"Why are Officials Disobeying Federal Laws on Immigration but not on Radiation" A Doctors Letter on Small Cell Wireless in Neighborhood

In response to the new Montgomery County ZTA...... 

Dear Ms. Herrera,

BACKGROUND

In the URL in your incoming message, it is stated:

"Many residents have expressed concern about the health effects of radio frequency (RF) emissions.  Under federal law, the County may not “regulate the placement, construction, and modification of personal wireless service facilities on the basis of the environmental effects of radio frequency emissions to the extent that such facilities comply with the [FCC’s] regulations concerning such emissions.”  In other words, the County may enforce and require compliance with FCC regulations, but not create additional requirements."

GERMAN RACIAL LAWS

In my view, it is an abdication of the Council's responsibility to hide behind a 'federal law', if adherence to that law could bring harm to the residents of Montgomery County.  For example, consider the Holocaust Encyclopedia (https://www.ushmm.org/wlc/en/article.php?ModuleId=10005681).  It lists tens, if not hundreds, of "federal laws" implemented in Nazi Germany against its Jewish citizens, starting in 1933.  If you were a member of a German County Council in the 1933-1940 time frame, would you be comfortable with such laws?  More specifically, would you be sending out a letter to the residents of that County telling them they have no choice but to obey and implement such laws?

That example is very analogous to the situation today with respect to implementation of small cell towers to support 5G.  We know radiofrequency emissions (RF) are harmful in isolation, and potentially very harmful when combined with other toxic stimuli.  I showed many examples of harm from RF (in isolation and especially in combination with other toxic stimuli) in my book chapter that I circulated to the Council in my previous mailing

(http://stip.gatech.edu/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/371048_1_En_4_Chapter_OnlinePDF.pdf). 

How harmful?  We don't know. 

Our chapter showed a plethora of potentially fatal and chronic diseases that could result from RF radiation.  But, even the human effects data (horrific as it was) was based on relatively short-term exposure to RF, such as cell phones, cell towers, WiFi.  We know that many diseases, such as cancer, Alzheimer's disease, etc, can have very long latency periods for some toxic stimuli.  Intense exposures to RF are relatively recent, and we don't have the long-term human data (in isolation or in combinations) to ascertain the full extent of the damage these exposures can cause.  I cannot rule out that the potential damage from these long-term exposures would not equal, or even greatly exceed, the horrific damage caused by the Holocaust, especially because of the potential world-wide implementation of small cell tower 5G technology.  That's why I draw the analogy above, even though the Holocaust had strong racial motivations, while the motivations for RF-5G implementation are profit and greed.  It is small comfort for the victims to know that they died from someone's greed rather than racial motivations!

JAPANESE-AMERICAN INTERNMENT DURING WWII

On 19 February 1942, President Roosevelt issued Executive Order 9066, authorizing internment of tens of thousands of citizens of Japanese ancestry and resident aliens from Japan.  That was essentially a Federal law.  We view it from today's perspective as horrific, and I have yet to see someone in recent times who would defend it.  But, at the time, it was accepted by the majority of non-Japanese Americans.  Should we have followed that proclamation blindly, as we did, causing undue hardship and disruption for a group whose only 'crime' was being of a particular ancestry?  And, how is today's action by the Montgomery County Council different from the actions of those authorities seventy-five years ago who went along with, and hid behind, an obviously harmful Federal Order?

SANCTUARY CITIES

Sanctuary cities limit their cooperation with the Federal government in enforcing Federal immigration law.  In Maryland, three counties are listed as sanctuary counties: Baltimore, Prince George's, and--Montgomery.  Whether one agrees with their resistance or not, the officials (and residents) of these counties are willing to disobey Federal law because they think it is wrong. 

So, for Montgomery County in particular, why are the officials willing to disobey Federal laws on immigration, but  hide behind the cover of Federal law when it comes to the implementation of the infrastructure for 5G?  Are the consequences of obeying Federal immigration law more serious than the consequences of obeying Federal telecommunications law? 

