February 2023 Newsletter

February 17, 2023

Hi EMF Safety Network Friends,

We are deeply grateful for the sharing of information in our network. Thank you, everyone! Not only does our mutual support expand our awareness about EMF issues, but it can inform us in ways we may not have previously considered. There is power in that!

While we aim to keep discussions focused on EMF issues, occasionally a comment comes through that may seem off topic, but we leave that to our list moderator, Warren, who helps us stay on track. As stated: “This list started for California and has now grown to include members from other US states and other countries who are also opposing smart meters and educating about EMF, and RF pollution.”

The following info is on our list subscriber page: “This discussion list is private! All members must be honest about who they are. Infiltration by industry, or their affiliates will not be tolerated and moles or persons found falsifying their identities or sharing private information from this list with opposing industry interests will be exposed publicly, and prosecuted to the full extent of the law.” This important statement helps keep us safe to share.

SEBASTOPOL, CA- SMART WATER METER UPDATE……………………………………

The rollout of the Syserco Smart Water Meters installation is projected to begin at the end of February.

Although there was a concerted effort by Sandi and others last year to stop the installation of smart water meters entirely, a compromise was reached which will allow residents a free opt-out from the transmitting device/antenna that’s connected to the smart meter. Sebastopol will still be replacing all analog water meters with smart water meters regardless of opt-out. Meters without transmitters will be read manually each month.

An opt-out form is available on the Sebastopol City website: https://ci.sebastopol.ca.us/City-Government/Departments-Services/Public-Works/Water-and-Wastewater/AMI_Opt_out-Application-Approved-Final-9-20-22.aspx. We recommend sending in the form as soon as possible, before installation commences in the next few weeks. The city plans to inform residents of the installation with a door hanger a few days before the roll-out in their neighborhood. If you have questions, call the City of Sebastopol at: 707-823-1153. More info about the opt-out: https://ci.sebastopol.ca.us/City-Government/Departments-Services/Public-Works/Water-and-Wastewater/AMI_Opt_out_FAQ_Approved-Final-9-20-22.aspx

Why opt-out?

Read more: http://emfsafetynetwork.org/sebastopol-rethink-smart-water-meters/comment-page-1/  Although the City is promoting this as a water saving measure, Syserco wrote: “… there has never been a claim that the new meters save energy, save water and reduce greenhouse gas emissions.” Many residents have already chosen to opt out of PG&E Smart Utility Meters due to concerns over RFR, excessive data collection, and unwanted surveillance.

The City recently sent us the following answer to our questions about the Smart Water Meter installation:

1) How will this ping rate be monitored (the rate needs to be verified). Who collects this data?

The ping rate is scheduled to be set at 3 pings per day. Two of them scheduled and one random. The data is collected from the Beacon software service that imports from the meter endpoints.

2) When will the residents be able to view and act on the opt-out application and how will it be publicized? Will this be prior to installation?

The information is on the city website. https://ci.sebastopol.ca.us/City-Government/Departments-Services/Public-Works/Water-and-Wastewater  Individual door hangers with the Opt-out information will also be delivered at a minimum off 48 hours prior to installation.

3) If a meter is installed and a resident requests an opt-out after installation, how soon will the antenna be removed?

Once the City receives a signed opt-out form, the establishment of the account and the removal of the data collector/transmitter can occur up to a 3 weeks period depending on the number of requests. For data recording and a clean cut off for billing purposes, the City may elect to avoid removing the data collector/transmitter until after the close of the monthly billing cycle – usually at the end of the month.

4) Are four pings a day (as recommended by the manufacturer) required? Could one transmission ping provide all the information that is needed?

The manufacture recommends 4 pings per day. The minimum recommended transfer of data is 3 times per day. Per City Council Direction, 3 pings per day with two of them scheduled and one random.

5) The spec sheet states that the average RFR broadcast will be approximately 10 dBm at the meter and the signals decrease with the square of the distance (two feet away is ¼ of one foot, etc.). How will this broadcast intensity be monitored and at what distance? (10 dBm = 1,210,000 uW/m2)

There are no current plans for monitoring.

6) What recourse do residents of Sebastopol have if the intensity or frequency is increased?
[No response]

SEBASTOPOL- CELL TOWER UPDATE…………………………………………………………..

