Everyone that you will see in this video knows about the two sides of this issue. There are many other key players in this saga who are not in this 7 minute damage control piece. Ladies and gentlemen. We all make choices and the choices we make will have to be lived with for the rest of our God given lives. I have no problem with technology. This message was produced and delivered via a hardwired desktop computer. The problem that I have is with the wireless radiation that the district has chosen to spray from wireless access points into the classrooms to bridge the gap from the fiber optic cables in the walls to the students devices. I am not alone. It is the position of many scientific experts in the fields of neurology, physics, biochemistry, engineering, public health, environmental medicine and mainstream medicine that wireless microwave radiation DOES NOT BELONG IN A
CLASSROOM. http://wifiinschools.com Yes this is marketing plain and simple, Madison Avenue style complete with airbrushing. They are candy coating a jawbreaker on this one gang, believe me.
No, what you won’t see here are the stacks of thousands of scientific studies that show wireless radiation is harmful. What you won’t see here are the RF meters picking up wireless microwave radiation emissions whose levels are trillions of times the normal background levels coming off of the district’s wireless access points and wireless devices. What you won’t see here are the impassioned pleas to the board members and staff to stop the wireless proliferation until it has been proven safe. What you won’t see here are the interviews with the scientists whose credentials vastly exceed anyone employed by the district that warn against the very things Robert Pletka is doing with wireless in the FSD. What you won’t see here is Karent Whisnant, and Nancy Regitz at a parent teacher conference refusing to accept peer reviewed scientific literature warning against the forced wireless exposure and the potential for harm to the children. What you won’t see here are the potential biological effects of chronic microwave exposure to the brains and reproductive organs of these students. What you won’t see here is the 100 page electrical contract that the Fullerton Joint Union High School District entered into in order to HARDWIRE ALL OF THEIR COMPUTERS. What you won’t see here are the decisions being made at all of the Fullerton High Schools to put student safety in front of an agenda. What you won’t see here is Acacia Principal Karen Whisnant calling the police on our group as we peacefully handed out literature to parents on the public sidewalk in attempts to warn of the potential irreparable biological harm to students. What you won’t see here, in my opinion, are people who are worthy of their positions.
WHAT YOU WILL SEE HERE IS AN ALL STAR CAST COMPRISED OF THOSE WHO HAVE DECIDED TO IGNORE THE REPEATED WARNINGS AND PARTICIPATE IN THE LARGEST FORCED IRRADIATION OF SCHOOL CHILDREN THAT THE WORLD HAS EVER KNOWN. What you will see here are children with microwave transmitters in direct proximity to their sensitive developing reproductive areas. What you will see here are students using wireless devices crammed into close quarters all day long being exposed to unprecedented levels of microwave radiation trillions of times the levels that you and I were exposed to growing up. The classroom microwave radiation levels are higher than those of a cell tower 100 meters away. Yes ladies and gentlemen, what you will see here are your children and those who are making the crucial health decisions for them in a manner, in my opinion, which demonstrates callous disregard for the well being of these children as well as current State Law. They sugar coat all this and slickly sell it to you. These are the faces of the irradiated and the irradiators, plain and simple. We are the faces of those who want caution exercised when it comes to something so unnecessary and dangerous as wireless classrooms.
#1 by Anonymous on May 20, 2014 - 3:58 pm
Please read the selected quotes from
“Is Science Being Hidden from the Public?”
Eileen O’Connor
Director, Radiation Research Trust
“As of March 28, 2014 representatives of the telecom industry, government officials, and WHO scientists absolutely, irrefutably have the latest science from Hardell and know that Hardell himself is calling for RF to be classified a Group 1 carcinogen. The clock has now started ticking on liability. No more excuses. SCENIHR, The industry, the EU Commission, and WHO are now fully informed.”
