Monday, January 27, 2020

5G Global Protest

First 5G Global Protest: News Coverage (Updated Jan 30, 2020)
"The deployment of 5G around the world is being carried out with the collusion of world governments and major telecommunication companies without guarantees for health and the environment. Scientific and environmental organizations from all over the planet have come together to demand from the UN, the WHO, the European Union, the Council of Europe and the governments of all nations the call that was issued throughout January 25 planet...."  (Google translation)
(Los ecologistas piden que se detenga el despliegue del 5G." El Illustrador, Jan 27, 2020)

 A website for the Global 5G Protest Day listed more than 260 demonstrations on January 25, 2020, in 37 countries aimed to stop the deployment of 5G.

A Google news search found that Switzerland, Italy, the Netherlands, Croatia and Slovenia appear to have had the most news coverage of the demonstrations. Although protests were planned in more than 85 cities in English-speaking countries, relatively few news stories appeared in English.

 Following are links to more than 100 news stories from twenty-two countries.
Austria



Inquiétudes quant aux effets de la 5G

 Croatia

Na protestu v Ljubljani opozorila o vplivu 5G na varnost ljudi
ROVINJ: Mirni prosvjed protiv 5G tehnologije

U Zagrebu održan protest protiv 5G mreže

 ODRŽAN MIRNI PROVJED PROTIV 5G TEHNOLOGIJE Odazvalo se tridesetak građana, ostali pogledavali sa strane

 I Ljubljana se pridružila globalnom prosvjedu protiv 5G tehnologije

 Denmark

Fynsk protest mod stråling: - Mennesker flygter fra byerne og må bo i campingvogne

Debat: Global 5G Protest sendt til byrådet

Demonstrationer mod 5G  


5G, tra favorevoli e contrari bisognerebbe pensare alle conseguenze

 5g Bologna, in strada per dire "no"

 Verona,presidio contro il 5g, il nuovo standard per la comunicazione mobile

Protest gegen 5G


Honderden demonstranten op de Dam: ‘5G maakt alle leven kapot’

 New Zealand
Anti-5G protestors rally in Christchurch as roll-out continues



Poland
Protest w centrum Opola. Straszono technologią 5G, lobby szczepionkowym i politykami na usługach koncernów

 Protest przeciwko sieci 5G w Opolu. Manifestanci: powoduje raka mózgu i zaburza pracę urządzeń


Protest împotriva tehnologiei 5G! Flashmob pentru interzicerea acesteia

Miting Stop 5G la Piața Universității, simultan cu acțiuni în lume. De ce vor protestatarii interzicerea tehnologiei internetului wireless de mare viteză

Serbia


South Africa

Durban joins global 5G protests

5G protests continue in Switzerland, following inconclusive report

Fürs Klima, gegen 5G: Zwei Demos in Bern

Diverse manifestazioni contro 5G in Svizzera

Hunderte demonstrieren in Schweizer Städten gegen 5G-Ausbau

Labels: , , , , , , , , ,

Thursday, January 2, 2020

Wireless Radiation Safety: 2019 Year in Review

The four top wireless safety stories in 2019 were ...

 1) widespread public opposition to the rollout of 5G;
2) revision of national and international radio frequency radiation exposure limits, and 
3) cell phones that exceed the safety limits.
4) Berkeley's cell phone "right to know" law survives 2nd U.S. Supreme Court challenge

5G Deployment

The fifth generation of cellphone technology, 5G, was launched this year with fanfare and considerable hype. Hundreds of scientists and medical doctors opposed the rollout of this new technology due to the absence of safety testing.

Thousands of wireless safety advocates in the U.S. and many other nations have organized opposition to the deployment of this technology which requires installation of millions of “small cell” antennas.

In addition to microwaves, in many countries 5G for the first time will expose the population and environment to millimeter waves from cell antennas in their neighborhoods as well as a new generation of wireless devices.

Devra Davis. 5G: The Unreported Global Threat. Medium, May 18, 2019.

Joel Moskowitz. We Have No Reason to Believe 5G is Safe. Scientific American, October 17, 2019.

For more information see:

5G Wireless Technology: Is 5G Harmful to Our Health?
5G Wireless Technology: Millimeter Wave Health Effects
5G Wireless Technology: Cutting Through the Hype
Scientists and Doctors Demand Moratorium on 5G
5G Day of Action
Cell Tower Health Effects



Radio Frequency Radiation Exposure Limits Revised by the ICNIRP and the FCC

This year the International Commission for Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP) and the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) proposed revised safety limits for radio frequency radiation (RFR) exposure that ignore or dismiss most of the research published since the original guidelines were adopted in the 1990's. The revised exposure limits fail to regulate low intensity RFR exposures that have been found to cause harm to humans and other species in hundreds of peer-reviewed studies.

ICNIRP and the FCC have long-standing conflicts of interest with the telecommunications industry. 

More than 240 scientists who have published over 2,000 papers and letters in professional journals on electromagnetic fields believe that national and international RFR exposure limits are inadequate to protect human health.

As part of a project called, “The 5G Mass Experiment,” Investigate Europe, a team of investigative journalists from the European Union (EU), examined the risks of deployment of 5G and the adequacy of electromagnetic field (EMF) safety guidelines promoted by the International Commission for Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP). 

The journalists published sixteen articles about the ICNIRP "cartel" in newspapers and magazines in eight EU countries including France, Germany, Italy, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, and the United Kingdom. The articles reported conflicts of interest among members of the ICNIRP and efforts to bias national reviews of the health effects of RFR.

