They told us cigarettes were safe and thalidomide was good. The experts never seem to learn. They are the gift that keeps on giving. They continue to bequeath us with drugs like Epilim and Phen-Phen, things like cases of Diet Joke stacked to the ceilings in all the pharmacies and all of the other dangerous petrochemical poison that will land you on the pharmaceutical industry’s fly paper if you are not paying attention. Folks, 20-20 hindsight and a quarter won’t even get you a cup of coffee today and that is why we cannot rely on it. When the damage is done, it is done. It is then too late.
2.45 GHz IS A MEDICAL AND SCIENTIFIC FREQUENCY. Do we have the making of an experiment on our hands? Do we have willing subjects? Do we have a laboratory? Do we have informed consent? It appears that quite possibly, unbeknownst to many of us, that in my opinion, we do. This particular frequency of the electromagnetic spectrum is commonly employed in laboratories and medicine. It is used to move chemical reactions along, anneal, synthesize and polymerize compounds, and among other things, to destroy tissue.
Columbia University actually owns a patent for taking DNA that responds to the EMF and transferring it to another piece of DNA, which can be turned on. It has been shown that this piece of DNA can be used as an electromagnetic trigger. A trigger for what? With 75,000 miles of circulatory system in the incredible machine called the human body, there are a lot of variables. Both the thermal and non thermal EMF actions elicit responses in DNA and DNA picks up all kinds of frequencies. The nucleic structure of DNA is an incredible fractal antenna on a molecular scale. The six foot double helix molecule crammed into less than a one micron space is coiled and coiled and coiled many times over. This DNA response to the EMF emissions’ phenomenon is observed at the very lowest power levels in the 2.45 GHz frequency range. Talk about reception and gain!
Fullerton’s classroom WiFi routers and the WiFi enabled wireless devices all utilize a pulsed high frequency microwave emission at 2.45 GHz. It just so happens that maximum dielectric loss of water molecules, the essence of life, begins at 2.45 GHz and it is taking place right in your child’s lap where the essence of your grandchildren will begin.
This is also the same frequency that your microwave oven operates on, however, with the WiFi, the data is sent in ‘packets’ or ‘pulses’ along the waves.
It is this ‘pulse’ and the resulting square waves that many scientists contend is one of several properties of this particular form of microwave radiation that is responsible for the mechanism for adverse health effects that are being reported in the scientific literature.
Although the intensity is supposedly perceived as ‘low’, wireless classroom levels can potentially be trillions of times above the natural background levels in that part of the electromagnetic spectrum. The resulting high frequency pulsed square waves that these tablets and laptops emanate are a man made freak of nature, and are being emitted right in your child’s lap. Is this a coincidence or is it by design? Is this being foisted on an unsuspecting populace as part of a larger clandestine attempt to effect fertility? I believe that it is.
The current ISM standards were established in 1985 when this application of the technology was unthinkable. They rolled WiFi out in 1997 with NO SAFETY TESTING. Even more compelling is that the current ICNIRP guidelines are intended to protect in the very short term against gross heating effects-in other words “does it burn” from short term exposures. In addition to the aforementioned, the long term non-thermal effects and the pulsed square waves are where the additional, in my opinion, far more serious concerns lie. Studies have been undertaken at length confirming that non- thermal dangers are real. There are NO studies to date, that I am aware of, on the safety of long term non-thermal dangers or biological effects associated with the exposures to the levels and intensity of high frequency pulsed non-ionizing microwave radiation in the wireless classroom settings- similar to what some of the Fullerton School District’s children are already being exposed to. There are only studies that show we are harming our children.
Will the Fullerton School District and its Board of Trustees allow the expansion of this technology to continue unabated, in what I believe to be, the complete absence of concrete and conclusive evidence that this technology is safe in its proposed classroom setting applications? REMEMBER, THESE DEVICES EMIT IN DIRECT PROXIMITY TO THE SENSITIVE DEVELOPING REPRODUCTIVE AREAS OF OUR CHILDREN -RIGHT IN THEIR LAPS. WOULD YOU PUT YOUR CELL PHONE IN YOUR LAP ALL DAY AND TALK ON IT?
I find it odd that the principal of my child’s school uses a hardwired device on their desk. If it works in the office, why can it not work in the classroom? I wonder why what is good for the goose isn’t good for the gander?
I urge all of you to please take the time to educate yourself and read up on the science which is I believe is largely being ignored by the main stream media and the Fullerton School District. The evidence for potential harm predates even many of us.
For those of you who need a PLAIN ENGLISH TRANSLATION-THEY ACT LIKE THEY DON’T KNOW WHAT THIS STUFF REALLY DOES TO THE KIDS-I for one don’t feel like sitting around for 10 years to find out and neither should you. I personally believe that there is much more to this story than meets the eye. In the meantime, the technology should be HARDWIRED in ALL of the classroom settings and that will eliminate the danger to our children. Today’s kids already have the odds stacked against them. Let’s not help the house on this one.
