5G Day of Action

5G Day of Action Rally, Wisconsin for Safe Technology, Greendale, Wisconsin

The Americans for Responsible Technology (ART), an association of more than 90 organizations, coordinated a nationwide day of action on May 15, 2019 to protest the deployment of 5G in the United States.

The purpose of the demonstrations was to raise public awareness about the health risks from 5G radiation and to place the burden of responsibility on those who stand to profit from 5G deployment.

ART and more than 30 local wireless safety groups called on wireless companies (Verizon, Sprint, AT&T and T-Mobile) and their sub-contractors (e.g, Crown Castle, American Tower, ExteNet Systems) to suspend the deployment of small cell antennas until chronic, low level exposure to 5G radio frequency radiation can be proven safe for everyone.

The local sponsors and locations of thirty demonstrations that occurred in fourteen states are listed below. A few other demonstrations do not appear in this list (e.g., Berkeley, CA; Oakland, CA).

California
California Brain Tumor Association, Burbank, CA

Ventura County Issues Reform, Calabasas, CA

Napa Neighborhood Association for Safe Technology, Napa, CA

Center for Electrosmog Prevention, San Diego, CA

San Francisco State University, San Francisco, CA

EMF Safety Network, San Rafael, CA

EMF Safety Network, Sebastopol, CA 

Ventura County Issues Reform, Simi Valley, CA

Concerned Citizens Against 5G, Stockton, CA

Ventura County Issues Reform, Thousand Oaks, CA

Danville Citizens for Responsible Growth, Walnut Creek, CA

Hawaii
Keep Your Power, Kahului, HI

Illinois
Stop 5G Chicago, Chicago, IL

Maryland
What is 5G?, Bethesda, MD

Massachusetts
Centerville Concerned Citizens, Hyannis, MA

Last Tree Laws, Northampton, MA

Michigan

Safe Tech Forward, Detroit, MI

Stop 5G MI, Petoskey, MI

North Carolina
Safe Tech Kids, Asheville, NC

Triangle Citizens for Safe Technology, Durham, NC

New York
Citizens for 5G Awareness, East Northport, NY

5G Wake Up Call, Manhattan, NY

Stop Smart Meters, Woodstock, NY

Oregon
Oregon for Safer Technology, Ashland, OR

Oregon Institute for Creative Research, Portland, OR

Pennsylvania
5G Free, Harrisburg, PA

South Carolina
Stop 5G Greenville, Greenville, SC

Vermont
EMF Safety for Vermont, Brattleboro, VT

Washington
Citizens of Tacoma Against 5G Small Cells in Residential Areas, Tacoma, WA

Wisconsin
Wisconsin for Safe Technology, Greendale, WI

News Media Coverage of 5G Day of Action

California

Marin activists rally against 5G

Marin Independent Journal, May 15, 2019

https://www.marinij.com/2019/05/15/marin-activists-rally-against-5g/

Protesters rally against 5G in San Diego
KGTV (San Diego, CA), May 15, 2019 (ABC)
https://www.10news.com/news/local-news/protesters-rally-against-5g-in-san-diego

https://news.yahoo.com/protesters-rally-against-5g-san-150110063.html

Photo Gallery: Locals protest against 5G at AT&T

Los Angeles Times, May 16, 2019
https://www.latimes.com/socal/burbank-leader/photos/la-tn-blr-me-att-5g-protest-photogallery.html

Protesters voice opposition to 5G telecommunication devices

Los Angeles Times, May 17, 2019

https://www.latimes.com/socal/burbank-leader/news/tn-blr-me-att-5g-protest-20190515-story.html

5G Fear: Protesters rally in Grass Valley
The Union (Nevada County, CA), May 16, 2019
https://www.theunion.com/news/5g-fear-protesters-rally-in-grass-valley/

Hawaii

Group protests 5G, doesn’t want it on Kauai
The Garden Island, May 16, 2019
https://www.thegardenisland.com/2019/05/16/hawaii-news/group-protests-5g-doesnt-want-it-on-kauai/