Investigate Europe. The 5G mass experiment. January 13, 2019.

Joel Moskowitz.The ICNIRP cartel and the 5G mass experiment. March 15, 2019.

Investigate Europe. Mobile phones and health: Is 5G being rolled out too fast? Computer Weekly, April 2019.

Louis Slesin. Will WHO Kick Its ICNIRP Habit? Non-Thermal Effects Hang in the Balance. Microwave News, November 4, 2019.

For more information see:

ICNIRP’s Exposure Guidelines for Radio Frequency Fields
International EMF Scientist Appeal
An Exposé of the FCC: An Agency Captured by the Industries it Regulates
FCC: Why We Need Stronger Cell Phone Radiation Regulations--Key Testimony
FCC: Why We Need Stronger Cell Phone Radiation Regulations--Research Papers


Cell Phone Testing in the U.S. and France

A year-long investigation by the Chicago Tribune found that some popular cell phones purchased over-the-counter including the iPhone 7 and iPhone 8 failed the FCC's safety test when tested following the manufacturers' recommended separation distance from the body of 5-15 millimeters. Many phones failed the test when kept close to the body resembling how most people use their phones. Following the publication of this study, three legal firms filed a class action lawsuit against Apple and Samsung.

In December, the FCC completed an investigation which found that the phones it sampled passed the FCC safety test. However, the FCC used different procedures than the Tribune. Most of the FCC's phones were provided by the manufacturers along with software and ancillary equipment for testing. Moreover, the FCC did not test phones next to the body.

Marc Arazi, Devra Davis, Annie Sasco. Scientists call for the recall of millions of mobile phones. Press release. Paris, June 28, 2018

Sam Roe. We tested popular cellphones for radiofrequency radiation. Now the FCC is investigating. Chicago Tribune, August 21, 2019.

Joe Mahr. Lawsuit filed against Apple, Samsung after Chicago Tribune tests cellphones for radiofrequency radiation. Chicago Tribune, August 29, 2019.

FCC. Resolution of notice of inquiry, second report and order, notice of proposed rulemaking, and memorandum opinion and order. FCC 19-126. December 4, 2019.

FCC. Results of Tests on Cell Phone RF Exposure Compliance. Office of Engineering and Technology. December 19, 2019.

Joe Mahr. FCC says tests find cellphones comply with federal limits on radiofrequency radiation. Chicago Tribune, December 20, 2019.

For more information see:

What's Wrong with Cell Phone Radiation Exposure Limits? (SAR)
Children are more exposed to cell phone radio-frequency radiation than adults
An Exposé of the FCC: An Agency Captured by the Industries it Regulates
GAO 2012 Mobile Phone Report to the Congress
iPhone 8 Models: Specific Absorption Rates (SAR) or RF Exposure
iPhone 7 Models: Specific Absorption Rates (SAR) or RF Exposure
Do iPhones emit more radiation than Samsung Galaxy phones?



Berkeley's Cell Phone "Right to Know' Law Survives 2nd Supreme Court Challenge

In a major victory for consumer rights and public health, the U.S. Supreme Court rejected a free speech challenge filed by the CTIA--The Wireless Association against the City of Berkeley's"cell phone right to know law."

Thus, the ruling by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals that the law is constitutional enables the city to continue to enforce its ordinance which requires cell phone retailers to notify prospective customers about cell phone manufacturers' safety guidelines to ensure consumer safety. The ordinance was adopted by a unanimous vote of the city council in May, 2015.

In refusing to review the case, the Supreme Court ignored the pleas of six pro-business organizations that submitted amicus briefs in support of the CTIA's position.




Other popular posts on Electromagnetic Radiation Safety in 2019

"Cell Phones, Cell Towers, and Wireless Safety" (UC Berkeley presentation)
Recent Research on Wireless Radiation and Electromagnetic Fields
Berkeley Cell Phone "Right to Know" Ordinance
Berkeley Cell Phone "Right to Know" Ordinance: Media Coverage
Recent Research on Wi-Fi Effects
Hybrid & Electric Cars: Electromagnetic Radiation Risks
New Apple Watch Reignites Concerns over Cell Phone Radiation
AirPods: Are Apple’s New Wireless Earbuds Safe? (Blood-brain barrier effects)


Labels: , , , , , , ,

Friday, November 1, 2019

Part II: Why We Need Stronger Cell Phone Radiation Regulations--Key Research Papers Submitted to the FCC

Selected FCC Submissions re: 

"Reassessment of Federal Communications Commission Radiofrequency 
Exposure Limits and Policies" (Proceeding Number 13-84)


Part II: Key Research Papers Submitted to the FCC

 Last revision: November 1, 2019
The FCC received more than 1,200 submissions regarding its cell phone radiation regulations. These documents reveal what we know about wireless radiation health effects, and why we need to strengthen regulations and provide precautionary warnings to the public.
In response to the Federal Communications Commission's (FCC) request for input regarding its radio frequency radiation regulations adopted in 1996, individuals and organizations submitted thousands of documents, testimonials, research papers and scientific publications that are now available to the media and to the public. 
These documents reveal what we know about wireless radiation health effects, and why we need to strengthen regulations and provide precautionary warnings to the public.