I would argue the opposite.  While the consequences of obeying Federal immigration law will result in substantial hardship and disruption of their lives for the individuals affected, for most the consequences will not be life-threatening.  The consequences of obeying Federal telecommunications law have the potential of resulting in many severe illnesses and premature deaths.  In short, the Council has shown willingness to disobey Federal law in the immigration situation, but unwillingness to do the same in the telecommunication situation.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

One reason for the schizophrenic behavior of the Council on the above problems of immigration and telecommunications infrastructure could be related to potential conflicts of interest.  

For the telecommunications implementation issue, have the Council members been vetted for conflict of interest?  

This would include: 

• any elements of their investment portfolio that would profit from operation and expansion of the mobile telecommunications network; 
• any elements of their present business endeavors that would profit from operation and expansion of this network; 
• any elements of pensions received that would profit from operation and expansion of this network; 
• any proposals in the pipeline or being considered that would profit from operation and expansion of this network; 
• any other existing or potential conflicts of interest by which they could profit from operation and expansion of the mobile telecommunications network.  Anyone conflicted should be required to recuse themselves from decision-making on this network.

RECOMMENDATIONS

We are at a critical point in the fight to restrict exposure to very harmful levels of wireless radiation.  Already, studies have shown extensive human damage resulting from the previous generations of mobile telecommunications networks.  Implementation of 5G would raise potential human damage to unprecedented levels, because of the vastly increased density of cell towers required and their proximity to humans.

We need to make a stand: not tomorrow, not in some other location, but here, in Montgomery County, and now, in 2018!  If Montgomery County can claim sanctuary status for immigration, they can certainly claim sanctuary status to be free from the potentially ravaging effects of 5G.  Let's not do the equivalent of making the trains to the Camps run on time, or of sending innocent people to internment facilities, as we did seventy-five years ago.  Let's do what is right, for once, and oppose installation of these 5G cell towers!

Dr. Ronald N. Kostoff

https://smartech.gatech.edu/handle/1853/59311

The above letter was in response to this email from Ms. Mitsuko Herrera

-----Original Message-----
Sent: Thu, Feb 8, 2018 9:23 am
Subject: County Executive Transmitted Small Cell ZTA to Council

Thank for your comments in the Small Cell ZTA process.  We wanted to let you know that the County Executive transmitted a Proposed ZTA to the County Council.  We expected that the ZTA will be introduced next Tuesday, February 13, 2018, and that a public hearing will be scheduled for March or April.  The County Executive’s transmittal package is attached and updated information will continue to be provided here: http://montgomerycountymd.gov/cable/Towers/zta-links.html

The proposed ZTA would allow use of streetlight, utility, and parking lot lights in urban and commercial areas. It is not making changes to use of streetlights in residential areas or in areas with underground streetlights.  It would also allow antennas on rooftops of buildings at least 35 feet tall in residential areas (instead of the current 50 feet), and on buildings in commercial and urban areas at least 20 feet tall (instead of the current 35 feet).  The County Executive will continue to look for more information – particularly about pole design – and address changes in a residential areas at a later date.

In addition, we also wanted to let you know that there is an industry-sponsored small cell bill being circulated in Annapolis for consideration in by General Assembly.  The bill has not yet been introduced, but we have heard they have gotten a sponsor in both the House and Senate.  We expect to see the bill introduced in the next two weeks, and we will send a link to the bill once that happens.  In the draft concepts, the bill would prohibit any zoning review when a pole up to 50 feet is installed (including in residential areas), allow equipment up to 28 cubic feet.

Thank you again for your input, 

Mitsuko Herrera

AntennaZTA@montgomerycountymd.gov

2018 Proposed Zoning Text Amendment (ZTA)

 New: CE Small Cell ZTA to Council (Feb 2018) New: Database of Antenna and Tower Applications Interactive Map

Montgomery County Schools MEMO to Parents and Staff: Digital Safety and School and Home

Information and updates from the office of the Chief Technology Officer

FRIDAY, JANUARY 12, 2018

Digital Safety at School and at Home 

The MCCPTA Safe Technology Subcommittee would like to share the following recommendations for using technology at school and at home.