Maryland

Activists protest against 5G towers
WDVM (Montgomery County, MD), May 15, 2019

https://www.localdvm.com/news/i-270/activists-protest-against-5g-towers/2004392639

5G health fears exist but NYT & WSJ blame them on RT

RT America (reported on rally in Bethesda, MD), May 15, 2019

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xzsGx1BTGc4

Protestors keep up fight against wireless technology

Montgomery Sentinel, May 23, 2019
https://mont.thesentinel.com/2019/05/23/protestors-keep-up-fight-against-wireless-technology

Massachusetts

Rally seeking scrutiny of new 5G wireless
Cape Cod Times (Hyannis, MA), May 15, 2019
https://www.capecodtimes.com/opinion/20190515/rally-seeking-scrutiny-of-new-5g-wireless

New York

Protesters call on Woodstock to block 5G wireless installation
Daily Freeman, May 15, 2019
https://www.dailyfreeman.com/news/local-news/protesters-call-on-woodstock-to-block-g-wireless-installation/article_21df1904-7743-11e9-baa8-cbe50257f5da.html

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PdBprsl1S4s

Long Islanders Join Nationwide Anti-5G Rally
Long Island Press, May 16, 2019
https://www.longislandpress.com/2019/05/16/long-islanders-join-nationwide-anti-5g-rally/

North Carolina

Local group rallies in Asheville as part of national protest over 5G technology
WLOS (Asheville, NC), May 15, 2019  (ABC)

https://wlos.com/news/local/local-group-rallies-in-asheville-as-part-of-national-protest-over-5g-technology

Oregon

Locals plan rally against 5G rollout

KOBI / KOTI (Medford, OR), May 15, 2019  (NBC)

https://kobi5.com/news/locals-plan-rally-against-5g-rollout-102059/

  

5G cell tower protest in Ashland

KTVL (Ashland, OR), May 15, 2019  (CBS)

https://ktvl.com/news/local/5g-cell-tower-protest-in-ashland-with-concerns-for-health-and-well-being-from-newly-proposed-tower

Group rallies against 5G roll out
KDRV (Medford, OR), May 15, 2019  (ABC)
https://www.kdrv.com/content/video/510001372.html

https://www.kdrv.com/content/news/Group-rallies-against-new-5G-technology-roll-out-510001741.html

Locals plan rally against 5G rollout

KMVU (Medford, OR), May 15, 2019  (Fox)

https://fox26medford.com/locals-plan-rally-against-5g-rollout/#

Canada

Protesters push public notification on harms of cell tower radiation

Summerland Review (Summerland, British Columbia), May 15, 2019

https://www.summerlandreview.com/news/protesters-push-public-notification-on-harms-of-cell-tower-radiation/

--

Related Posts on Electromagnetic Radiation Safety

Scientists and Doctors Demand Moratorium on 5G
5G Wireless Technology: Is 5G Harmful to Our Health?

5G Wireless Technology: Millimeter Wave Health Effects

5G Wireless Technology: Cutting Through the Hype

5G Wireless Technology: Major newspaper editorials oppose "small cell" antenna bills
FCC Open Letter Calls for Moratorium on New Commercial Applications of Radiofrequency Radiation

Cell Tower Health Effects

PowerWatch: 1,670 Scientific Papers on Electromagnetic Fields

This list is a compilation of citations for 1,670 peer-reviewed papers about electromagnetic fields (EMF) published in scientific journals from 1979 through 2018. The list includes all papers that PowerWatch published on its website as of October 11, 2018.

This is not a comprehensive list of studies. PowerWatch selected these studies from their internal database of 15,000 (approx.) scientific papers, most of which address EMF. 

Powerwatch has been researching the links between EMF and health risks for more than 25 years. The organization, which is completely independent of government and industry, gathers information to help the lay person understand this issue. For more information about PowerWatch go to: https://www.powerwatch.org.uk/docs/aboutus.asp.

Powerwatch recently added a search engine to its website which enables the user to search specific fields in their database for specified time periods.

This list is published on the Electromagnetic Radiation Safety website with the permission of Alasdair Philips, the Science Director and co-founder of PowerWatch.