T-Mobile (12 antenna) 80 Ft. Cell Tower Proposed for 9300 Mill Station Road, Sebastopol

An active neighborhood group has mounted a strong opposition to this permit application for 9300 Mill Station Road. Some of their reasons include:

1)   Riparian waterway and toxic microplastics pollution from faux cell tower tree.
2)   Destruction of scenic views.
3)   Safety and fire issues.
4)   Environmental effects and human health Issues from (RFR).
5)   Decreased property values.
6)   Insurance: Who will take responsibility for damages?

This location is just outside City limits, so the permit is before the County of Sonoma’s Planning Department.

Monopole Cell Tower- 32 ft. 10655 Mill Station Road, Sebastopol

Crown Castle has plans for another tower a little over a mile away, at 10655 Mill Station Rd. A small public notice was published in the Santa Rosa Press Democrat on Feb. 9, 2023 with the following info:

“Any interested party that believes the proposed action may have a significant impact on the environment may file a Request for Environmental Review to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC). Such request may only raise environmental concerns. Information regarding the project may be found under file number A1237169 on the FCC website: www.fcc.gov/asr/applications. Request must be filed within 30 days of the notice being posed on the FCC website.”

All requests must be filed electronically with the FCC. This particular file number also required the request to be snail mailed to Crown Castle (not emailed). They gave this address: Crown Castle, 2000 Corporate Drive, Canonsburg, PA 15317 Attn: Regulatory Sept. 23-000421/KEB. They don’t make it easy to oppose, do they?

By the way, if you go to the FCC website to file for environmental review, you can view all the other cell towers in many states that are up for environmental review each month. There are well over 100 on this FCC site and are updated daily . You can view the FCC application and the location map: https://wireless2.fcc.gov/ASRManager/service/nationalNoticeReport.faces

SANTA ROSA- CELL TOWER UPDATE………………………………………………………….

AT&T 70 ft. Macro Cell Tower at 2400 Bluebell Drive, Santa Rosa

Once again, a small public notice appeared in the PD newspaper on Jan. 10th, this time asking for interested persons to submit a request for environmental review on the FCC website for a 70 ft. AT&T cell tower at 2400 Bluebell Drive, Santa Rosa. This same tower location had already been approved last April by the Santa Rosa Planning Commission despite an opposition report filed by Safetech4SantaRosa and concerned neighbors. I wondered what gives?

First it was approved by the Planning Commission and then it needs to go through an environmental review process with the FCC. We did file the request for FCC environmental review last week, but this time we included the need for fire safety, as this macrotower will share that same address as a battery wholesaler and warehouses lithium batteries for electric and hybrid cars. The tower will be less than 50 feet away!

The Santa Rosa Fire Department submitted a statement that there would be accessible water sources to combat potential fires on the site, but ignored the fact that cell tower fires are electrical fires that can’t be fought with water. Likewise, lithium and water react violently!

AT&T Cell Tower Upgrade, next to popular Sports Field and Public Bleachers, 750 Doyle Park Drive, Santa Rosa

A permit was pulled to “upgrade” an AT&T CELL tower from 9 to 12 antennas. We took RFR readings showing the already high readings at this tower, and submitted our findings (including a video) to the Santa Rosa Planning Commission. Unfortunately, the 12 antenna upgrade was approved, but the Commission chair said she wished she could oppose it, but needed more legal clout. Her parting words were “Please work to change the laws. Keep doing what you’re doing.”

Note: We thank our good friend, Mary, for her eagle eyes as she scours the public notices every day looking for key words like monopole, FCC, antenna structure, etc. Otherwise, how would we know? Mary has a Verizon Small Cell tower 42 ft. from her house.

The information below is from our Marin County Friend, Vicki Sievers:

LEGAL ACTION…………………………………………………………………………

iPhone Users Seek Supreme Court Review

Plaintiffs claim that a lab hired by the Chicago Tribune found that the iPhone 7, 8, and X showed exposure above the federal limit when the phones were carried close to the body. In August the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals dismissed the claims, but because circuits are split on pre-emption issues, the plaintiffs are now seeking Supreme Court review. https://news.bloomberglaw.com/litigation/iphone-users-seek-scotus-review-of-radiation-preemption-ruling  (requires subscription to read in full, if you’re interested ask me for the rest).