For Students at School:

• Consider placing Chromebooks/laptops on desks and tables rather than in laps;
• Don’t forget to shut down and log off of Chromebooks/laptops when moving from classroom to classroom;
• Consider turning off cell phones and keeping them in backpacks or lockers off when not in use;
• If necessary, take eye breaks, 1-to 2 minutes in length, approximately every 15 minutes;
• Attend to task! Avoid distractions such as reading email, playing games, or browsing the Internet;
• Engage in face-to-face socialization, especially at free time, lunch, and recess;
• Always use the Internet and devices for educational purposes in accordance with MCPS’s responsible use policies;
• Use resources that do not infringe on another’s copyright or trademark rights.

For Students at Home:

• “Disconnect” at least one hour before bedtime.  This includes all forms of media and requires online-based homework to be done well in advance of bedtime;
• Keep electronic devices out of bedrooms for a sounder sleep.

For Teachers:

• Encourage students, when appropriate, to customize their device screens using tools such as ScreenShader designed to reduce potential eye strain and fatigue
• Consider providing students with options for good behavior that include physical activity and social interaction rather than “device time”;
• When requested, provide paper alternatives for take-home class work.

Additional Resources:

• Maryland Children’s Environmental Health and Protection Advisory Council (CEHPAC):
• https://phpa.health.maryland.gov/OEHFP/EH/Shared%20Documents/CEHPAC/MD_CEHPAC_SchoolWiFi_022017_final.pdf
• New Jersey Education Association (NJEA):
• https://www.njea.org/minimize-health-risks-from-electronic-devices/ . 
• http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/140/Supplement_2/S81
• http://www.businessinsider.com/why-its-bad-to-use-your-phone-before-bed-2015-7
• http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/140/Supplement_2/S92

Congratulations MCPS! 

See resources this memo links to here as well. (

• New Jersey Education Association (NJEA) PDF for download to print! 
• https://ehtrust.org/wp-content/uploads/New-Jersey-Educators-Minimize-Health-Risks-From-Radiation.pdf
• Press Release: Maryland Children’s Environmental Health and Protection Advisory Council (CEHPAC) 
• http://www.sbwire.com/press-releases/first-state-in-the-nation-maryland-state-advisory-council-recommends-reducing-school-wireless-to-protect-children-777904.htm

“Protecting The Maryland Public From Harm By Wireless Technology” by Dr. Powell

“Protecting The Maryland Public From Harm By Wireless Technology”

January 13, 2018 Ronald M. Powell, Ph.D.

Ronald M. Powell, Ph.D. has released a document entitled “Protecting the Maryland Public from Harm by Wireless Technology.”  

Excerpts from the document include:

Protecting the Maryland Public From Harm by Wireless Technology Dr. Ronald Powell by Safe Tech For Schools on Scribd

 

“Radiofrequency radiation is harmful to health. 

Why so? The levels of manmade radiofrequency radiation in our environment, including right here in Maryland, are increasing. This increase is caused by the introduction of more and more wireless devices, without an understanding of the health consequences. These consequences can manifest differently in different individuals. Examples include sleep disruption; stress, anxiety, or irritability; headaches; ringing in the ears; concentration, memory, or learning problems; fatigue; loss of balance; eye problems; heart palpitations or arrhythmia; nerve pain; cancer; and many more. 

These problems arise because all living things are bioelectrical in nature, including human beings. That is why electroencephalograms and electrocardiograms work; they measure the tiny electrical voltages that operate the brain and the heart. Unfortunately, the radiofrequency radiation from wireless devices is strong enough to disrupt many natural biological processes. That disruption can cause, or exacerbate, a host of chronic illnesses, leading even to death.”

Dr. Ronald Powell’s qualifications:

“I am a retired U.S. Government scientist (Ph.D., Applied Physics, Harvard University, 1975). 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. For those organizations, respectively, I addressed Federal research and development program evaluation, energy policy research, and measurement development in support of the electronics and electrical-equipment industries and the biomedical research community. I currently interact with other scientists and with physicians around the world on the impact of the environment – including the radiofrequency/microwave environment – on human health.”