Table of Contents

Mobile and Cordless Phones (pp. 2-29) -- 525 papers (P=306, N=100, - =119)

Mobile Phone Masts (pp. 30-35) -- 94 papers (P=39, N=10, - =45) 

Wi-Fi (pp. 36-38) -- 38 papers (P=13, N=3, - =22) 

Radio Transmitters (pp. 39-41) -- 43 papers (P=36, N=2, - =5) 

EEG and Brain Responses (pp. 65-67) -- 53 papers (P=48, N=2, - =3) 

Electrical Sensitivity (pp. 60-64) -- 88 papers (P=41, N=23, - =24)

Radiofrequency EMF Mechanisms (pp. 68-81) -- 251 papers (P=185, N=37, - =29)

Powerline Frequencies (pp. 42-59) -- 333 papers

Powerfrequency EMF Mechanisms (pp. 82-95) -- 256 papers

Click on the following link to download the 95-page list (pdf):

http://bit.ly/PowerWatch1670

Related Posts:

Recent Research on Wireless Radiation and Electromagnetic Fields

Effects of Exposure to Electromagnetic Fields: 833 Studies

Scientific Evidence of Harm from Cell Phone Radiation: Two Years of Research

Key Cell Phone Radiation Research Studies

Google Glass Alert: Potential health risks from wireless radiation

Evaluation of Temperature Elevation in Human Ocular Tissues due to Wireless Eyewear Devices

Lan J, Du G. Evaluation of temperature elevation in human ocular tissues due to wireless eyewear devices. ACES Journal. 34(1):17-24. 2019. 

Abstract

In this paper, a numerical study is proposed to evaluate the temperature variation in the human ocular tissues during the electromagnetic radiation exposure from wireless eyewear device. The results show that the temperature in the whole eyeball increases gradually as the exposure time goes on and could reach the thermal steady state at about 30 minutes. During this process, the temperature increments in different ocular tissues are between 1.1°C and 1.7°C. The results also show the maximal ratio of temperature increments in the initial 5 and 10 minutes to that of the whole steady state could reach to 42.9% and 69.2%, respectively. Therefore, we believe that electromagnetic radiation from wireless eyewear device might pose a threat on the health of the human eyes. People should decrease the talk time as soon as possible to protect their eyes from the possible health hazards. Finally, attention is paid to evaluate the relationship between the maximal SAR and the temperature increments. The results show the temperature increments do not increase in direct proportion to the maximal SAR, which indicates that the maximal SAR and the temperature increments should be taken into account simultaneously while evaluating the biological effect of microwave on the ocular tissues.

Conclusions

Based on the results evaluated in this paper, we find that the temperature in the whole eyeball increases gradually and reaches the thermal steady state at about 30 minutes during the EM exposure of wireless eyewear device. The temperature increments in different ocular tissues are from 1°C to 1.7°C. We, therefore, believe EM exposure from wireless eyewear device may pose a threat on the health of the eyes, especially for the lens which suffer from the maximal temperature increments. Meanwhile, the results also show that the maximal ratio of temperature increments in the initial 5 and 10 minutes exposure time to that of the complete thermal steady state could reach to 42.9% and 69.2%, respectively. Hence, wireless eyewear device users should shorten the usage time as soon as possible to protect their eyes from the possible health hazards. Finally, we evaluate the relationship between the maximal SAR and the temperature increments in the ocular tissues. We find that the temperature increments do not increase in direct proportion to the maximal SAR. Therefore, we believe the maximal SAR and the temperature increments should be taken into account simultaneously while evaluating the biological effect of microwave on the ocular tissues. This paper could provide valuable data for the establishment of related safety standards and future researches in the biological effect of microwave and human eyes. However, limited by the experimental condition, the experiment is not included. Therefore, conclusions presented in this paper are just indicative but not definitive.

