms, minority and esol population than the rest of the County) has a tower. There are several times where cell towers were proposed and not put up because of strong opposition by parents. For example, Whitman High School, Wootton High School and Walter Johnson High School. Parents were vocal in complete opposition and the towers were halted. (Watch video above if you want to know why.)

Read the Bethesda Beat article Parents Decry Wootton Cell Tower Proposal, Principal Decides Not to Move Forward.

This is why the MCPS schools with cell towers are more often schools with higher minorities and students receiving free lunch. This is an environmental justice issue.

What Can You Do?

  1. Immediately get the word out to other parents and the students. They need to know.
  2. Hold community meetings to discuss the issue. Have the Blair PTA discuss the issue and develop an opinion. What does the student council at Blair think?
  3. Contact your elected officials and request an immediate halt to this tower.* (Do not take no for an answer. ) See the Sample Letter to Personalize.
  4. Attend the Hearing: Maryland National Capital Park and Planning Commission
    Thursday March 5, 10am. You have to sign up to testify online. It says that online spots fill up quickly and you can start signing up 10 days in advance. "If you need assistance to complete this form,

    please contact staff in the Chair’s Office via email at MCP-Chair@mncppc-mc.org or call 301-495-4605."
  5. Write and post letters publicly on parent and community list serves.

Even if they say it is a "done deal" parents have halted cell towers near their children. It can be done.

More info.

The proposed 199 foot County Tower near Blair High School is proposed to be located right next to one of the existing ones near Blair. Existing towers are about 10 feet from the baseball field and the other is less than 300 feet from the track and field.

Something that is different about this new tower vs others that have tried to locate at MCPS, is that it will be a County owned tower as part of their public safety radio system. So it goes through a different process called "Mandatory Referral" hearing at the Planning Board. Mandatory Referral is a required review by the Planning Board of government projects of a certain size. The Mandatory Referral process basically means whatever the Planning Board says, the County can ignore if they want to.

After it's constructed, wireless companies could locate on the new pole without going through the special exception hearing process with a hearing examiner that is required when commercial wireless companies want to build new towers in Montgomery County. Once any tower is built, companies can add antennas to it later through what is called a modification which does not involve any input from the public or a hearing. It's mostly just a permit process.

So, by the County constructing this tower, they are creating a loophole for the wireless companies. In fact wireless companies applied to locate a monopole tower in the very spot the County is proposing theirs. But after they applied it was withdrawn because it was found it didn't comply with zoning. It was too big for the property and also less than 300 feet from homes. Now this is the same property but because it's the County building it, they get to bypass the regulations. So far the County has not committed in writing to limiting the antennas on the tower to only public safety antennas.

See the 2017 Blair High School Tower Committee Application here.
CLEARLY the companies want to put their antennas in the area.

Meanwhile in California, parents are working hard to remove cell antennas near their schools. Please se below a banner created by parents and watch their news coverage here.

Watch the cell tower meeting at Wootton here.

* Send email to all Councilmembers -- >County.Council@MontgomeryCountyMD.gov

-- or contact one by one:

Gabe Albornoz 240-777-7959
Councilmember.Albornoz@montgomerycountymd.gov
View Staff List for Gabe Albornoz

Andrew Friedson 240-777-7828
Councilmember.Friedson@montgomerycountymd.gov
View Staff List for Andrew Friedson

Evan Glass 240-777-7966
Councilmember.Glass@montgomerycountymd.gov
View Staff List for Evan Glass

Tom Hucker 240-777-7960
Councilmember.Hucker@montgomerycountymd.gov
View Staff List for Tom Hucker

Will Jawando 240-777-7811
Councilmember.Jawando@montgomerycountymd.gov
View Staff List for Will Jawando

Sidney Katz 240-777-7906
Councilmember.Katz@montgomerycountymd.gov
View Staff List for Sidney Katz

Nancy Navarro 240-777-7968
Councilmember.Navarro@montgomerycountymd.gov
View Staff List for Nancy Navarro

Craig Rice 240-777-7955
Councilmember.Rice@montgomerycountymd.gov
View Staff List for Craig Rice

Hans Riemer 240-777-7964
Councilmember.Riemer@montgomerycountymd.gov
View Staff List for Hans Riemer

------------------
Contact County Executive Marc Elrich: 240-777-0311

Thanks to Small Cells in Montgomery County for this blog repost.