The European Commission in collaboration with the Greek Atomic Energy Commission (GAEC) under the auspices of the EU Council Greek Presidency organized a major workshop in Athens on EMF electromagnetic fields and health effects with a focus on public awareness, conciliating scientific findings and uncertainties in policy making. The event took place on 27th & 28 March 2014 at Cotsen Hall, Athens, Greece and included presenters from various parties from the European Commission, WHO, public authorities, industry, operators, environmental and consumer associations and academia. The goal of the conference was to reach a common approach for the future in order to respond to public concerns about electromagnetic fields, to enhance information dissemination and discuss new studies and scientific evidence in relation to EMF, and to identify knowledge gaps needed for sound policy making. In this context, the new SCENIHR draft opinion on EMF and potential health effects was presented.
SCENIHR, the Scientific Committee on Emerging and Newly Identified Health Risks, has been charged with providing reports for the European Commission and Members of the European Parliament which may be relied upon by all participating governments.
Eileen O’Connor was invited as a representative for the UK Radiation Research Trust charity and was joined by Sissel Halmøy representing International EMF Alliance.
The opening address was given by Marian Harkin MEP expressing the need for a review from up to date evidence and the need for accountability. She stressed importance of openness towards lobbying and diverse opinions and the need for transparency and inclusion of all stakeholders. She reminded the EU Commission and SCENIHR that public consultation should not simply be a box ticking exercise and that consultation is only meaningful if addressing negative outcomes along with reports that have positive outcomes. Furthermore and perhaps most profoundly, she gave the stark reminder that 500 million citizens are relying on SCENIHR’s review.
Eileen O’Connor said “I was hoping for an equal and honest debate to be held in Athens, but was sadly surprised and extremely disappointed by the lack of inclusion for stakeholders with alternative views to scientists representing SCENIHR in Athens. I was one of only two voices invited to present with an alternative view and had taken time to prepare a presentation in the hope and anticipation of receiving a warm welcome and equal opportunity to be heard and taken seriously.”
Sissel Halmøy said “It was plain for all to see that there was clear selection bias from SCENIHR’s review as they clearly cherry picked their own research and promoted it as gold standard while heavily criticising Lennart Hardell’s research.”
The Hardell Group published five ground breaking studies in 2013, all of which have been ignored by SCENIHR in their report. The Hardell studies are the first to correlate mobile phone usage with incidences of brain tumours over a 20+year period of time, longer than any other epidemiological studies. They found a clear correlation between cell phone usage and two types of brain tumours, acoustic neuromas and the deadliest of all brain cancers, gliomas. Yet this startling risk of brain tumors was not only ignored, but denigrated by members of SCENIHR, the irony being IARC — the World Health Organization’s cancer committee — accepted Hardell’s science prior to 2013 for consideration when the IARC scientists almost unanimously voted for the 2B “possible carcinogen to humans” classification for the entire RF – EMF Spectrum.
Eileen O’Connor reminded Joachim Schüz, Head of IARC’s Section of Environment and Radiation, that the highest court in Italy favored Hardell’s study over the 2010 Interphone Studies, which had failed to find a similar correlation. She also reminded him that the Italian court considered Hardell’s studies more reliable and independent than the Interphone study which had been part funded by the mobile phone industry.
For years scientists have been offering incomplete, inconsistent and contradictory information, leading to confusion for the public and policy makers, resulting in members of the public seeking justice via the courts.
“There is a lack of responsibility taken with policy makers saying they are relying on government and industry funded scientific reports from scientists. Then these same scientists say it is the duty of policy makers to protect public health. Who is truly speaking out for the 500 million citizens the European Commission oversees? Do we need to wait for the courts to hold those who are offering inexact, incomplete and contradictory information accountable?
Eileen O’Connor held the five Hardell papers missing from SCENIHR’s report up high for all to see and called for them to be included within the SCENIHR review. Reading the conclusion from one of the papers she said
“Conclusions Based on Hill’s viewpoints and his discussion on how these issues should be used, the conclusion of this review is that glioma and acoustic neuroma are caused by RF-EMF emissions from wireless phones. According to the IARC Preamble (54), the classification should be group 1, i.e., “the agent is carcinogenic to humans”, and urgent revision of current guidelines for exposure is needed.”