Open access paper: http://www.aces-society.org/includes/downloadpaper.php?of=ACES_Journal_January_2019_Paper_3&nf=19-1-3

--

On the effects of glasses on the SAR in human head resulting from wireless eyewear devices at phone call state

Lan JQ, Liang X, Hong T, Du GH. On the effects of glasses on the SAR in human head resulting from wireless eyewear devices at phone call state. Prog Biophys Mol Biol. 2018 Feb 8. doi: 10.1016/j.pbiomolbio.2018.02.001.

Abstract

This paper evaluates the effects of glasses on the specific absorption rates (SAR) in the human head resulting from wireless eyewear device at phone call state. We mainly concentrate on the SAR in the eyes since their sensitivity to electromagnetic fields (EMF). We find wearing glasses obviously alters the distribution and magnitude of the SAR. The maximal SAR in the ocular tissues with glasses is even 6 times more than that without glasses. Wearing glasses also induce the new hotspot in the eyes which may cause the biggest SAR increment in the ocular tissues. Moreover, calculated results indicate that the maximal SAR is sensitive to the size of glasses and radiation frequency. Because of this, we believe wearing glasses may possibly increase the risk of health hazard to eyes of wireless eyewear device user. These calculated results could be a valuable reference for the glasses designer to reduce the SAR in the eyes.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29428220

Conclusions

Based on the calculated results, we find wearing glasses obviously alters the distribution and magnitude of SAR. The maximal SAR in the ocular tissues with glasses is even 6 times more than that without glasses. Wearing glasses also could induce the new hotspot in the eyeballs which may cause the biggest SAR increment in the ocular tissues. Moreover, calculated results indicate that the maximal SAR is sensitive to the size of glasses and radiation frequency. Therefore, we believe wearing glasses may possibly increase the risk of health hazard to human eyes. In order to decrease the SAR in the ocular tissues, people should choose the adaptive glasses according to the radiation frequency. If possible, we advise people to take off their glasses when they use the eyewear device. These calculated results could be a valuable reference for the glasses designer to reduce the SAR in the eyes. However, due to the limited research conditions, the experiment is not included. So conclusions, in this paper, are just indicative but not definitive.

--

March 22, 2017

The Google Glass, an optical head-mounted display designed in the shape of a pair of eyeglasses, was not embraced by the general public when it was introduced in 2013-2014. So Google changed its marketing strategy to target specific occupational needs including healthcare, military, and sports applications.

Recently, a colleague told me that some physician offices in California require their staff to wear the Glass. Last week, National Public Radio reported that some factory workers must also wear the Glass.

Tasnim Shamma, Google Glass Didn't Disappear. You Can Find It On The Factory Floor. WABE/National Public Radio, March 18, 2017. http://n.pr/2nDG22d

Following is a press release I prepared three years ago which provides precautionary information about this wireless device. SAR values for the latest model of the Google Glass follow the press release.

--

Google Glass Alert: Potential health risks from wireless radiation

The Google Glass emits more wireless radiation than most cell phones on the market, but unlike cell phone users, Glass users may be wearing this device on their heads for more than 12 hours a day putting their health at risk.

By Joel M. Moskowitz, Ph.D., School of Public Health, University of California, Berkeley

BERKELEY, Calif. - April 15, 2014 - PRLog -- The Google Glass emits both Wi-Fi and Bluetooth radiation. Although the Glass official web site, http://www.google.com/glass/start/ , contains information warning consumers about the device's potential interference with radio or television reception, the site provides no safety information to consumers.

As a body-worn, microwave-emitting device, Google is required by Federal law to test the Specific Absorption Rate or SAR of the Glass. This is a measure of the maximum microwave radiation absorbed by the user in 6 minutes averaged over one gram of tissue. 

Although Google did not post the SAR information on its web site, the Glass test reports can be found on the FCC's web site at [https://fccid.io/document.php?id=1910822]. The FCC ID for the current version of the Glass is X1.

The official test report indicates that the SAR for the Glass is much higher than the SARs for the iPhone 5, the Samsung Galaxy S5, or most cell phones on the market.

During the last year, Google improved the antenna on the Glass which resulted in an increase in the SAR from 1.11 to 1.42 watts/kilogram (W/kg).  In contrast, the Samsung Galaxy S5 has a head and body SAR of 0.57 and 0.64 W/kg, respectively. The Apple iPhone 5 has a head SAR of 1.17 and a body SAR of 1.18 W/kg.