Posted by twtpadmin in Action Alert

Community Vision for Takoma ZTA19-07 Testimony

YOUR CHOICE IS CLEAR:

Champion Public Interests – Or Let the Telecom Industry Rule Our Streets

Nov. 19, 2019 Statement on behalf of Community Vision for Takoma*

by Colleen Cordes

Our Health and Safety Is Not Negotiable — Letting cell towers be installed as close as 30 feet from homes is to gamble with our health and the health of our children and grandchildren. Everyone on the Council is smart enough to know that we live in a world where good people work for big corporations – but where the first priority of the corporations they work for is profits, not people. So we’re not surprised that the good people of the telecom industry have spent decades trying to prevent and suppress important emerging science about the potentially serious health risks of radio-frequency radiation on our health and wellbeing. We are not surprised that they are trying to seduce the County into surrendering our public rights of way without a peep, with promises of amazing high-tech wonders to come. What we are surprised by, Councilmembers Hans Riemer, Gabe Albornoz, and Craig Rice, is that so far you seem to be so naïvely falling for this hype.

Everyone knows the FCC is a Captured Agency – But What About the Montgomery County Council? – The Edmond J. Safra Center for Ethics at Harvard University actually published a long exposé in 2015: Captured Agency: How the Federal Communications Commission is Dominated by the Industries It Presumably Regulates. To each member of our own County Council, know that we are paying attention and we will remember when the next election rolls around: Did you vote to let the Council be captured by the telecom industry as well? This is not a threat – it’s a statement of reality.

What is the Crowd Here Tonight So Concerned About?

  • Serious Potential Public-Health Risk: Consider, for example, the science-based commentary published by Scientific American last month–We Have No Reason to Believe 5G Is Safe . Written by Joel M. Moscowitz, Ph.D., who directs the Center for Family and Community Health at the University of California at Berkeley, it links to a recent call from hundreds of scientists and doctors for a 5G moratorium.
  • Corporate Welfare, Compliments of Taxpayers:  Corporations prefer to place cell towers in public rights-of-way since they can use our land at cost rather than negotiate a rate with a private property owner: It’s a much more profitable business model.
  • A Host of Other Social and Ecological Concerns About 5G Yet to be Subject to Public Debate:  The sponsors of ZTA 19-07 repeat industry’s hype about the positive potential of 5G. What about its negative potential? In addition to health concerns, critical predictions include:
    • A new world of 24/7 corporate and government surveillance and control.
    • Further diversion from face-to-face relationships with people and nature.
    • Severe pruning and reduced planting sites for shade trees, at an ecological moment in time when trees are more important than ever.
    • Increases in unemployment thanks to a huge push for autonomous trucks and cars and services of all kinds.
    • Ever more biased algorithms in AI-enabled tracking devices in all aspects of our daily lives contributing to new racial inequities.
    • And a big increase in energy use to power the multitude of new connected devices.

Remember the wonders of lead, asbestos, tobacco, CFCs, and fossil fuels? Let’s critically evaluate this new technology before we dive in — not be sorry later. Let’s get savvy. Drop the gee-whiz naivete about the next technological revolution. It’s clearly premature to line our residential streets with cell towers to speed the deployment of 5G. We need wisdom-based, not profit-based technology policies, generated only after robust public participation in decisions about the design and use of powerful technologies. The public should have access, for our deliberations, to a strong base of thoughtful, carefully researched analyses that scrutinize the full range of potential social and ecological impacts — both good and bad. ZTA 19-07 fails to meet any of these tests of wisdom.

And Councilmember Riemer, please stop distributing that canned statement from the American Cancer Society – last subject to a medical review, by the way, five years ago. We know it’s one of industry’s favorite ” don’t worry” go-to articles. Have you investigated whether the Society has connections to corporations that are invested in the speedy rollout of 5G? Did you not know that the ACS, related to other issues, has been criticized for conflicts of interest (See: https://nonprofitquarterly.org/is-the-american-cancer-society-putting-money-ahead-of-mission/) and questionable partnerships with corporations (See: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/05/health/american-cancer-society-brawley-resigns.html)?

See also: The Miseducation of America | By Dr. Devra Davis | Mar 29, 2021 An expose on the major omissions of fact from the New York Times July 16, 2019 article on 5G by William J. Broad.