Although fifteen countries have issued precautionary health warnings about cell phone radiation and recommendations on how to reduce risks, the wireless industry in the U.S. has opposed precautionary warnings and wants to weaken our radiation standards instead of strengthen them.
In all, more than 1,200 submissions were made to the FCC between June 24, 2012 and November 1, 2019. Many submissions include multiple documents. To access these papers go to the FCC's web site for Proceeding Number 13-84.

Part II which appears below contains a list of key research papers and monographs submitted to the FCC and links to these documents which  enable people to download the papers.
See Part I for key submissions to the FCC regarding cell phone radiation and its health effects, and cell phone testing procedures and regulatory standards.
See Part III for links to petitions signed by EMF scientists calling for stronger regulations of electromagnetic fields (EMF) including radio frequency fields. The International EMF Scientist Appeal was signed by more than 240 scientists who have published over 2,000 papers and letters in professional journals on EMF and biology or health.
 Published Research Papers

 Adams et al. Effect of mobile telephones on sperm quality: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Environment Int. 2014. 70(2014): 106-112.  http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/view?id=60001040814

 Aldad TS, Gan G, Gao XB, Taylor HS. Fetal radiofrequency radiation exposure from 800-1900 mhz-rated cellular telephones affects neurodevelopment and behavior in mice. Sci Rep. 2012;2:312. doi: 10.1038/srep00312. http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/view?id=7022311532

Altun et al. Effects of mobile phone exposure on metabolomics in the male and female reproductive systems. Environ Res. 2018 Nov;167:700-707.
https://ecfsapi.fcc.gov/file/1091314126731/Effects%20of%20mobile%20phone%20exposure%20on%20metabolomics%20in%20the%20male%20and%20female%20T%20reproductive%20systems.pdf

Balmori A. Electromagnetic pollution from phone masts. Effects on wildlife. Pathophysiology. 2009 Aug;16(2-3):191-9. doi: 10.1016/j.pathophys.2009.01.007.
http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/view?id=7520940774

 Balmori A. Anthropogenic radiofrequency electromagnetic fields as an emerging threat to wildlife orientation. Science of Total Environment. 518-519:58-60. 2015.
https://ecfsapi.fcc.gov/file/109303096909269/Balmori%202015.pdf 

 Barnes F, Greenebaum B. Role of radical pairs and feedback in weak radio frequency field effects on biological systems. Environ Res. 2018 May;163:165-170.
https://ecfsapi.fcc.gov/file/10913119016386/Role%20of%20radical%20pairs%20and%20feedback%20in%20weak%20radio%20frequency%20field%20effects%20on%20biological%20systems.pdf

Belpomme et al. Thermal and non-thermal health effects of low intensity non-ionizingradiation: An international perspective. Envir Pollution. 242:643-658. 2018. https://ecfsapi.fcc.gov/file/12103008105187/nonionizing%20radiation%20international%20perspective%20Belpomme%20Hardell%20Carpenter%202018.pdf

Belyaev et al. Nonthermal effects of extremely high-frequency microwaves on chromatin conformation in cells in vitro—Dependence on physical, Physiological, and genetic factors. IEEE Transactions on Microwave Theory and Techniques. 48(11):2172-2179. 2000. 
https://ecfsapi.fcc.gov/file/10711815002508/2000%20Belyaev%20IEEE_MTT_%20MMW%20Review.pdf

 Betzalel et al. The human skin as a sub-THz receiver–Does 5G pose a danger to it or not? Envir Research. 163:208-216. 2018. https://ecfsapi.fcc.gov/file/1210030663890/The%20human%20skin%20as%20a%20sub-THz%20receiver%20%E2%80%93%20Does%205G%20pose%20a%20danger%20to%20it%20or%20not%20(1).pdf

 Buchner K, Eger H. Changes of Clinically Important Neurotransmitters under the Influence of Modulated RF Fields—A long-term study under real-life conditions. Umwelt-Medizin-Gesellschaft 24(1):44-57. 2011. http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/view?id=7520940778

 Blackman CF. Treating cancer with amplitude-modulated electromagnetic fields: a potential paradigm shift, again? Br J Cancer. 2012 Jan 17;106(2):241-2. doi: 10.1038/bjc.2011.576. http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/view?id=7520940777

Chou CK, Guy AW, Kunz LL, Johnson RB, Crowley JJ, Krupp JH. Long-term, low-level microwave irradiation of rats. Bioelectromagnetics. 1992;13(6):469-96.
http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/view?id=60002060833

Costa et al. Treatment of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma with very low levels of amplitude-modulated electromagnetic fields. Br J Cancer. 2011 Aug 23;105(5):640-8.doi:10.1038/bjc.2011.292.
http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/view?id=7520940776

Cucurachi et al. A review of the ecological effects of radiofrequency electromagnetic fields (RF-EMF). Environ Int. 2013 Jan;51:116-40. doi: 10.1016/j.envint.2012.10.009.
http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/view?id=7520940763

Davis et al. Swedish review strengthens grounds for concluding that radiation from cellular and cordless phones is a probable human carcinogen. Pathophysiology. 2013 Apr;20(2):123-9. doi: 10.1016/j.pathophys.2013.03.001.
http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/view?id=7520943925

Everaert J, Bauwens D. A possible effect of electromagnetic radiation from mobile phone base stations on the number of breeding house sparrows (Passer domesticus). Electromagn Biol Med. 2007;26(1):63-72. http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/view?id=7520940767