This document is available for download at this EHT link. This document is on the Whatis5G.infowebsite, a website that details the myriad of ways that 5G will impact humans, humanity, wildlife and the earth. 

Message for Marylanders

You can find the email addresses for all current State Delegates and State Senators on this web site, by clicking on the “Legislators” tab at the top of the web page: http://mgaleg.maryland.gov/webmga/frm1st.aspx?tab=home

You can find out which candidates have so far signed up with the Maryland State Board of Elections by referring to the web site below.  Just click on your district number.

http://elections.state.md.us/elections/2018/primary_candidates/index.html

Maryland State Children’s Environmental Health And Protection Advisory Council Recommendations To Reduce Wi-Fi

Frenemies and Free Riders: Presentation by Mitsuko R Herrera Montgomery County Government

Why is our Montgomery County official in a Conference where the goals include streaming deployment of wireless facilities?

Slide 3  states:

Working Groups
• Model Code for Municipalities
• Model Code for States
• Competitive Access to Broadband Infrastructure • Removing State and Local Regulatory Barriers
• Streamlining Federal Siting 
Slide 8

The draft report identifies a number of barriers to deployment on federally managed land and
buildings with several proposals
Challenges included varying and unpredictable fees and rates at the federal level
Historical and environmental review can be cumbersome and should be harmonized across federal landholding while also expanding exclusions under the National Environmental Protection Act and National Historic Preservation Act
DoD agencies should streamline efforts to deploy broadband on military bases 

Frenemies and Free Riders: Presentation by Mitsuko R Herrera Montgomery County Government   by  s on Scribd

NASA Engineer Opposes Small Cells in Piedmont California

POSTED ONNOVEMBER 15, 2017 

This letter was First posted on the http://scientists4wiredtech.com website 

NASA Engineer Opposes Small Cells in Piedmont

November 15, 2017

City Council Members
City of Piedmont, CA
120 Vista Avenue
Piedmont, CA 94611
(510) 420-3040

Re: Deny All Nine Crown Castle/Verizon So-Called "Small Cell" Cell Tower Applications for Piedmont

Dear Piedmont City Council Members,

I fear that you have no interest in reading this letter. It is clear to me that you have not read my previous letters, or you could not understand them. As I stated in September, if you approved any of the nine Crown Castle/Verizon So-Called "Small Cell" Cell Tower applications targeting Piedmont, I would move out. So, I have purchased another house and am leaving Piedmont. I expect I will not be alone.

I moved my family to Piedmont because of the good reputation of the schools. However, your acquiescence to irradiating the schools and sidewalks around the recreation center is beyond my imagination. I can’t figure out how kids will walk to school, recreation center or pool without being in the high-radiation beam of these cell towers that will bracket the recreation center and pool.

The babies learning to swim at the wading pool will be irradiated
by a cell tower only 30 steps from their unprotected bodies.

Shame on you. Shame on you. Shame on all of you!

If you approve the 314 Wildwood tower, this would enclose three Piedmont schools with high power radiation from four cell phone towers and certify Piedmont as the school system to avoid. Over the previous two months, you have demonstrated that you ignore every public statement of fact regarding this issue. Your legal counsel has clearly no experience in this area, and your staff has been working against the residents’ best interests.

For example:

• There is sufficient Verizon coverage, and we demonstrated that there is NO SIGNIFICANT GAP in Verizon coverage in Piedmont. Crown Castle/Verizon did not prove their case, as they must, to allow them to place cell towers in Piedmont. Piedmont residents proved in multiple on-site measurements and showed videos at the 10/02/17 City Council meeting. Sherk also showed in multiple meetings that Verizon’s own maps showed FULL COVERAGE for PIEDMONT — for voice, text and data services .

How is it that your senior planner can accept Crown Castle’s word that there is insufficient coverage? That’s total, unadulterated horse shit. And you sat there doing nothing. How is it that your legal counsel said that "coverage" and "capacity" are essentially the same? That’s bad legal advice. And you simply accepted it.

Shame on you!

• There are ADA laws protecting people with EMS, and you have simply ignored their testimony.