Councilmember Riemer, you’ve also directed us to pro-5G stories in The New York Times. Here’s news straight from the NYT about its new partnership with Verizon involving NYT getting early access to 5G networking and equipment – talk about an incredible PR opportunity for the telecom industry! (See: https://open.nytimes.com/exploring-the-future-of-5g-and-journalism-a53f4c4b8644 ) And here’s more news about increasing links between Verizon and NYT — this one from the Wall Street Journal, which describes “a deepening advertising partnership between the two companies.” (See: https://www.wsj.com/articles/verizon-sponsors-new-york-times-subscriptions-for-high-schools-11569492001 ) Other news media have their own financial conflicts. Have you noticed the full-page ads for 5G from Verizon and T-Mobile in The Washington Post lately? We’ve noticed – we hope you will put the dollar signs here together as well.

Racial Equity and Social Justice: An especially urgent issue – the danger that the siting of cell towers in our neighborhoods will target our most affordable neighborhoods first and unfairly often. This is a pressing issue of racial equity.  Consider the County’s record to date in allowing large installations of cell antennas at affordable housing sites that are home primarily to families of color. ZTA 19-07 would do absolutely nothing to change that, or to prevent communities of color from once again being asked to shoulder far more than their share of the risks to health and safety.

Community Vision for Takoma urges the County to commission an immediate full scale, on-site audit of what actual health exposures are right now at apartments at 7600 Maple Avenue. Those 189-units provide an affordable home to many individuals and families of color. They have a right to safe shelter and to be fully informed. If our County commitment to racial equity and affordable housing means anything, we urge you to make sure a comprehensive, on-site review of what’s happening there gets started this week. That would include a detailed study of actual current conditions, including what warning signs are posted and in what languages, if protective physical barriers are in place, who has access to the two roof levels and the penthouse, and a comprehensive study of radio frequency emissions on top of, inside, around the perimeter and the grounds.

We brought this urgent issue to the Tower Committee this month – after an application to replace some of the 33 antennas there predicted that areas of the roof would register 25 times the limits for the general public’s exposure to RF radiation allowed by the FCC’s way too lenient rules. The Chair of the Committee threatened to throw us out of the meeting. But we’re not leaving the room. All applications for wireless transmission facilities should be subject to a review for their impact on racial equity and social justice.

It’s your choice, and your constituents are paying attention: Will you champion public interests or let the telecom industry rule Montgomery County’s streets? Please, prioritize the social and ecological health of our County: Community Vision for Takoma opposes ZTA 19-07, and we refuse to consent to be part of this experiment.

 


* Community Vision for Takoma (CVT) is a volunteer group working for an inclusive, just, and compassionate community and an effective, responsive local government.  We strive to apply Takoma Park’s progressive legacy to the social and ecological challenges of the 21st century. This version has been slightly revised from our submitted written testimony.

Posted by twtpadmin

Big Turnout in Opposition to ZTA 19-07 Public Hearing – November 19, 2019

Posted by twtpadmin

TUESDAY Nov. 19, 2019 HEARING: ACT NOW to Stop County Approval of Cell Towers in Front Yards

UPDATE: The hearing was held Nov. 19, 2019 (related post located here), but there is still time to voice your concerns. Find council contact information at the end of this post.

Tuesday Night, Nov. 19:

Let’s Pack the County Council Hearing to Oppose Cell Towers as Close as 30 Feet from Our Homes!

In order to speak, you need to sign up to make a 3-minute comment Nov. 19, Tuesday, at the County Council hearing on County Councilmember Hans Riemer’s proposal — Zoning Text Amendment 19-07. Also, contact County Councilmembers directly  — see links to all below — to share your concerns.
ZTA 19-07 would make it easier to line residential streets with cell towers on street poles in our public rights-of-way — as close as 30 feet from our front doors.
What’s the problem?
  • Serious Potential Public-Health Risk: From Scientific American last month–We Have No Reason to Believe 5G Is Safe (Joel M. Moscowitz, UC Berkeley). It links to a recent call from hundreds of scientists and doctors for a moratorium on 5G deployment.
  • Corporate Welfare, Compliments of Taxpayers:  Corporations prefer to place cell towers in public rights-of-way since they can use our land at cost rather than negotiate a rate with a private property owner: It’s a much more profitable business model.
  • Other 5G issues:  Sponsors of ZTA 19-07 repeat industry’s hype about the positive potential of 5G. What about its negative potential? In addition to health concerns, predictions include: A new world of 24/7 corporate and government surveillance and control, further diversion from face-to-face relationships with people and nature, harm to trees, and a big increase in energy use to power the new connected devices. Remember the wonders of lead, asbestos, tobacco, CFCs, and fossil fuels? Let’s critically evaluate this new technology before we dive in — not be sorry later.