Doctors, Scientists and Engineers Join Forces to challenge UK Government on 5G Safety

The growing group is supported by a team of lawyers who are commencing legal proceedings to challenge UK government’s failure to address clearly-identified health and safety risks of wireless radiation and increased exposure from the deployment of 5G. They state: “Risks are foreseeable and preventable. Current standards are not fit for purpose and obsolete.”  A case now being heard concerns fundamental rights to privacy and protection from experimentation.  More here: https://actionagainst5g.org/

Three Hundred+ Towers in India found to Exceed Prescribed Limits

Dr. Joel Moskowitz (UC Berkeley Public Health) comments on this finding: “India systematically monitors cell tower radiation to ensure compliance with radio frequency exposure limits; however, in the US no agency does this. The FCC, which is captured by industry, responds to complaints about electromagnetic interference but does not systematically monitor cell tower compliance with FCC regulations. The cost of a comprehensive monitoring system would likely be covered by the fines assessed to industry for noncompliance. Moreover, workers and the public would be better protected from intense exposure to cell tower radiation.” https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/defaultinterstitial.cms

SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY………………………………………………………………………

Dr. Joel Moskowitz posts New Research on Wireless Radiation Effects
As in earlier compilation postings like this one, you can scroll through to see the study titles in bold, and read reports of interest.  https://www.saferemr.com/2022/06/recent-research-on-wireless-radiation.html

Bioengineering Professor Emeritus has accumulated close to 2000 studies over 30 years on Non-ionizing Radiation Effects.

Dr. Henry Lai, University of Washington, is one of the most important EMF researchers of all time. Dr. Moskowitz has posted this compilation in a document that contains abstracts for 290 of the studies published since 1997. The studies assessed the effects of radiofrequency radiation exposure on free radical-related cellular processes.  See pages 164-187 for the Table that summarizes key details about each study.

SUMMARY:

1. Of the 290 studies published since 1997, 263 studies (91%) reported statistically significant effects of radiofrequency radiation on free radical-related cellular processes; only 27 studies (9%) found no significant effects.
2. Change in cellular free radical status is a consistent effect of radiofrequency radiation exposure.
3. Effects can occur at low specific absorption rates (SAR) or power density of exposure. Of the 70 low intensity exposure studies, 68 studies (91%) reported significant effects on free radical-related cellular processes.To see the full summary or to download the 187-page document (pdf): https://www.saferemr.com/2018/02/effects-of-exposure-to-electromagnetic.html

SMART METERS……………………………………………………………………………………..

CHILDREN’S HEALTH DEFENSE Publishes Informative articles on Smart Meters

The first broad-scoped piece quotes many experts, and covers several downsides of Smart meters, including health, fire risk and privacy violation. The second includes how home wiring can act as an antenna, sending pulses of biologically active frequencies (with power densities greater than cell towers) into occupants’ bodies. https://childrenshealthdefense.org/defender/smart-meters-health-privacy/?utm_source=salsa&eType=EmailBlastContent&eId=71b08967-8feb-40be-adf9-2937efc0092c

Why Smart Meters Are Good for Utility Companies, Bad for Consumers

Don’t Want a Smart Meter? Take It Up With Your State Lawmakers, Experts Say

(link to above: https://childrenshealthdefense.org/defender/smart-meter-state-legislation/

Green Street Radio interviews experienced NY Activist, Michele Hertz, on Smart Meter Harms

On the most recent edition of Green Street News, hosts Doug and Patti Wood welcomed their friend and colleague Michele Hertz to talk about “Not So Smart Meters.” Michelle tells how they caused her to become severely ill, and what she has done as a result. Her riveting story is similar to so many heard over the years. Minute 13:20  https://www.greenstreetnews.org/podcast/episode/90013a19/not-so-smart-meters-with-michele-hertz

EDUCATION……………………………………………………………………………………….

EHT PATREON offers February 28^th Webinar with Physicians for Safe Tech executive director, Cindy Russell

Dr. Russell is an important voice in safe technology. From EHT: “At the cutting edge of research on the health impacts of wireless technology, Dr. Russell has studied toxins for more than 20 years. Her work with Physicians for Safe Technology is focused on protecting the public, education and advocacy for environmental health and safety. She believes we can create a world where technology serves our needs without undermining our physical or environmental health.” More here: Cindy Russell 2/28 Webinar: https://us02web.zoom.us/webinar/register/WN_5dGubQ10S8OOaCUOJWav4w

(Note: A Patreon membership is needed for this event. EHT Patreon membership is well worthwhile, in my experience. https://www.patreon.com/ehtrust )