How is it that your legal counsel used a single case in which Electromagnetic Sensitivity (EMS) was not considered an ADA-recognized issue? That shows how little he knows and how little you know. It proves that there is a legal definition of EMS that has been recognizes by the Federal Architectural Access Board since 2002. Yet, you dismissed the needs of 3% of Piedmont residents who have this environmentally-induced disability. They can’t walk downtown without getting sick. Due to Fire Station cell towers, Mulberry’s already has an outrageous 5,400 microwatts per square meter of microwave radiation. Just know that, with your recent decisions, the microwave radiation levels will be going up in Piedmont and the kids will be bathing in it.

Shame on you!

• Piedmonters young and old rallied to show you how they do not want these so-called "Small Cell" cell towers in their town. Hundreds of letters were sent to you, while there was only a single letter in support of these Crown Castle/Verizon cell towers. We heard impassioned speeches from children who will be irradiated. And from their well-informed mothers and fathers.

How is it that you would decide their lives weren’t worth fighting for? A law suit might cost the city $200,000. Are you kidding? There are kid’s lives at stake here.

How much is the treatment for Leukemia? How many children
are you willing to sacrifice so the City of Piedmont
doesn’t use its "community fund?" Is a garden party
more important than a child’s life?

What will you do when Piedmont children start having Leukemias and Lymphomas? I already sent you the studies showing the connection between cell towers and these illnesses. In Spain, they dismantled a cell tower near a school that had five case of Leukemia and Lymphoma in the span of a year.

Shame on you!

• Microwave radiation damages and kills trees. I’ve provided overwhelming scientific reports on this subject, including a 10-year study of tree damage correlated to microwave power. Yet you have managed to ignored them all.

Shame on you!

• Microwave radiation damages birds and insects. I’ve provided numerous scientific reports on this subject, showing how microwaves have upset homing pigeons and natural navigational abilities of migratory birds. When a tower goes up, nearby birds either move their nests or face a decline in their offspring. Birds staying near a tower often never finish building their nest in their apparent confusion. Insects are profoundly affected by radiation. A ten-minute per day cell phone placement in a bee-hive will cause the bees to stop honey production, lose interest in procreation, and the bee hive will die in a matter of 5 weeks. A tiny fraction of a cell tower’s power, 40 microwatts, will kill bird embryos. Yet, you simply ignored all of these scientific reports.

Shame on you!

• Microwave radiation below FCC limits produces cancers in rats. I’ve provided references to the National Toxicology Program study which shows brain and heart tumors in rats at levels below those allowed by the FCC. The NTP study also confirms that DNA breakage is a function of intensity and of duration. This means that children need to be protected above all else. They have the longest exposure duration. However, you have ignored these studies.

Shame on you!

• Home values will decline because of your decisions. It is apparent that you do not care about the people in Piedmont, but they deserve better. Their homes are usually a large fraction of their wealth and your decisions cause them to lose a large fraction of their wealth — just so that you City Council Members can relax. I understand that part of the agreement between Piedmont and Crown is that you make residents sue Crown instead of Piedmont if anything bad happens. To that I say:

Shame on you!

I really hope that Piedmont will come to its senses and reject all of these Crown Castle/Verizon so-called "Small Cell" cell towers.

Crown Castle is not acting in good faith as a public utility. It serves a "for-profit" wireless company, and its designation as a California Public Utility should be challenged rather than accepted by Piedmont. It’s track record shows that it does not serve the population at large, which is a requirement of a public utility. Instead, Crown only serves wealthy communities where the profit margins are better. Piedmont should challenge Crown’s "public utility" designation, since it would eliminate their ability to bully their way into town.

I hope you deny the 314 Wildwood application. The drawings have been wrong from the beginning, the vault will be too noisy to meet Piedmont noise regulations and the microwave transmitter at 314 Wildwood is double than the size the other three Crown Castle/Verizon cell towers the City Council recently approved. Moreover, the noise from the equipment vault will be 8 times louderthan the nighttime ambient background noise.

Please do not approve the Crown Castle/Verizon so-called "Small Cell" Cell tower application for 314 Wildwood at the upcoming Piedmont City Council meeting.