Tell our County Council ::: Our Health & Safety Is Not Negotiable!

Speak Up — or just show up, with or without a sign — at Tuesday’s County Hearing: Anyone can sign up — you’ll be placed on a wait list, but we hear folks on the wait list generally get to speak. And just your attendance — with a handmade sign, if you like — will be powerful!
Call and Email the Council — Contact Info Below. Connect with them on Twitter and Facebook. Set up meetings in person with staff  to express your opinion. They need to hear from you today:
 
Hans Riemer (At Large) is the lead sponsor of this proposed Ordinance. The 2 co-sponsors are Craig Rice (District 2), and Gabe Albornoz (At Large).
We need 5 of the 9-member Council to oppose it to stop it. Help us reach the whole Council, but especially Evan Glass and Will Jawando, who are also At Large reps for the entire County, as well as Tom Hucker, our own District 5 rep.  And urge County Executive Marc Elrich to strongly oppose it too.
Send email to all Councilmembers — County.Council@MontgomeryCountyMD.gov
— or contact one by one:
——————-
Contact County Executive Marc Elrich: 240-777-0311
Community Vision for Takoma
Posted by twtpadmin in Action Alert, Legislation

WUSA9 Report: Verizon permit delayed over ‘alarming’ radio frequency predictions in Takoma Park

Verizon permit delayed over ‘alarming’ radio frequency predictions in Takoma Park
‘Worst-case predictive modeling’ concludes exposure could be 25-times higher than the FCC limit.
Author: Scott Broom | WUSA9
Published: 10:59 PM EST November 7, 2019
Updated: 10:59 PM EST November 7, 2019

Related Links:

Community Vision Takes Stand on Cell Tower Safety at Local Building

ACTION ALERT: The Montgomery County Council will be holding a Public Hearing on Bill ZTA 19-07 on Tuesday, November 19th at 7:30pm at the Montgomery County Council Building

Posted by twtpadmin in Action Alert, Legislation

URGENT: We need your help, again – to STOP ZTA 19-07

Montgomery County Coalition to Control Cell Towers-MC4T

Dear neighbors,

Councilmember Reimer is back with yet another industry tilted Zoning Text Amendment (ZTA) 19-07 – written by and for the exclusive benefit of Big Wireless.

ZTA 19-07 does NOT protect residents.

It is another retread in a series of bad bills that reduces cell pole setbacks in residential zones and further erodes the already insufficient procedural protections for residents.   Bottom line:  ZTA 19-07 will make it faster, easier and cheaper for Big Wireless to install large cellpoles in very close proximity to homes.

ZTA 19-07 must be stopped! 

How can you help defeat ZTA 19-07?

  • Attend the only scheduled public hearing  and voice your strong opposition to ZTA 19-07 at 7:30PM on Tuesday November 19, 2019 at Council Office Building in Rockville. (You may still be able to sign up to testify here.) Regardless, put this on your calendar and please plan to attend!
  • Email and call members of the Council to express your oppostion to 19-07. (It is very important that the four brand new members of the Council (Albornoz, Friedson, Glass and Jawando) hear from residents about our strong disapproval of ZTA 19-07.  Those four new Councilmembers were not  part of prior wireless ZTA reviews

Residents have been pleading with the Montgomery County Council for 3 years to work with us and to work with the County Executive to write and pass comprehensive legislation that truly protects neighborhoods from obtrusive and ugly wireless contraptions in close proximity to homes,  and to fix the administrative deficiencies of all current wireless telecommunications and related ordinances to provide equity, transparency and fairness for residents.

Please follow @MC4TORG on twitter and like/repost our most recent tweet regarding ZTA 19-07.

And, thanks so much for your continued support!

Rick Meyer

on behalf of

http://www.mc4t.org/

 

Posted by twtpadmin in Action Alert, Legislation

The Montgomery County Council will be holding a Public Hearing on Bill ZTA 19-07 on Tuesday, November 19th at 7:30pm at the Montgomery County Council Building

The Montgomery County Council will be holding a Public Hearing on Bill ZTA 19-07 on Tuesday, November 19th at 7:30pm at the Montgomery County Council Building.  If this Bill passes, it will allow the deployment of Small Cell Millimeter Microwave radiating antennas in "some" residential areas every 2-3 or so homes only 30 feet away from our houses.