Falcioni et al. Report of final results regarding brain and heart tumors in Sprague-Dawley rats exposed from prenatal life until natural death to mobile phone radiofrequency field representative of a 1.8 GHz GSM base station environmental emission. Environ Res. 2018 Aug;165:496-503. https://ecfsapi.fcc.gov/file/10913119016386/Report%20of%20final%20results%20regarding%20brain%20and%20heart%20tumors%20in%20Sprague-Dawley%20rats%20exposed%20from%20prenatal%20life%20until%20natural%20death%20to%20mobile%20phone%20radiofrequency%20field%20representative%20of%20a%201.8%20GHz%20GSM%20base%20station%20environmental%20emission.pdf

 Fernández et al. Absorption of wireless radiation in the child versus adult brain and eye from cell phone conversation or virtual reality. Environ Res. 2018 Nov;167:694-699. https://ecfsapi.fcc.gov/file/10913927726988/Absorption%20of%20wireless%20radiation%20in%20the%20child%20versus%20adult%20brain%20and%20eye%20from%20T%20cell%20phone%20conversation%20or%20virtual%20reality.pdf

 Foerster et al. A prospective cohort study of adolescents' memory performance and individual brain dose of microwave radiation from wireless communication. Envir Health Perspectives. 126(7). July 2018. 
https://ecfsapi.fcc.gov/file/10429016089243/ProspectiveCohortStudyofAdolescents%E2%80%99%20Memory%20PerformanceandIndividual%20Brain%20DoseofMicrowaveRadiation.pdf

Fragopoulou et al. Scientific panel on electromagnetic field health risks: consensus points, recommendations, and rationales. Rev Environ Health. 2010 Oct-Dec;25(4):307-17.
http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/view?id=7520940752

Gandhi, OP. Yes the Children Are More Exposed to Radiofrequency Energy From Mobile Telephones Than Adults. IEEE Spectrum. 3:985-988. July 10, 2015.
http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/view?id=60001122233

Gandhi, OP, Kang G. Inaccuracies of a plastic pinna SAM for SAR testing of cellular telephones against IEEE and ICNIRP safety guidelines. IEEE Transactions on Microwave Theory and Techniques. 52(8):2004-2012. Aug 2004; DOI: 10.1109/TMTT.2004.832689.
http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/view?id=7022311473

Gandhi et al. Exposure limits: the underestimation of absorbed cell phone radiation, especially in children. Electromagn Biol Med. 2012 Mar;31(1):34-51. doi: 10.3109/15368378.2011.622827.
http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/view?id=7022311190

Giuliani L, Soffritti M. (Eds.) Non-thermal Effects and Mechanisms of Interaction between Electromagnetic Fields and Living Matter. ICEMS Monograph. European J Oncology. Vol. 5. 2010.
http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/view?id=7520940834

Güler et al. The effect of radiofrequency radiation on DNA and lipid damage in female and male infant rabbits. Int J Radiat Biol. 2012 Apr;88(4):367-73. doi: 10.3109/09553002.2012.646349.
http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/view?id=7022311528

Haggerty K. Adverse Influence of Radio Frequency Background on Trembling Aspen Seedlings: Preliminary Observations.International Journal of Forestry Research, vol. 2010, Article ID 836278, 7 pages, 2010. doi:10.1155/2010/836278. http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/view?id=7520940764

Hagström M, Auranen J, Ekman R. Electromagnetic hypersensitive Finns: Symptoms, perceived sources and treatments, a questionnaire study. Pathophysiology. 2013 Apr;20(2):117-22. doi: 10.1016/j.pathophys.2013.02.001. http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/view?id=7520941823

Hardell L. World Health Organization, radiofrequency radiation and health - a hard nut to crack (Review). Int J Oncology. 51:405-413. 2017.

Havas M. Radiation from wireless technology affects the blood, the heart, and the autonomic nervous system. Rev Environ Health. 2013;28(2-3):75-84. doi: 10.1515/reveh-2013-0004. http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/view?id=7520958029

Herbert MR, Sage C. Autism and EMF? Plausibility of a pathophysiological link - Part I. Pathophysiology. 2013 Jun;20(3):191-209. doi: 10.1016/j.pathophys.2013.08.001.
http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/view?id=7520958030

Herbert MR, Sage C. Autism and EMF? Plausibility of a pathophysiological link part II. Pathophysiology. 2013 Jun;20(3):211-34. doi: 10.1016/j.pathophys.2013.08.002.
http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/view?id=7520958031

Houston et al. The effects of radiofrequency electromagnetic radiation on sperm function. Reproduction. 2016.
https://ecfsapi.fcc.gov/file/1093016723166/RF%20Impact%20on%20Spermatozoa.pdf

 Kane RC. A possible association between fetal/neonatal exposure to radiofrequency electromagnetic radiation and the increased incidence of autism spectrum disorders (ASD). Med Hypotheses. 2004;62(2):195-7.
http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/view?id=7520941400

Kesari KK, Kumar S, Behari J. Pathophysiology of microwave radiation: effect on rat brain.
Appl Biochem Biotechnol. 2012 Jan;166(2):379-88. doi: 10.1007/s12010-011-9433-6.
http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/view?id=7520939750

 Kocaman et al. Genotoxic and carcinogenic effects of non-ionizing electromagnetic fields. Environ Res. 2018 May;163:71-79.  https://ecfsapi.fcc.gov/file/1091314126731/Genotoxic%20and%20carcinogenic%20effects%20of%20non-ionizing%20electromagnetic%20fields.pdf