Best regards,

Peter Harvey, formerly 123 Highland Ave.

Peter R Harvey has been a member of the University of California Berkeley Physics department, Space Sciences Laboratory (SSL), for more than four decades. He holds a MS degree in computer science from UC. He has developed more than 30 NASA space instruments and six spacecraft which communicate via microwave to the SSL-developed 10-meter S-band Berkeley Ground Station. He has published more than 34 scientific papers which have been cited in other scientific publications more than 2,900 times. He is currently supporting NASA’s Parker Solar Probe spacecraft as it goes through pre-launch testing. 
https://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/themis/mission/harvey_bio.htm

This is 5G: Speech by FCC Head

This is 5G. This is why they are placing cell towers in our yards from the former Head of the FCC.

WJLA News: Montgomery County Citizens Opposed To Small Cell Antennas

NORTH POTOMAC, Md. (ABC7) — Nowadays, most people enjoy the convenience of a smartphone, but few want the antennas that support such technology in their front yard.

ABC7's Montgomery County Reporter Kevin Lewis explains the challenge of enhancing service while keeping homeowners happy in the video above.

This news report is online at http://wjla.com/news/local/debate-over-small-cell-phone-antennas-in-montgomery-co

The Hill: 5G Small Cells and A Cell Tower On Every Block To Line Telecom Pockets

Public health is littered with examples where economic interests trumped scientific advice

BY DEVRA DAVIS

5G IS THE TECHNOLOGY THAT PROMISES TO TIE TOGETHER THE INTERNET OF THINGS (IOT). SO, IF YOU'RE ONE OF THE MILLIONS WHO CRAVE FASTER INTERNET DOWNLOADS, OR IF YOU REQUIRE CONSTANT CONTACT BETWEEN YOUR MOBILE AND FRIDGE, THEN 5G IS THE “SOLUTION” AT HAND.


AROUND THE NATION, STATE LEGISLATURES ARE RAPIDLY FIRING OFF BILLS TO STREAMLINE THE MASSIVE DEPLOYMENT OF 5G WIRELESS INFRASTRUCTURE, PREEMPTING LOCAL AUTHORITY IN FAVOR OF THE TELECOM INDUSTRY’S FINANCIAL INTERESTS. BUT IS THIS ECONOMIC AND REGULATORY BATTLE THE WHOLE STORY?


Last week, California Gov. Jerry Brown (D) took a bold step in vetoing S.B. 649, 5G streamlining legislation that would have granted the telecom industry a green light to place a mini cell tower approximately every hundred yards throughout the state.


Had the bill been signed into law, localities would have lost the right to say where these so-called “small cells” are installed, also capping fees they could charge the telecom companies for erecting these structures in public rights-of-way.


And yet, almost two dozen states are moving forward with similar streamlining bills. While Missouri’s Small Cell Deployment Act failed, over a dozen states are swiftly passing legislation despite fierce opposition. In response, 21 Texas cities including Dallas and Austin have sued their state, as have 70 communities in Ohio.


In Montgomery County, Md., a local bill was tabled after residents expressed opposition, only to be replaced by a transparency plagueddraft zoning amendment. The county is pitching this rezoning as “protecting the character” of neighborhoods, because it ensures transmitters are camouflaged, yet it virtually eliminates public notice and hearings for antennas on streetlights and utility poles.


In 2016, the Federal Communications Commission approved Spectrum Frontiers, making the U.S. the first country in the world to open up higher-frequency millimeter wave spectrum to roll out 5G. Now, two federal 5G streaming bills, The MOBILE NOW Act and The DIGIT Act, have passed the Senate and are on the way to the House.


Read the full article at http://thehill.com/opinion/technology/357591-public-health-is-littered-with-examples-where-economic-interests-trumped

Montgomery County Residents Testify In Opposition To Cell Antennas In Their Yards

Watch Videos of Resident Testimony on Small Cells in Montgomery County. As you can see, residents are OUTRAGED. They do not want these wireless antennas in their yards, 

Tragically, Small Cell Towers are about Life and Death, Informed Consent Agreement by Ronald M. Powell, Ph.D.