In the U.S. no personal wireless device can have a SAR that exceeds 1.6 W/kg. The SAR standard, however, was developed several decades ago in the U.S. primarily by physicists and engineers to protect users from the acute effects of the heat generated by microwave radiation. The standards do not protect users from the non-thermal effects of cell phone radiation which have been associated with increased brain cancer risk among long-term cell phone users and other health problems in the short term including electrosensitivity, sperm damage and infertility, and reproductive health risks in children.

Just because these devices are legal does not mean they are safe

Although many health researchers, including myself, have questioned the utility of assessing only a device's SAR, currently that is all governments measure and regulate. 

Governments want consumers to believe that all legally marketed wireless devices are safe, and that the SAR level does not matter as long as it meets the legal standard.  Yet no study has proved that exposure to low-intensity microwave radiation is safe, and thousands of peer-reviewed, published studies have found biologic effects from such exposures. The research suggests that governments need to adopt more stringent, biologically-based, standards to protect consumers' health.

Medical and public health professionals should call on Google to end this experiment on Glass users or at least fully inform consumers of the potential long-term health risks from wearing this device.

https://www.prlog.org/12310450-google-glass-alert-potential-health-risks-from-wireless-radiation.html

--

Google Glass SAR test report update

Following are the results from the SAR test report for the Google Glass Model GG1 (A4R-GG1; dated May 18, 2015):

Head test: 0.293 W/kg for Wi-Fi (2.4 GHz) and 0.790 W/kg for Wi-Fi (5 GHz)

Simultaneous transmission: 0.874 W/kg

Bluetooth was excluded from testing as the maximum output power is 2.0 dBm.

https://apps.fcc.gov/eas/GetApplicationAttachment.html?id=2646093

GAO 2012 Mobile Phone Report to the Congress

"The U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) is an independent, nonpartisan agency that works for Congress. Often called the "congressional watchdog," GAO examines how taxpayer dollars are spent and provides Congress and federal agencies with objective, reliable information to help the government save money and work more efficiently." 

The FCC Failed to Comply with the GAO's Cell Phone Recommendations

At the request of the U.S. Congress, in 2012 the U.S. General Accountability Office (GAO) conducted an investigation and issued a report, "Exposure and Testing Requirements for Mobile Phones Should Be Reassessed" (GAO 12-771).

The report made two recommendations to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), the agency in the Department of Commerce responsible for ensuring cell phone safety: 

(1) formally reassess the exposure limit for radio frequency radiation and change the limit if appropriate; and 

(2) reassess the adequacy of cell phone testing requirements, particularly when phones are held next to the body, and update testing requirements as appropriate.

Since 2012, the GAO routinely contacted the FCC to determine whether the FCC implemented the GAO's recommendations. Since the FCC has provided no specific plans to comply, in 2019 the GAO closed out the investigation reporting that the FCC failed to implement the GAO's recommendations regarding cell phone exposure limits and testing requirements (see below).

The FCC's exposure limits and testing procedures adopted in 1996 are considered inadequate to protect human health by most scientists who publish research on the effects of non-ionizing electromagnetic fields on biology and health.

The GAO report was requested in 2012 by the following members of Congress: Henry Waxman, Anna Eshoo, and Edward Markey.

https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-12-771

Also see:

An Exposé of the FCC: An Agency Captured by the Industries it Regulates

FCC: Why We Need Stronger Cell Phone Radiation Regulations--Key Testimony

What's Wrong with Cell Phone Radiation Exposure Limits? (SAR)

Children are more exposed to cell phone radio-frequency radiation than adults

--

January 10, 2013

"Comments on the 2012 GAO Report:
'Exposure and Testing Requirements for Mobile Phones Should Be Reassessed'”

By Joel M. Moskowitz, Ph.D.
School of Public Health
University of California, Berkeley

U.S. General Accountability Office (GAO). Exposure and Testing Requirements for Mobile Phones Should Be Reassessed. GAO-12-771. Washington, DC: General Accountability Office. http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-12-771 .