Rick Meyer, President of the Montgomery County Coalition for the Control of Cell Towers provides this commentary:

  • Residents defeated three previous attempts since 2016 to pass zoning legislation on behalf of Big Wireless to make it faster, simpler and cheaper to install wireless transmitters in close proximity to residences. (ZTA 19-07 is the fourth attempt since 2016 and the third sponsored by Councilmember Reimer.)
  • Unfortunately, residents were not able to defeat ZTA 18-02 last year which removed protections for apartment and condo dwellers in Commercial zones)
  • Reimer’s 19-07 is no better than what had been defeated previously.
  • And, 19-07 does nothing to fix procedural inequities and lack of opportunities for input by residents. Which is why the residents of Montgomery County have been pleading with the Council for 3 years for comprehensive Legislation that truly protects their neighborhoods from intrusive and ugly wireless contraptions.
  • ZTA 19-07 does NOT protect residents. It is another retread in a series of bad bills written by and for the exclusive benefit of Big wireless.

Here is what you can do now.

Gabe Albornoz 240-777-7959
Councilmember.Albornoz@montgomerycountymd.gov
View Staff List for Gabe Albornoz

Andrew Friedson 240-777-7828
Councilmember.Friedson@montgomerycountymd.gov
View Staff List for Andrew Friedson

Evan Glass 240-777-7966
Councilmember.Glass@montgomerycountymd.gov
View Staff List for Evan Glass

Tom Hucker 240-777-7960
Councilmember.Hucker@montgomerycountymd.gov
View Staff List for Tom Hucker

Will Jawando 240-777-7811
Councilmember.Jawando@montgomerycountymd.gov
View Staff List for Will Jawando

Sidney Katz 240-777-7906
Councilmember.Katz@montgomerycountymd.gov
View Staff List for Sidney Katz

Nancy Navarro 240-777-7968
Councilmember.Navarro@montgomerycountymd.gov
View Staff List for Nancy Navarro

Craig Rice 240-777-7955
Councilmember.Rice@montgomerycountymd.gov
View Staff List for Craig Rice

Hans Riemer 240-777-7964
Councilmember.Riemer@montgomerycountymd.gov
View Staff List for Hans Riemer

Related Links:

 

Posted by twtpadmin in Action Alert, Legislation

Letter to Montgomery County Council: 5G and its small cell towers threaten public health

October 2, 2019

To:  The County Council of Montgomery County, Maryland

From:  Ronald M. Powell, Ph.D.
5G and its small cell towers threaten public health.

Implementing 5G is PURE INSANITY.  It requires yielding to two of the worst trends evident in our society today:  denial of science, which provides massive evidence of harm from radiofrequency radiation; and yielding to pressure from corporations that are willing to hurt the public, without compunction, for short-term profit.

Want to know why?  This message describes, as briefly as I can, the answers to the questions below.  Please read what interests you.  I present these comments as a retired U.S. Government career scientist (Ph.D. in Applied Physics, Harvard University).

  • Why is control of 5G secondary to stopping its deployment?
  • What makes Maryland a leader in MANDATING exposure to harmful radiofrequency radiation?
  • What is Maryland’s implicit policy on exposure to radiofrequency radiation?
  • Why is human health so vulnerable to harm from radiofrequency radiation?
  • What is the evidence of harm caused by radiofrequency radiation?
  • What are the advantages and disadvantages of 5G compared to fiber-optic technology?
  • What is driving the implementation of 5G?
  • What should our telecommunications goals be?
  • Who am I?

Why is control of 5G secondary to stopping its deployment?

Control by local government of the deployment of 5G’s small cell towers is, indeed, an important goal, because local governments are closer to the people and can better reflect their wishes.

But there is an even more important goal:  STOPPING the deployment of 5G altogether.  The reason, as shown throughout this message, is that there is NO SAFE WAY to implement 5G in our communities; rather, there are only BAD WAYS and WORSE WAYS.  So local control means ONLY that local governments can choose among bad and worse ways.

It may seem difficult to stop 5G, but it will be easier to stop it NOW than to get it removed later after huge numbers of Maryland residents fall ill.

What makes Maryland a leader in MANDATING exposure to harmful radiofrequency radiation?