Kundi M, Hunter H-P. Mobile phone base stations—Effects on wellbeing and health. Pathophysiology. 2009.
https://ecfsapi.fcc.gov/file/109303096909269/Kundi%20%26%20Hutter%2C%202009.pdf

 Lai H. Exposure to Static and Extremely-Low Frequency Electromagnetic Fields and Cellular Free Radicals. Electromagn Biol Med. 2019 Aug 26:1-18. https://ecfsapi.fcc.gov/file/10920151427784/Henry%20Lai%20ELF%20static%20field%20review%20paper%202019.pdf

 Levis AG, Gennaro V, Garbiso S. Business bias as usual: The case of electromagnetic pollution.  In Elsner W, Frigato P, Ramazzotti P eds: “Social Costs Today. Institutional Analyses of the Present Crises”. Routledge (Taylor&Francis Group), London and New York 2012: 225-68.
http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/view?id=7520958478

Levis et al. Mobile phones and head tumours. The discrepancies in cause-effect relationships in the epidemiological studies - how do they arise? Environ Health. 2011 Jun 17;10:59. doi: 10.1186/1476-069X-10-59.
http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/view?id=7520940825

Levitt BB, Lai H. Biological effects from exposure to electromagnetic radiation emitted by cell tower base stations and other antenna arrays. Environ. Res. 18:369-395. 2010.
http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/view?id=7022311466

Li DK, Ferber JR, Odouli R, Quesenberry CP Jr. A prospective study of in-utero exposure to magnetic fields and the risk of childhood obesity. Sci Rep. 2012;2:540. doi: 10.1038/srep00540. http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/view?id=7022311533

 Lin JC. Human exposure to RF, microwave, and millimeter-wave radiation. IEEE Microwave Magazine. 17(6):32-36. 2016.
https://ecfsapi.fcc.gov/file/1018263449175/IEEE%20MWM%20RF%20Exposure%2007464988%20James%20C%20Lin%202016.pdf

 Lin, JC. The significance of primary tumors in the NTP study of chronic rat exposure to cell phone radiation. IEEE Microwave Magazine. 20(11):18-21. 2019.  
https://ecfsapi.fcc.gov/file/1018805901388/Lin%20NTP%20Primary%20Tumors%2008866792.pdf

 Lissak G. Adverse physiological and psychological effects of screen time on children and adolescents: Literature review and case study. Environ Res. 2018 Jul;164:149-157. https://ecfsapi.fcc.gov/file/10913927726988/Adverse%20physiological%20and%20psychological%20effects%20of%20screen%20time%20on%20children%20and%20adolescents%3A%20Literature%20review%20and%20case%20study.pdf 

 McKee L. Meeting the imperative to accelerate environmental bioelectromagnetics research. Environ Res. 2018 Jul;164:100-108. https://ecfsapi.fcc.gov/file/10913296696567/Meeting%20the%20imperative%20to%20accelerate%20environmental%20bioelectromagnetics%20research.pdf

 Melnick RL. Commentary on the utility of the National Toxicology Program study on cellphone radiofrequency radiation data for assessing human health risks despite unfounded criticisms aimed at minimizing the findings of adverse health effects. Environ Research. 168:1-6. 2019. https://ecfsapi.fcc.gov/file/1001332406626/Melnick-Commentary%20on%20the%20utility%20of%20the%20National%20Toxicology%20Program%20study.pdf

 Miller et al. Cancer epidemiology update, following the 2011 IARC evaluation of radiofrequency electromagnetic fields (Monograph 102). Envir Research. 2018. 
https://ecfsapi.fcc.gov/file/12103008105187/Miller%20et%20al%20(1).%20Cancer%20epidemiology%20update%20copy%202.pdf

 Myung et al. Mobile phone use and risk of tumors: a meta-analysis. J Clin Oncol. 2009 Nov 20;27(33):5565-72. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2008.21.6366.
http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/view?id=7520940706

Nittby et al. Increased blood-brain barrier permeability in mammalian brain 7 days after exposure to the radiation from a GSM-900 mobile phone. Pathophysiology. 2009 Aug;16(2-3):103-12. doi: 10.1016/j.pathophys.2009.01.001.
http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/view?id=7520941405

Nittby et al. Review. Radiofrequency and extremely low-frequency electromagnetic field effects on the blood-brain barrier. Electromagn Biol Med. 2008;27(2):103-26. doi: 10.1080/15368370802061995.
http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/view?id=7520941406

Odaci E, Bas O, Kaplan S. Effects of prenatal exposure to a 900 MHz electromagnetic field on the dentate gyrus of rats: a stereological and histopathological study. Brain Res. 2008 Oct 31;1238:224-9. doi: 10.1016/j.brainres.2008.08.013. http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/view?id=7022311527

Pall ML. Electromagnetic fields act via activation of voltage-gated calcium channels to produce beneficial or adverse effects. J Cell Mol Med. 2013 Aug;17(8):958-65. doi: 10.1111/jcmm.12088.
http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/view?id=7520941801

Pall ML. Microwave frequency electromagnetic fields (EMFs) produce widespread neuropsychiatric effects including depression. J Chemical Neuroanatomy. 2015.
https://ecfsapi.fcc.gov/file/1001669617135/PallNeuropsychiatric2015.pdf

 Pall ML. WiFi is an important threat to human health. Environ Research. 164: 405-416. 2018. https://ecfsapi.fcc.gov/file/10429016089243/WIF%20threat%20Martin%20Pall%202018%20Environmental%20Research%20.pdf