The GAO Report selectively reviewed scientific literature that supports the FCC’s claim that cell phones which comply with the federal standards are safe. The GAO did not consider the methodologic limitations of this research or the alternative interpretations of the results from these studies. The GAO Report did not review the scientific evidence that strongly suggests the FCC standards which control only for thermal effects do not adequately protect the public from harm due to non-thermal effects of long-term exposure to cell phone radiation.

Although we do not have conclusive proof that cell phone radiation is harmful to humans, the FCC certainly cannot prove its claim that cell phones that comply with current federal standards are safe. The claim relies on many assumptions about the science. A critical review of the science—as opposed to simply “weighting the evidence”— reveals that these assumptions have dubious validity, and that there is sufficient evidence to require the development of a stronger, biologically-based standard that protects against sub-thermal exposures.

Comments (11 pp.) available at:  http://bit.ly/SneysY.

--

"What GAO Found

Scientific research to date has not demonstrated adverse human health effects of exposure to radio-frequency (RF) energy from mobile phone use, but research is ongoing that may increase understanding of any possible effects. In addition, officials from the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the National Institutes of Health (NIH) as well as experts GAO interviewed have reached similar conclusions about the scientific research. Ongoing research examining the health effects of RF energy exposure is funded and supported by federal agencies, international organizations, and the mobile phone industry. NIH is the only federal agency GAO interviewed directly funding studies in this area, but other agencies support research under way by collaborating with NIH or other organizations to conduct studies and identify areas for additional research.

The Federal Communications Commission’s (FCC) RF energy exposure limit may not reflect the latest research, and testing requirements may not identify maximum exposure in all possible usage conditions. FCC set an RF energy exposure limit for mobile phones in 1996, based on recommendations from federal health and safety agencies and international organizations. These international organizations have updated their exposure limit recommendation in recent years, based on new research, and this new limit has been widely adopted by other countries, including countries in the European Union. This new recommended limit could allow for more RF energy exposure, but actual exposure depends on a number of factors including how the phone is held during use. FCC has not adopted the new recommended limit. The Office of Management and Budget’s instructions to federal agencies require the adoption of consensus standards when possible. FCC told GAO that it relies on the guidance of federal health and safety agencies when determining the RF energy exposure limit, and to date, none of these agencies have advised FCC to change the limit. However, FCC has not formally asked these agencies for a reassessment. By not formally reassessing its current limit, FCC cannot ensure it is using a limit that reflects the latest research on RF energy exposure. FCC has also not reassessed its testing requirements to ensure that they identify the maximum RF energy exposure a user could experience. Some consumers may use mobile phones against the body, which FCC does not currently test, and could result in RF energy exposure higher than the FCC limit.

Federal agencies and the mobile phone industry provide information on the health effects of mobile phone use and related issues to the public through their websites and mobile phone manuals. The types of information provided via federal agencies’ websites on mobile phone health effects and related issues vary, in part because of the agencies’ different missions, although agencies provide a broadly consistent message. Members of the mobile phone industry voluntarily provide information on their websites and in mobile-phone user manuals. There are no federal requirements that manufacturers provide information to consumers about the health effects of mobile phone use.

Why GAO Did This Study

The rapid adoption of mobile phones has occurred amidst controversy over whether the technology poses a risk to human health as a result of long-term exposure to RF energy from mobile phone use. FCC and FDA share regulatory responsibilities for mobile phones. GAO was asked to examine several issues related to mobile phone health effects and regulation. Specifically, this report addresses (1) what is known about the health effects of RF energy from mobile phones and what are current research activities, (2) how FCC set the RF energy exposure limit for mobile phones, and (3) federal agency and industry actions to inform the public about health issues related to mobile phones, among other things. GAO reviewed scientific research; interviewed experts in fields such as public health and engineering, officials from federal agencies, and representatives of academic institutions, consumer groups, and the mobile phone industry; reviewed mobile phone testing and certification regulations and guidance; and reviewed relevant federal agency websites and mobile phone user manuals.