Maryland has rushed to implement multiple sources of radiofrequency radiation with little to no consideration of the adverse health effects.  Here are multiple examples:

Wireless Smart Meters for the measurement of electricity have already been forced on homes and businesses throughout much of Maryland.  These meters bring the source of radiofrequency radiation up close and personal to the residents, even to the walls against which children sleep.  Wireless Smart Meters transmit pulses of radiofrequency radiation throughout the day and the night, every day of the year.  To escape the radiation from your own meter, you must pay your electric power company a monthly Opt-Out fee, forever, for a non-radiating meter.  At last report, about 44,000 Maryland homeowners have made this choice.  But there is NO way to escape the radiation from your neighbors’ wireless meters.

Wireless Smart Meters for the measurement of natural gas and water are either already implemented in parts of the State, or are being planned, and will worsen the problem already created by the Wireless Smart Meters for electricity.

Wi-Fi is implemented widely in Maryland’s schools and bathes the children and the teachers in radiofrequency radiation every school day for years.  Parents with the wisdom to protect their children from such exposure MUST forfeit a public school education for those children.  All this has occurred even though the Maryland Children’s Environmental Health and Protection Advisory Council, which reports to the Governor, recommended phasing Wi-Fi out of the schools in favor of much safer wired technology.  (Wifi Radiation in Schools in Maryland, Final Report, December 13, 2016, page 8.  (https://phpa.health.maryland.gov/OEHFP/EH/Shared%20Documents/CEHPAC/MD_CEHPAC_SchoolWiFi_022017_final.pdf)

Many Maryland public schools have even accepted the installation of cell towers on school grounds, in payment for fees, dramatically increasing the exposure of the children and the teachers to radiofrequency radiation.

This assault on the public health by radiofrequency radiation will be completed by installation of 5G’s small cell towers up and down residential and business streets, up close to Maryland residents.  These towers will operate 24 hours per day throughout the year.

What is Maryland’s implicit policy on exposure to radiofrequency radiation?

Maryland’s implicit policy appears to be this:

“No resident of Maryland shall be permitted to escape 24-hour exposure to radiofrequency radiation, at ever higher levels, even though such radiation has already been shown to be harmful to human health.”

“Wireless technology is good by definition, so the more of it the better, no matter what its effects on health may be.”

“All scientific evidence that shows that exposure to radiofrequency radiation is harmful to human health should be categorically denied, no matter what source that evidence comes from, including the National Institutes of Health, the International Agency for Research on Cancer of the World Health Organization, and the international biomedical research community more broadly.”

Why is human health so vulnerable to harm from radiofrequency radiation?

In the simplest terms, human beings are bioelectrical in nature.  That is why electrocardiograms work when they monitor a beating heart.  And that is why electroencephalograms work when they monitor the activities in the brain.  Humans evolved in levels of radiofrequency radiation far below those produced by human technology today.  We humans are simply not designed to tolerate today’s high levels of radiofrequency radiation.

When the radiofrequency radiation from cell towers, including 5G’s small cell towers, and other wireless sources, hits the body, that radiation disrupts the bioelectrical workings of the body.  This disruption occurs at levels of radiation far below the Maximum Permitted Exposure limits set by the Federal Communications Commission, which are the only “official” limits in place in the U.S.A. today.  In response, the body must fight back constantly to regain control.  This battle can lead to a wide range of health problems.  Here is just a partial list:  sleep disruption, headaches, irritability, ringing in the ears, fatigue, loss of concentration and memory, nerve pain, dizziness, eye problems, nausea, heart palpitations, depression, and cancer.

No one is immune to harm, but vulnerability varies widely with the individual.  That vulnerability appears to be greatest for pregnant mothers, young children, teenagers, men of reproductive age, seniors, the disabled, and those with chronic health conditions.  A host of major medical conditions are now under study by the international biomedical research community to determine what role exposure to radiofrequency radiation may play in causing, or aggravating, them.  Examples include autism, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), autoimmune diseases, and Alzheimer’s disease, among so many others.

The effects of radiofrequency radiation appear to be cumulative; so the longer that exposure continues, the greater the chance that an individual will be overtly affected.  Some individuals will develop a devastating condition called Electromagnetic Hypersensitivity Syndrome, with a host of symptoms, including extreme pain from exposure to even very low levels of radiofrequency radiation.  Just to survive, such individuals must often leave their homes and jobs, where exposure levels have proved to be too high, and move to rare locations away from radiation sources.  Such individuals regularly contact scientists (including me), physicians, and other aware individuals for advice on what to do.