HERE ARE ONE THOUSAND THREE HUNDRED AND NINETY SIX Reference Links to Peer-Reviewed Studies re RF Microwave Radiation RIGHT HERE:
http://citizensforsafetechnology.org/Electrosmog-Bibliography-COLLECTIONS,28,3376
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22465825
http://www.bioinitiative.org/table-of-contents/
http://www.hese-project.org/hese-uk/en/niemr/index.php?content_type=R
DECLASSIFIED: THE 1976 DEFENSE INTELLIGENCE AGENCY REPORT ON MICROWAVES
#1 by Anonymous on October 3, 2013 - 5:43 am
Why are we being told that it is safe when it is not? How can this be allowed to go into classrooms all over the United States?
#2 by "How can this be?" on October 3, 2013 - 12:12 pm
Once you get past how incredulous and unbelievable this situation is, you may want to look at the stakeholders involved and how this could ever come to be the case.
Tech Industry-their market share (WiFi enabled devices) is now a huge part of the global economy, and they have been allowed to grow without restraint. They will continue to grow unless something is done. They are motivated by what best serves their business model and greed.
Government – The Feds have given governance of wireless radiation to the FCC, via FCC guidelines. The guidelines have not been touched since 1996; that was 17 years ago. The FCC guidelines completely ignore non-thermal biological effects, which is the issue with wireless radiation. Stepping back and looking at this, it appears as if the FCC has given a pass to the Tech industry for 17 years, amounting to no regulation. The different “health” agencies, Center for Disease Control (CDC) and the National Institute of Health (NIH) are all busy denying/ignoring the ties being made between wireless radiation and: infertility, ADHD, autism, childhood leukemia, dizziness, headaches, nosebleeds, DNA damage, etc. I have read that the FCC has been governed by ex Tech Industry Execs, I can’t confirm this, only that the current guy that has been nominated by the US President to head the FCC is Tom Wheeler from the Tech Industry, “Tom has had an impressive career in the telecommunications and high-tech field that makes him eminently qualified for this position,”
Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2013/04/tom-wheeler-fcc-chair-reports-90787.html#ixzz2ggMwDLjI
The Federal government is motivated by something stronger than the legal and moral obligation to protect people from what are known wireless radiation harms.
Media – The predominant way we learn about new things is through the media. What comes through mainstream media automatically is given credulity, although this is changing. The general population has not learned of the harms of wireless radiation because the media has been “quiet”, at best. What is the media’s motivation in remaining “quiet” about this? Whatever it is, it must be stronger than the ethical and moral obligation the press has to the public. What if the ties to autism, childhood leukemia, ADHD, do have merit? Is the media complicit in keeping information from the public?
General Public – The public has come to know that the FCC, CDC, NIH, etc all have within their mission statements the responsibility to protect the health of the people. It is taken for granted that the public can trust these Federal agencies to do their job. The general public hears very little, sporadic information on wireless radiation harms from the media. The result is that the general public is ignorant of what information exists that says wireless radiation is harmful. The parents do not know that putting their children in wireless classrooms is risking the health of their children. Because they are counting on and trust the agencies and governing bodies to do their job, they think everything is okay.
The public is being told by the school district that these classrooms are “totally safe.” Challenging and questioning these superintendents is not something most are willing to do, but you must. What is at stake here is tremendous. What is your motivation for not speaking up? Does your lack of courage or not wanting to rock the boat exceed the obligation we have to our children and humanity to advocate on their behalf? Parents, are you thinking that your child will not be touched by childhood leukemia or ADHD, so it is okay?
State and Local governing bodies – I believe they are being advised by their taxpayer funded risk management counsel that they are within the FCC guidelines and they are legally okay to proceed with these wireless classrooms. Since there is no significant public outcry, they are going ahead. The outcry from the few that know is dismissed. Ignorance and arrogance prevail and they don’t care enough to look at evidence contrary to their wireless classroom agenda. Are incomes and prestige at risk here? Perhaps, but how can the desire to preserve either ever outweigh the legal, moral, and ethical obligation of ensuring a safe school environment for our children?
Drs Pletka and Giokaris, answer that question and explain to the parents how you are choosing wireless technology over the health of our children?
#3 by Joe Imbriano on October 3, 2013 - 11:45 pm
Simple, they just follow orders for 20 grand a month, when in doubt, defer to taxpayer funded counsel, and totally rely on the complacency of a constituency of parents of 25,000 children that has zero interest in the meat and potatoes. The focus is instead on the frosting and decorations which are by default allowed to take precedent.
Heck it’s a no brainer because it is not their kids on the classrooms anyway and they don’t have those Cisco access points in their offices with 35 Ipads running all day. Besides their reproductive days are long behind them.