Panagopoulos DJ. Comparing DNA damage induced by mobile telephony and other types of man-made electric fields. Mutation Research--Reviews in Mutation Research. 781:53-62. 2019. https://ecfsapi.fcc.gov/file/10429016089243/Panagopoulos-2019-Mut%20Res%20Rev%20Comparing%20DNA%20damage%20induced%20by%20mobile%20telephony%20and%20other%20types%20of%20man-made%20electromagnetic%20fields.pdf

Panagopoulos DJ, Johansson O, Carlo GL. Evaluation of specific absorption rate as a dosimetric quantity for electromagnetic fields bioeffects. PLoS One. 2013 Jun 4;8(6):e62663. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0062663. Print 2013. Erratum in: PLoS One.
http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/view?id=7520938512

Peleg M, Nativ O, Richter ED. Radio frequency radiation-related cancer: assessing causation in the occupational/military setting. Environ Res. 2018 May;163:123-133.

https://ecfsapi.fcc.gov/file/10913296696567/Radio%20frequency%20radiation-related%20cancer%3A%20assessing%20causation%20in%20the%20occupational%3Amilitary%20setting.pdf

 Persson BRR, Salford LG, Brun A. Blood-brain barrier permeability in rats exposed to electromagnetic fields used in wireless communication. Wireless Networks. 3:455-461.1997. http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/view?id=7520941992

Rea et al. Electromagnetic field sensitivity. Journal of Bioelectricity. 10(1&2):242-256. 1991.
http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/view?id=7520937451

Russell CL. 5 G wireless telecommunications expansion: Public health and environmental implications. Environ Research. 165:484-495. 2018. https://ecfsapi.fcc.gov/file/1001332406626/CindyRussell5%20G%20wireless%20telecommunications%20expansion.pdf

 Sage C, Carpenter DO. Public health implications of wireless technologies. Pathophysiology . 16: 233–246. 2009. 
https://ecfsapi.fcc.gov/file/109303096909269/Sage%20%26%20Carpenter%2C%202009.pdf 

 Sagar et al. Comparison of radiofrequency electromagnetic field exposure levels in different everyday microenvironments in an international context. Environ Int. 2018 May;114:297-306. https://ecfsapi.fcc.gov/file/10920151427784/RF%20microenvironment%206-nation%20study%20Environment%20Intl%20Sagar%20Roosli%202018.pdf

 Sivani S, Sudarsanam D. Impacts of radio-frequency electromagnetic field (RF-EMF) from
cell phone towers and wireless devices on biosystem and ecosystem – a review. Biology and Medicine 4(4):202-216. 2012. http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/view?id=7520940779

 Thielens et al. Exposure of Insects to Radio-Frequency Electromagnetic Fields from 2 to 120 GHz. Sci Reports. 8: 3924. 2018.  https://ecfsapi.fcc.gov/file/1210030663890/Exposure%20of%20Insects%20to%20RadioFrequency%20Electromagnetic%20Fields%20from%202%20to%20120GHz%205g%20.pdf

 Tseng et al. Induction of vertebrate regeneration by a transient sodium current. J Neurosci. 2010 Sep 29;30(39):13192-200. doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.3315-10.2010. http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/view?id=7520940761 

 Wall et al. Real-world cell phone radiofrequency electromagnetic field exposures. Environ Res. 2019 Apr;171:581-592.
https://ecfsapi.fcc.gov/file/10913296696567/Real-world%20cell%20phone%20radiofrequency%20electromagnetic%20field%20exposures.pdf

 Yahyazadeh A, Deniz ÖG, Kaplan AA. The genomic effects of cell phone exposure on the reproductive system. Environ Res. 2018 Nov;167:684-693.
https://ecfsapi.fcc.gov/file/109131837001830/The%20genomic%20effects%20of%20cell%20phone%20exposure%20on%20the%20reproductive%20system.pdf

Yakymenko et al. Oxidative mechanisms of biological activity of low-intensity radiofrequency radiation. Electromagnetic Biology and Medicine. Posted online on July 7, 2015. 
http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/view?id=60001122232

Zothansiama et al. Impact of radiofrequency radiation on DNA damage and antioxidants in peripheral blood lymphocytes of humans residing in the vicinity of mobile phone base stations. Electromagnetic Biology and Medicine. 2017. 

Papers and Monographs

Austrian Medical Association. Guideline of the Austrian Medical Association for the diagnosis and treatment of EMF-related health problems and illnesses (EMF syndrome): Consensus paper of the Austrian Medical Association’s EMF Working Group. Vienna, Austria. Mar 2012.
http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/view?id=7520940750

Bioeffects of Selected Nonlethal Weapons. Addendum to the Nonlethal Technologies *Worldwide (NGIC-I 147-101-98) Study. Undated classified document released by the Dept of the Army Dec 13, 2006. http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/view?id=7022311621

BioInitiative Working Group. Sage C, Carpenter DO. (Eds). BioInitiative Report: A Rationale for  Biologically-based Exposure Standards for Low-Intensity Electromagnetic Radiation. www.bioinitiative.org, December 31, 2012. (29 chapter authors)
http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/view?id=7520939958 

Council of Europe. Parliamentary Assembly. The potential dangers of electromagnetic fields and their effect on the environment. Doc. 12608. May 6, 2011. http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/view?id=7022311504

Dart P. Alterations in Hormone Physiology. Undated.
http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/view?id=7520940905