What is the evidence of harm caused by radiofrequency radiation?

Thousands of archival biomedical research papers, published in peer-reviewed journals, have shown that radiofrequency radiation (“wireless radiation”) is harmful to human health, not to mention the health of other living entities.  These papers have been collected and reviewed in a number of major documents.  Here are three examples of such reviews:

BioInitiative Working Group, Cindy Sage, M.A. and David O. Carpenter, M.D., Editors, BioInitiative Report:  A Rationale for Biologically-based Public Exposure Standards for Electromagnetic Radiation, December 31, 2012.  Written by 29 authors from 10 countries.  Draws on about 1800 references.
(http://www.bioinitiative.org)

Igor Belyaev, Amy Dean, Horst Eger, Gerhard Hubmann, Reinhold Jandrisovits, Markus Kern, Michael Kundi, Hanns Moshammer, Piero Lercher, Kurt Müller, Gerd Oberfeld, Peter Ohnsorge, Peter Pelzmann, Claus Scheingraber, and Roby Thill, EUROPAEM EMF Guideline 2016  for the prevention, diagnosis and treatment of EMF-related health problems and illnesses, Reviews of Environmental Health 2016, Vol. 31, No. 3, pages 363-397.  Draws on 308 references.
(https://www.degruyter.com/downloadpdf/j/reveh.2016.31.issue-3/reveh-2016-0011/reveh-2016-0011.pdf)

Martin L. Pall, Ph.D., 5G Risk:  The Scientific Perspective (2019).  Addresses the intracellular mechanism of harm from wireless radiation, and the eight primary areas of biological harm.  Draws on 139 references.  (www.stopsmartmetersbc.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/5G-Risk-The-Scientific-Perspective-by-Martin-L.-Pall-The-5G-Summit-2019.pdf)

In 2011, the International Agency for Research on Cancer of the World Health Organization classified radiofrequency radiation as a Group 2B Human Carcinogen (“possibly carcinogenic”), naming explicitly “wireless phone” radiation (cellular radiation), based on the increased risk for glioma.  Glioma is a malignant type of brain cancer that is usually fatal.  It most recently took the life of Senator John McCain and Beau Biden, the son of Vice President Joe Biden.  (https://www.iarc.fr/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/pr208_E.pdf)

In 2018, a massive study by the National Toxicology Program at the National Institutes of Health linked cellular radiofrequency radiation (RFR) to cancer of the nerves of the heart (schwannomas), to cancer of the brain (glioma), and to multiple other health effects in test animals.  (https://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/results/areas/cellphones/index.html)

In 2015 and continuing, 247 scientists from 42 nations signed an appeal to the United Nations.  These are scientists who have “published peer-reviewed papers on the biological or health effects of non-ionizing electromagnetic fields” (which are inclusive of radiofrequency radiation).  Their appeal was the following:

“Address the global public health concerns related to exposure to cell phones, power lines, electrical appliances, wireless devices, wireless utility meters and wireless infrastructure in residential homes, schools, communities and businesses.”  (https://www.emfscientist.org/)

For more information on the health effects of radiofrequency radiation, please see the website of the Environmental Health Trust, especially the “Science” tab.  (https://ehtrust.org/)

What are the advantages and disadvantages of 5G compared to fiber-optic technology?

5G has only ONE advantage compared to a wired technology, like fiber-optic technology:  5G will support mobility, just as current cellular technologies do.  Among wireless technologies, 5G will support faster wireless data rates, enabled by its operation at higher frequencies than current cellular technologies.

But wired technology, especially fiber-optic technology, is superior to 5G in EVERY WAY other than mobility.  Fiber-optic technology produces NO radiofrequency radiation, so it poses NO health hazard and thus is far safer than 5G or any cellular technology.  Also, fiber-optic technology is MUCH faster than any wireless technology, including 5G.  And fiber-optic technology is more reliable, more cyber secure, more private, and far more energy efficient than 5G or any cellular technology.  Further, fiber-optic technology requires no cell towers and antennas.  Rather fiber-optic technology employs optical fibers that are no bigger than a wire.  These fibers are close to invisible and are easily buried.  So fiber-optic technology does not despoil the environment with massive cell towers and antennas, unlike 5G and any cellular technology.  (For a more detailed description on the limitations of 5G, see https://whatis5g.info/.)