Tragically, Small Cell Towers are about Life and Death

To:  All Members of Montgomery County Citizens Advisory Boards

November 6, 2017

Please know that the proposed installation of small cell towers throughout Montgomery County would be a health tragedy for our County.  These towers are sources of high levels of radiofrequency radiation that will be placed right in front of homes and businesses without their consent -- not to mention their INFORMED CONSENT.

If you are wondering what you would be consenting to, if you WERE asked, I have written up a short Informed Consent Agreement which is attached.  If presented with this agreement, would you sign it?

Need to catch up on small cell towers?

If you are not certain that you understand about small cell towers, and the associate Fifth Generation (5G) of cellular technology that is destined for these towers, please see this web site for an introduction:

http://whatis5g.info/

If you want to read a superb article about small cell towers, just published in "The Hill", please click HERE or enter the following web site into your browser:

http://thehill.com/opinion/technology/357591-public-health-is-littered-with-examples-where-economic-interests-trumped

This article was written Devra Davis, Ph.D., M.P.H. who has had a distinguished career of public service in support of public health.  Dr. Davis was a member of the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change that was named a joint recipient of the Nobel Prize for Peace in 2007.

If you want to know more about the impact of wireless technologies, including small cell towers, on health, please see the following web site, created by Dr. Davis who is the founder of the Environmental Health Trust:

https://ehtrust.org/

Health concerns of County residents fall on deaf ears

Unfortunately, we are being told by our County officials that our health concerns carry no weight in determining whether or not small cell towers will be installed in our County.  The reason our officials cite is a provision of the 1996 Telecommunications Act that contains an "environmental effects" exclusion that is frequently interpreted as a "health effects" exclusion:

“No State or local government or instrumentality thereof may regulate the placement, construction, and modification of personal wireless service facilities on the basis of the environmental effects of radio frequency emissions to the extent that such facilities comply with the Commission's regulations concerning such emissions.”

(In the above quotation, the "Commission" is the Federal Communications Commission.)

Unfortunately, the Federal Communications Commission permits the irradiation of the public with such high levels of radiofrequency radiation that the public is not protected from harm.

However, please consider the following implication of this supposed health exclusion, and ask yourself is there isn't a way to fight back against such an unjust law.

Our laws are in conflict

The international biomedical research community has made it quite clear that radiofrequency radiation, and specifically cellular radiofrequency radiation, can harm people in an enormous number of ways.  Most recently the National Institutes of Health linked cellular radiation to brain cancer (glioma) which is usually fatal, and to a nerve cancer (schwannoma) that can be fatal.  That is, the scientific evidence suggests that we must treat radiofrequency radiation, and in particular cellular radiation, not only as dangerous to health generally, but also as a CARCINOGEN that is dangerous to life itself.

So, when a small cell tower is placed "up close and personal" to people, those people must be regarded as under "assault" by a carcinogen.  And, there are laws against assault.  Further, since that assault can result in death, those people must be considered as under "assault with a deadly weapon".  That is also against the law.  Furthermore, if any of those people die as the result of that assault, that is "murder".  Murder is also against the law.

So, it seems fair to ask this question:  Is the 1996 Telecommunications Act so powerful that it overrides the laws against assault, assault with a deadly weapon, and murder?  I doubt very much that the authors of the 1996 Telecommunications Act, in their zeal to promote the rapid expansion of cellular technology without prior testing for safety, intended to convey a right to the telecommunications industry to assault, and even kill, people.

If County officials want to protect the public from harm, they need to rally their legal might to resist ALL EFFORTS to install small cell towers in the County, not just because that is the right thing to do, but also because such installation violates multiple existing laws that are reasonably believed to be preeminent.

I would be proud to see Montgomery County take the lead in making this argument against the 1996 Telecommunications Act, which has proved to be an unjust law.

If you don't believe that cellular radiation is harmful

If you have trouble believing that cellular radiation is harmful, consider these questions:

• On which sources of information are you relying for assurances of safety?  Do those sources have extensive backgrounds in the biological effects of radiofrequency radiation?  Are those sources free from vested interests in cellular communications or other wireless technologies?