What GAO Recommends

FCC should formally reassess and, if appropriate, change its current RF energy exposure limit and mobile phone testing requirements related to likely usage configurations, particularly when phones are held against the body. FCC noted that a draft document currently under consideration by FCC has the potential to address GAO’s recommendations


For more information, contact Mark Goldstein at (202) 512-2834 or goldsteinm@gao.gov, or Marcia Crosse at (202) 512-7114 or crossem@gao.gov."

View report: https://www.gao.gov/assets/600/592901.pdf

https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-12-771

Electromagnetic Radiation Safety: 2018 Year in Review

December 30, 2018 (Updated January 3, 2019)

Project Censored (PC) selected “How Big Wireless Convinced Us Cell Phones and Wi-Fi are Safe" as one of the ten most under-reported stories of the past year. The PC story featured a new study of miscarriage in pregnant women and a special investigation conducted for The Nation and The Guardian which examined how news about wireless health risks has been censored by the media due to industry influence. PC is a media research initiative that champions the importance of a free press for democratic self-government.

Environmental Factor, the award-winning newsletter of the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, reported: 

"In a milestone year for the Environmental Factor, a look at the top 20 stories reveals coverage of draft and final cell phone studies dominated reader interest .... Coverage of the National Toxicology Program’s studies on cell phone radio frequency radiation accounted for 29 percent of pageviews to monthly issues in 2018.... We would not be surprised if the November story on the final NTP cell phone radio frequency radiation studies appears on the 2019 top stories list."

--

This year the U.S. government rolled back many regulatory environmental protections and paved the way for industry to intensify its exploitation of the environment at the expense of planetary health. The telecom and wireless industries have benefited from the government's abdication of responsibility to protect the public's health. State and federal governments have conflicts of interest -- on average, 19% of your cell phone bill is devoted to taxes and fees in addition to the taxes that corporations pay.

With the conclusion of two major studies this year, we now have “clear evidence” that cell phone radiation exposure can cause cancer based upon research conducted by the National Toxicology Program in the U.S. and the Ramazzini Institute in Italy. Many scientists believe that this research constitutes the “missing link” needed for the World Health Organization's International Agency for Research on Cancer to declare wireless radiation a human carcinogen (i.e., Group 1).

Researchers at Yale University and the Connecticut Health Department published the first case-control study examining the association between cell phone use and thyroid cancer.  The researchers found elevated risks of thyroid cancer among heavier, long-term cell phone users. This research may help explain why thyroid cancer is the fastest growing cancer in the U.S. Incidence has nearly tripled since the 1980’s from four per 100,000 in 1980 to fifteen per 100,000 in 2014.

By year end, 247 scientists from 42 nations who have published over 2,000 papers in professional journals on electromagnetic fields and biology or health signed the International EMF Scientist Appeal. The consensus of these experts, based upon the preponderance of peer-reviewed research, is that cell phone and wireless radiation exposure increases the risk of reproductive harm, neurological disorders, and cancer. They are demanding health warnings and stronger regulation of magnetic fields and radio frequency radiation.

Yet health agencies (e.g., the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and the World Health Organization) and quasi-official groups (e.g., the U.S. National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements and the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection) continue to dismiss the preponderance of research which finds that cell phone and wireless radiation causes bioeffects and health effects.

In January, Physicians for Safe Technology launched its website which documents the health risks from wireless radiation exposure. In April, the International Society of Doctors for the Environment and its member organizations in 27 countries, adopted a declaration calling for a moratorium on the deployment of the fifth generation of cellular technology, known as 5G.

Following the tobacco industry playbook, the CTIA, the wireless industry trade association, launched an advertising campaign, "The Global Race to 5G," which claims that the U.S. could reap massive economic benefits, but only if it is the first nation to deploy this technology. The CTIA successfully lobbied for greater access to the electromagnetic spectrum including millimeter waves in addition to more microwave spectrum and limits on fees that localities could collect for "small cell" antenna sites.