Dart P. Cell Phones and Risk of Brain Tumor. Undated.
http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/view?id=7520940911

Dart P. Consequences of Chronic Microwave RF Exposure. Undated.
http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/view?id=7520940908

Dart P. Effects of Microwave RF Exposure on Fertility. Undated.
http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/view?id=7520940909

Dart P. Health Effects of Microwave Radio Exposures: Acute Symptoms from RF Exposure. Undated. http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/view?id=7520940904

Dart P. Microwave RF Interacts with Molecular Structures. Undated.
http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/view?id=7520940906

Dart P, Cordes K, Elliott A. Public Health Implications of the Proposed Cell Phone Transmission Tower at Oakway Golf Course. Undated. http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/view?id=7022311419

Dart P, Cordes K, Elliott A, Knackstedt J, Morgan J, Wible P, Baker S. Biological and health effects of microwave radiofrequency transmissions: A review of the research literature. A report to Eugene Water and Electric Board. Jun 4, 2013.
http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/view?id=7520940903

European Environment Agency. Statement on Mobile Phones for Conference on Cell Phones and Health: Science and Public Policy Questions, Washington, 15 September 2009. http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/view?id=7022311538

Frey A. Opinion: Cell Phone Health Risk? The Scientist. Sep 25, 2012.
http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/view?id=7022311550

Frey AH. On the Safety of Cell Phone Radiation. British Medical Journal. Nov 7, 2011.
http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/view?id=7022311551

Glaser ZR. Bibliography of Reported Biological Phenomena (‘Effects’) and Clinical Manifestations Attributed to Microwave and Radio-Frequency Radiation: Research Report No. 2 Revised. Naval Medical Research Institute. Oct 4, 1971. Second printing w/ revisions. Apr 20, 1972. (Contains more than 2,000 references.) http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/view?id=7022311479

Goldsworthy A. The Biological Effects of Weak Electromagnetic Fields. Mar 2012.
http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/view?id=7022311211

Hardell L, Carlberg M, Gee D. Chapter 21. Mobile phone use and brain tumour risk: early warnings early actions?  In Emerging issues: Late lessons from early warnings: Science, precaution, innovation. European Environment Agency Report 1/2013. Jan 2013. Pp. 541-561. http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/view?id=7520941294

 IARC. Non-Ionizing Radiation. Part 2. Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Fields. Volume 102. Lyon, France: International Agency for Cancer Research, World Health Organization. 
https://ecfsapi.fcc.gov/file/1071413202273/Monograph%20radiofrequecy%20radiation%20WHO%3AIARC.pdf

 International EMF Scientist Appeal. August 25, 2019. 10 pp.
https://ecfsapi.fcc.gov/file/10916233196437/International_EMF_Scientist-Appeal%208-25-2019.pdf

Kane RC. Cellular Telephone Russian Roulette: A Historical and Scientific Perspective. New York: Vantage Press. 2001. http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/view?id=7520941881

 Kucinich D. 112th H.R. 6358. A bill to examine, label, and communicate adverse human biological effects associated with exposure to electromagnetic fields from cell phones and other wireless devices. Congress. 2d Session. Aug 3, 2012.
http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/view?id=7022311505

Lai H. Exhibit D: An Update on Neurological Effects of Nonionizing Electromagnetic Fields. Mar, 2014. 169 pp.
http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/view?id=7521098237

Lai H. Exhibit E: An Update on the Genetic Effects of Nonionizing Electromagnetic Fields. Mar, 2014. 94 pp.
http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/view?id=7521098238

Lai H. Abstracts of research publications on the biological effects of radiofrequency and cell phone radiation (1990-2017). Dec 13, 2017. 1,013 pp.
https://ecfsapi.fcc.gov/file/10916020933093/RFR%20ResearchSummary%20Henry%20Lai%202017.pdf

Lai H. A summary of recent literature on neurobiological effects of radiofrequency radiation. in “Mobile Communications and Public Health” Markov, M. (ed.), CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, 2018, Chapter 8, pp.187-222. https://ecfsapi.fcc.gov/file/10916020933093/Neurological%20effects%20of%20RF%20Henry%20Lai%20chapter%20Markov%202018.pdf

Lai H. Neurological effects of nonionizing electromagnetic fields. Oct 1, 2017. 237 pp. https://ecfsapi.fcc.gov/file/10916020933093/RFR-neurological-effects-%20Henry%20Lai%202017.pdf

Lai H. Abstracts of research publications on radiofrequency radiation and free radical (oxidative) effects. Apr 19, 2019. 118 pp.
https://ecfsapi.fcc.gov/file/10916151357910/RF-Free-Radical-oxidative-effect%20Henry%20Lai%204-19-2019.pdf

Lai H. Radiofrequency radiation comet assay studies. Apr 1, 2013. 40 pp.
https://ecfsapi.fcc.gov/file/10916151357910/RFR%20DNA%20comet-assay-studies%20Henry%20Lai%202017.pdf

Lai H. Percent comparison showing effect vs. no effect in neurological effect studies. Aug, 2019. 1 p.
https://ecfsapi.fcc.gov/file/10916151357910/Neurological%20Effects-Percent-Graphic-Henry%20Lai%20August-2019.pdf

Lai H. Percent comparison showing effect vs. no effect in comet assay and free radical (oxidative) (radiofrequency radiation and static field/ extremely low frequency field effect studies. Dec, 2017 and Apr, 2019. 1 p.
https://ecfsapi.fcc.gov/file/10916151357910/Genotoxic%20studies-Percent-Graphic-Henry%20Lai%202019.pdf