So users of wireless technology, including 5G, will have to decide if mobility ALONE is more important for their particular application than any other factor, including their own health and the health of their families, their friends, and their communities.

Compared to fiber-optic technology, 5G is already an out-dated technology, even aside from its adverse health effects.

What is driving the implementation of 5G?

5G appears to be an effort by the wireless industries to open new profit centers, now that they have largely maxed out the profits from today’s cell phone technology.  Consider these questions:

Is the hype for 5G coming more from potential providers of 5G, who hope to profit from 5G, or from potential users, who will have to pay for 5G?

Is the RUSH to implement 5G more about staking out claims to small cell sites in right-of-ways than about providing services that customers really need?

Is the RUSH to implement 5G driven by the growing awareness of the public and its representatives that radiofrequency radiation is harmful to health, and thus the providers feel that they must act quickly before resistance builds further?

What scientific studies, from impartial sources, can the providers of 5G identify that prove that 5G has NO adverse health effects on humans?  The burden of proof is on the providers.

When questioned by U.S. Senator Richard Blumenthal in a hearing before the Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee (February, 7, 2019), the representatives of industry could name no existing Independent studies and none in progress that industry was supporting.  (Story:  https://www.blumenthal.senate.gov/newsroom/press/release/at-senate-commerce-hearing-blumenthal-raises-concerns-on-5g-wireless-technologys-potential-health-risks; Video:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hsil3VQE5K4)

What should our telecommunications goals be?

Let me suggest the following:

Promote the expansion of fiber-optic technology as widely as possible, instead of degrading our environment with more harmful radiofrequency radiation, this time from 5G.

Require that the safety of 5G be proven by impartial studies before 5G can be installed in Maryland, instead of permitting the use of Maryland residents as guinea pigs to test that safety.

Join forces with other state and local governments to fight back against Federal laws and regulations that attempt to force any potentially harmful technology on the public without adequate PRIOR proof of safety.

Assert the legal right of the public to be free from the threat of assault by a wireless technology which every scientific indication to date suggests will be harmful to human health and sometimes fatal.

Who am I?

I am a retired U.S. Government career scientist (Ph.D. in Applied Physics from Harvard University).  During my Government career, I worked for the Executive Office of the President, the National Science Foundation, and the National Institute of Standards and Technology.  I currently interact with other scientists, with physicians, and with aware individuals worldwide about the impact of radiofrequency radiation on human health.

I have been a resident of Montgomery County since 1979.

Respectfully,

Ronald M. Powell, Ph.D.
Montgomery Village, MD

 


Take Action: Contact your county council representatives.


Posted by twtpadmin in Action Alert

Action Alert: Montgomery County is about to vote on 5G cell towers in our front yards!

Wednesday, October 2, 2019
Small Cells in Montgomery County Action Alert

Montgomery County is about to vote on 5G cell towers in our front yards!

The latest effort by Councilman Hans Riemer is a new zoning law that will allow cell towers 30 feet from homes.

Here is what you can do now.

1. Talk to your neighbors about 5G. Here are some resources to learn more

News Articles

2. Call and email the Council. Connect with them on Twitter and Facebook.

Gabe Albornoz 240-777-7959
Councilmember.Albornoz@montgomerycountymd.gov
View Staff List for Gabe Albornoz

Andrew Friedson 240-777-7828
Councilmember.Friedson@montgomerycountymd.gov
View Staff List for Andrew Friedson

Evan Glass 240-777-7966
Councilmember.Glass@montgomerycountymd.gov
View Staff List for Evan Glass

Tom Hucker 240-777-7960
Councilmember.Hucker@montgomerycountymd.gov
View Staff List for Tom Hucker

Will Jawando 240-777-7811
Councilmember.Jawando@montgomerycountymd.gov
View Staff List for Will Jawando

Sidney Katz 240-777-7906
Councilmember.Katz@montgomerycountymd.gov
View Staff List for Sidney Katz

Nancy Navarro 240-777-7968
Councilmember.Navarro@montgomerycountymd.gov
View Staff List for Nancy Navarro

Craig Rice 240-777-7955
Councilmember.Rice@montgomerycountymd.gov
View Staff List for Craig Rice

Hans Riemer 240-777-7964
Councilmember.Riemer@montgomerycountymd.gov
View Staff List for Hans Riemer

Posted by twtpadmin in Action Alert