The CTIA and the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) were also successful in getting legislative and regulatory bodies to adopt industry-written rules which override local policymakers’ ability to control where "small cell" antennas were placed in the public right-of-way. oblivious to the concerns of scientists and medical doctors about the added health risks from exposure to 5G radiation.

In reaction to the initial deployment of the million "small cell" antenna sites required to roll out 5G in the U.S., hundreds of community groups have organized in opposition. Many have coalesced under an umbrella organization, Americans for Responsible Technology. In the next few years, this grassroots movement may grow into a powerful political force as more and more people finally become aware of the health risks associated with wireless radiation exposure.

--

The EMR Safety website addresses scientific and policy developments regarding the health risks from exposure to electromagnetic radiation (EMR). Since 2013, the website has had almost 1.9 million page views by visitors from over 200 countries which attests to the worldwide concern about the impact of wireless radiation on our health and the health of our environment. During the past year, half of visitors were from outside the United States with the United Kingdom, Canada, India, Australia, Israel, Germany, Greece, Italy and France represented the most.

This website provides a curated collection of links to articles on cell phones and other wireless devices and infrastructure. The site summarizes the peer-reviewed research on health risks associated with wireless radiation and provides links to news stories that report on the manufacturing of doubt about these health risks by agencies and scientists with conflicts of interest.

The following links were the most popular wireless radiation stories in 2018:

Most popular wireless radiation stories in 2018

5G and proliferation of cell towers (including “small cells”)

Wireless Technology: Millimeter Wave Health Effects

Scientists and Doctors Demand Moratorium on 5G

5G Wireless Technology: Is 5G Harmful to Our Health? 

Cell Tower Health Effects

           5G Wireless Technology: Cutting Through the Hype

Cell Phone Towers are Largest Contributor to Environmental Radiofrequency Radiation

National Toxicology Program and Ramazzini cellphone radiation studies

National Toxicology Program Finds Cell Phone Radiation Causes Cancer

National Toxicology Program: Peer review of cell phone radiation study

Cell Phone Radiation Study: Final Reports 

Ramazzini Institute Cell Phone Radiation Study Replicates NTP Study

Recent wireless radiation research

            Recent Research on Wi-Fi Effects

            Electromagnetic Hypersensitivity

Recent Research on Wireless Radiation and Electromagnetic 

Effects of Exposure to Electromagnetic Fields: 833 Studies

Cellphone health effects research

Brain Tumor Rates Are Rising in the US: The Role of Cell Phone & Cordless Phone Use

Thyroid Cancer & Mobile Phone Use

Scientific Evidence of Harm from Cell Phone Radiation: Two Years of Research

Female Infertility & Cell Phone 

Effect of Mobile Phones on Sperm Quality

Harm reduction policies and actions

Cell Phone Safety Guidance from the California Public Health Department

Berkeley Cell Phone "Right to Know" Ordinance

Cell Phone and Wireless Technology Safety Tips

Most popular wireless product stories in 2018

Hybrid & Electric Cars: Electromagnetic Radiation Risks

New Apple Watch Reignites Concerns over Cell Phone Radiation

AirPods: Are Apple’s New Wireless Earbuds Safe?

Specific Absorption Rates for iPhones

 iPhone 6 SAR: Radiation Levels & Separation Distance

          iPhone XS and XR: Specific Absorption Rates (SAR) or RF 

 iPhone SE SAR: Radiation Levels & Separation Distance

          iPhone 8 Models: Specific Absorption Rates (SAR) or RF Exposure

 iPhones emit more radiation than Samsung Galaxy phones?

          iPhone X SAR: Specific Absorption Rate or RF Exposure

           iPhone 7 Models: Specific Absorption Rates (SAR) or RF Exposure

Specific Absorption Rates for Samsung Galaxy phones

Samsung Galaxy S9 and S9 Plus Specific Absorption Rates (SAR)

Samsung Galaxy S7 and S7 Edge Specific Absorption Rates (SAR

Samsung Galaxy S8 and S8 Plus Specific Absorption Rates (SAR)

Samsung Galaxy S6 and S6 Edge Specific Absorption Rates (SAR)