Lai H. Abstracts of research publications on neurological effects of static and extremely-low frequency electromagnetic fields (2007-2019). Sep 13, 2019. 117 pp.
https://ecfsapi.fcc.gov/file/10920151427784/Henry%20Lai%20static%20field%20ELF%20neurological%20effects%202007-2019%209-13-2019.pdf

Lai H. Supplementary Material: Literature on free radical generation after exposure to static and extremely-low-frequency electromagnetic fields (as of July 2019). 63 pp.
https://ecfsapi.fcc.gov/file/10920151427784/Henry%20Lai-ELF%20static%20fields%20free%20radicals%20supplementary%20material%207-2019.pdf

Leszczynski, D. FCC, IEEE and ICNIRP should tighten safety standards. Washington Times Communities. Apr 9, 2013.
http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/view?id=7022272017

Markova E, Malmgren L, Belyaev I. Microwaves from Mobile Phones Inhibit 53BP1 Focus Formation in Human Stem Cells Stronger than in Differentiated Cells: Possible Mechanistic Link to Cancer Risk. Environ Health Perspect. 118(3):394-399. Mar 2010. http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/view?id=7022311529

Moskowitz JM. Comments on the 2012 GAO Report: “Exposure and Testing Requirements for Mobile Phones Should Be Reassessed”. Aug 15, 2012 (rev. Aug 24, 2012).
http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/view?id=7520940705

Moskowitz JM. Why the FCC Must Strengthen Radiofrequency Radiation Limits in the U.S.: A compilation of original press releases from April 2012 – November 2013. Nov 5, 2013.
http://bit.ly/1b9FG37

Moskowitz JM. Wireless radiation and EMF abstracts published from August, 2016 - August, 2019. School of Public Health University of California, Berkeley. Sep 13, 2019. 527 pp.
https://ecfsapi.fcc.gov/file/1091330786203/Wireless%20radiation%20and%20EMF%20abstracts%20August%202016%20-%20August%202019%20Joel%20Moskowitz%209-13-2019.pdf

Moskowitz JM. We have no reason to believe 5G is safe. Scientific American. Oct 17, 2019.
https://ecfsapi.fcc.gov/file/1018805901388/191017_Scientific_American_We%20Have%20No%20Reason%20to%20Believe%205G%20is%20Safe%20Moskowitz.pdf

 Naval Medical Research Institute. Bibliography of reported biological phenomena ('effects') and clinical manifestations attributed to microwave and radio-frequency radiation. NTIS. 1972. https://ecfsapi.fcc.gov/file/1001034847591/Naval-Medical-Research-Institute-1972.pdf

 National Toxicology Program. Report of Partial Findings from the National Toxicology Program Carcinogenesis Studies of Cell Phone Radiofrequency Radiation in Hsd: Sprague Dawley® SD rats (Whole Body Exposures). Draft 5/19/2016. https://ecfsapi.fcc.gov/file/60002090569.pdf

Powerwatch. 1,670 peer-reviewed scientific papers on electromagnetic fields and biology or health. Electromagnetic Radiation Safety. Oct 22, 2018.
https://ecfsapi.fcc.gov/file/1018805901388/181022_EMF%20Studies%20from%20Powerwatch.pdf

 Roe S. We tested popular cellphones. Now the FCC is testing them. Chicago Tribune. Aug 21, 2019.  
https://ecfsapi.fcc.gov/file/1091340619273/We%20tested%20popular%20cellphones%20for%20radiofrequency%20radiation.%20Now%20the%20FCC%20is%20investigating.%20-%20Chicago%20Tribune.pdf

Russell C. Wireless Silent Spring. Santa Clara County Medical Association Bulletin. Oct 2018. https://ecfsapi.fcc.gov/file/1022423602512/Wireless%20Silent%20Spring_%20SCCMA%20Oct%202%2C%202018.pdf

 Sierck  PH. Smart Meter—What We Know: Measurement Challenges and Complexities. A Technical Paper to Clarify RF Radiation Emissions and Measurement Methodologies. Encinitas, CA: ET&T Indoor Environmental Surveys. Dec 2011.
http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/view?id=7022311412

U.S. Department of the Army. Bioeffects of Nonlethal Weapons. Feb 17, 1998 (Unclassified Dec 13, 2006). https://ecfsapi.fcc.gov/file/7022311476.pdf

 U.S. E.P.A. Electric and Magnetic Fields: An EPA Perspective on Research Needs and Priorities for Improving Health Risk Assessment. Washington: EPA. Dec 1992. http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/view?id=7022311520

U.S. EPA. EPA Comments to the Federal Communications Commission on FCC 93-142 April 1993. Notice of Proposed Rulemaking; Guidlines for Evaluating the Environmental Effects of Radiofrequency Radiation. http://bit.ly/2avzSMU

U.S. EPA. Letter from Norbert Hankin to Janet Newton re: inadequacy of FCC radiofrequency guidelines. Jul 16, 2002. https://ecfsapi.fcc.gov/file/7022311328.pdf

 Wargo J, Taylor HS, Alderman N, Wargo L. Cell Phones: Technology | Exposures | Health Effects. Environment & Human Health, Inc. 2012. http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/view?id=7022311531

Wisz, J. Potential Hazards of Cellular Phone Radiation: Responses to Fear and Uncertainty. Harvard University. 2002. http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/view?id=60001335019
Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)