• Are those sources more authoritative on health issues than the International Agency for Research on Cancer of the World Health Organization?  That organization linked radiofrequency radiation, and in particular cellular radiation, to cancer back in 2011?

• Are those sources more authoritative on health issues than the National Toxicology Program (NTP) at the National Institutes of Health?  The NTP confirmed the link of radiofrequency radiation, and in particular cellular radiation, to cancer in 2016 and to DNA damage more broadly in 2017?  And further findings are due for release in 2018.  These findings are the result of the largest study ($25 million) that the NTP has ever conducted of any toxin.

• Have you read some of the scientific research literature that connects radiofrequency radiation to biological effects and that has been funded by impartial sources?

What can You do?

If you would like small cell towers stopped, you must speak up to County officials, and quickly, because the small-cell-tower juggernaut is moving fast.  Below, I provide a list of cognizant County officials, their position titles, and their email addresses.  Thereafter, I provide a list of the email addresses alone for easy copying and pasting into your email program.  A single message to all of the officials at one time will let them know how you feel.

Ike Leggett - Montgomery County Executive:  ocemail@montgomerycountymd.gov
Eric Coffman - Chief, Energy and Sustainability, Montgomery County:  eric.coffman@montgomerycountymd.gov
Eric Friedman - Director. Montgomery County Office of Consumer Protection:  eric.friedman@montgomerycountymd.gov
Lisa Brennan - Associate County Attorney General, Montgomery County:  lisa.brennan@montgomerycountymd.gov
Roger Berliner - President, Montgomery County Council:  councilmember.berliner@montgomerycountymd.gov
Hans Riemer -  Vice President, Montgomery County Council:  councilmember.riemer@montgomerycountymd.gov
Marc Elrich - Montgomery County Councilmember:  councilmember.elrich@montgomerycountymd.gov
George Leventhal - Montgomery County Councilmember:  councilmember.leventhal@montgomerycountymd.gov
Craig Rice - Montgomery County Councilmember:  councilmember.rice@montgomerycountymd.gov
Nancy Floreen - Montgomery County Councilmember:  councilmember.floreen@montgomerycountymd.gov
Nancy Navarro - Montgomery County Councilmember:  councilmember.navarro@montgomerycountymd.gov
Sidney Katz - Montgomery County Councilmember:  councilmember.katz@montgomerycountymd.gov
Tom Hucker - Montgomery County Councilmember:  councilmember.hucker@montgomerycountymd.gov
Mistuko Herrera - Montgomery County Department of Technology Services:  mitsuko.herrera@montgomerycountymd.gov

ocemail@montgomerycountymd.gov
eric.coffman@montgomerycountymd.gov
eric.friedman@montgomerycountymd.gov
lisa.brennan@montgomerycountymd.gov
councilmember.berliner@montgomerycountymd.gov
councilmember.riemer@montgomerycountymd.gov
councilmember.elrich@montgomerycountymd.gov
councilmember.leventhal@montgomerycountymd.gov
councilmember.rice@montgomerycountymd.gov
councilmember.floreen@montgomerycountymd.gov
councilmember.navarro@montgomerycountymd.gov
councilmember.katz@montgomerycountymd.gov
councilmember.hucker@montgomerycountymd.gov
mitsuko.herrera@montgomerycountymd.gov

Who am I?

I have been a resident of Montgomery County since 1979.  I am a retired U.S. Government career scientist (Ph.D., Applied Physics, Harvard University, 1975).  During my Government career, I worked for the Executive Office of the President of the United States, the National Science Foundation, and the National Institute of Standards and Technology.  For those organizations, respectively, I addressed Federal research and development program evaluation, energy policy research, and measurement development in support of the electronics and electrical-equipment industries and the biomedical research community.  I currently interact with other scientists and with physicians around the world on the impact of electromagnetic fields on human health.

Share this message with anyone you wish.

Let us opt for a healthy future for our families and our friends in Montgomery County.

Regards,

Ronald M. Powell, Ph.D. 

Informed Consent Agreement on Cell Towers in Front of Homes by Dr. Ronald Powell on Scribd