Former New York Times science writer Blake Levitt and University of Washington Professor Henry Lai said the report fails to do a thorough review of recent literature on non-ionizing electromagnetic fields (EMF) and biological health effects. Only selected papers were evaluated using ambiguous criteria.
Most of the following publications since 2007 were not considered by SCENIHR.
Genetic effects:
RFR: 114 papers (65% reported effects)
ELF EMF: 59 papers (83% reported effects)
Neurological effects:
RFR: 211 papers (68% reported effects)
Oxidative status:
RFR: 106 papers (88% reported effects)
ELF EMF: 110 papers (88% reported effects)
Lai and Levitt said, “It is outrageous to ignore any effect of EMF exposure on human health and a crime to humanity not to recommend any action to curtail the exposure.”
“The public and policy makers deserve to know the truth as 500 million citizens are relying on their opinion,” demanded O’Connor. “The time has come and as a matter of urgency to demand the inclusion of truly independent scientists with a reminder that it is not just the 500 million citizens at risk today, but future generations due to the epigenetic properties this agent carries.”
“The world urgently needs to be informed that these five papers by the esteemed Hardell Group were dismissed and ignored by Schüz, by IARC, by WHO, and as we witnessed in Athens, by SCENIHR,” Eileen O’Connor stated. “These papers have been placed directly into the hands of the EU Commission along with the report from Lai and Levitt outlining hundreds of missing research papers demonstrating positive results in the hope that policy makers can hold SCENIHR accountable.”
Sissel Halmøy continued, “Our European Community is being irradiated by microwaves; people are becoming ill and suffering with many conditions including electrosensitivity. The World Health Organization has also declared a possible correlation to cancer in humans. It’s not rocket science. It’s just common sense and sound science.”
Eileen O’Connor is the co-founders for the UK Radiation Research Trust and co-founder for the International EMF Alliance. In 2011, she became a member of the European Commission’s DG SANCO expert group of stakeholders on electromagnetic fields. Eileen talked about her mission with this campaign since developing breast cancer in her 30’s and discovering a cancer cluster surrounding the T-Mobile phone mast in 2001 in the tiny hamlet of Wishaw. She highlighted 10 epidemiological studies that assessed for health effects of mobile phone base stations. Seven of these studies explored the association between base station proximity and neurobehavioral effects and three investigated cancer. Eight of the 10 studies reported increased prevalence of adverse neurobehavioral symptoms or cancer in populations living at distances 500 meters from base stations.
Residents of Wishaw engaged with T-Mobile while searching for the truth in science and pleading for their lives and for T-Mobile remove the phone mast after the discovering the cancer cluster. T-Mobile shamefully highlighted the Stewart report claiming the mast was operating within Safety guidelines, while burying a report commissioned by T-Mobile in 2000. The ECOLOG report of over 220 peer-reviewed and published papers found evidence for the following:
Adverse effects on central nervous system,
Cancer initiating and promoting effects,
Impairments of certain brain functions,
Loss of memory and cognitive function.
In addition, the Insurance industry worryingly highlights the implications for human health, in particular with regard to the use of mobile phones, power lines or antennas for broadcasting. Potential impacts are rated as high and likely to hit the casualty area of insurance business over the next decade.
Professor Lukas Margaritas, leader for the Department of Cell Biology at University of Athens, along with Dr Adamantia F. Fragopoulou and fellow researchers attended the event. Experts famous in this field having published many peer-reviewed papers, including research on the impacts of mobile phone and DECT cordless phone base radiation on key proteins in the brain, demonstrating that radiation from mobile and cordless DECT phones can affect proteins of the mouse brain that are critical to learning, memory, and thinking.
Eileen O’Connor announced to the assembled scientists, “As of March 28, 2014 representatives of the telecom industry, government officials, and WHO scientists absolutely, irrefutably have the latest science from Hardell and know that Hardell himself is calling for RF to be classified a Group 1 carcinogen. The clock has now started ticking on liability. No more excuses. SCENIHR, The industry, the EU Commission, and WHO are now fully informed.”
Please contact: Eileen O’Connor
Email: eileen@radiationresearch.org
For more information visit: http://www.radiationresearch.org