Prominent medical doctors and scientists have sent a letter to the CEO of Girls Scouts of the USA requesting they stop issuing the 5G Patch that was developed by a telecommunications company Ericsson stating that is sends a “dangerous message” to girls because of te inaccurate safety claims regarding 5G technology.
Download the Doctors and Experts letter to Girl Scouts on 5G Patch here.
Medical Doctor, Scientists and Expert Letter to Suspend The Girl Scout 5G IOT Patch and Replace With “Safer Technology” Patch
Dear Ms. Sofia Chang,
We applaud and support the Girl Scouts in their efforts to support STEM education for girls. However, it is also critically important that Scouts are educated about how to minimize health risks of technology, and are provided with science based information.
Please immediately suspend Girl Scouts of America’s 5G and IOT Ericsson patch because it disseminates scientifically inaccurate information and promotes a false and dangerous message. The activities for this badge are based entirely on materials developed by Ericsson (the Swedish multinational telecommunications firm), and they misleadingly state that 5G networks and phones are safe. In fact, scientific evidence clearly indicates that 5G and wireless networks are not safe.
5G will include low and mid band wireless frequencies that research links to memory damage, headaches, oxidative stress and impacts to the brain, endocrine system and reproduction as well as brain, thyroid and breast cancer.
As experts in the health impacts of digital communications technology, and as several of us are former Girl Scouts and parents of Scouts, we ask that an independent expert group be convened to develop a safer technology patch that reflects the up to date scientific evidence and medical recommendations.
Most parents are aware that excessive use of screens is contributing to depression, inactivity, bullying and many other mental health issues in children. However, most are unaware that wireless devices emit invisible microwave radiofrequency (RF) radiation, an exposure which presents serious health risks according to numerous scientists.
In addition, buried in the manual of cell phones are manufacturer instructions to keep the phone 5mm or further from the body. Research shows that if the phones are in body contact, the radiation exposure can exceed government limits. That information, and so much more, is what Girl Scouts need to know.
The American Academy of Pediatrics states that children are “uniquely vulnerable” to RF radiation and has repeatedly called for an update to U.S. regulations because research finds children absorb up to 10 times more RF radiation into their brain, eyes and bone marrow. Most importantly, as the brains of children and teens are still developing, they remain far more sensitive to harmful effects.
One activity for the 5G Badge has the Scout explaining to an adult “how millimeter wave spectrum is safe and does not cause harm to our health.” This is simply not factual. No U.S. health agency has ever made such a safety determination for these frequencies, nor has any agency reviewed the totality of the science to develop health based safety standards for millimeter waves or wireless radiation. Most of the 5G patch activities link to Ericsson content and Facebook and Youtube videos and other advertisements.
The European Parliament’s research report “Health Impact of 5G” concluded that commonly used wireless frequencies (450 to 6000 MHz) are probably carcinogenic for humans and affect male fertility with possible adverse effects on the development of embryos, fetuses and newborns. No determination was made on 5G’s higher millimeter wave frequencies because there was an absence of adequate safety data regarding long term effects.
Current U.S. laws on allowable human exposures to wireless RF remain unchanged since 1996. In fact, the U.S. FCC’s cell phone RF limits are based on a 220 pound man, not a young girl, and they do not consider long-term effects from years of exposure that will affect our girls.
Until U.S. regulations catch up with the science, the Girl Scouts can take a leadership role in supporting girls’ health and safety.
We recommend that the Girl Scouts develop a “Safer Technology” patch that includes ways to be tech savvy in the twenty-first century. Similar to the Girl Scout’ Screen Smart patch that educates girls about the overuse of screens, the new patch could teach girls how to minimize wireless radiation exposures, and how to choose,use, and design safer, non-wireless technologies for a healthy future. Activities could include addressing the environmental (impacts to pollinators, wildlife, trees) and life cycle impacts (e-waste, energy consumption, human rights issues) of unfettered 5G deployment.
Instead of relying on a corporation to provide safety materials on the radiation emissions of their own products, we recommend the Girl Scouts employ health information developed by independent medical and public health experts, for example:
American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP):
“Avoid carrying your phone against the body like in a pocket, sock, or bra. Cell phone manufacturers can’t guarantee that the amount of radiation you’re absorbing will be at a safe level.”
“If you plan to watch a movie on your device, download it first, then switch to airplane mode while you watch in order to avoid unnecessary radiation exposure.”
California Department of Public Health (CDPH)
“Don’t sleep with your phone in your bed or near your head.” CDPH Advisory
Massachusetts Breast Cancer Coalition (MBCC)
Cancer prevention education for students MBCC Let’s Talk Prevention Classroom Module3 on Cell Phones.
Environmental Health Trust (EHT)
As an independent think tank of expert scientists, engineers and physicians, EHT has also developed numerous resources to reduce cell phone radiation. Parents and Girl Scouts leaders can learn how to reduce household wireless radiation at our Healthy Tech Home Project healthytechhome.org.
We offer our expertise to support the development of a Safe Tech Patch and thank you so much for considering this important children’s health issue.
Sincerely
Devra Davis, PhD, MPH
President and Founder Environmental Health Trust
Fellow, American College of Epidemiology and Collegium Ramazzini
Dr. Hugh Taylor MD
Chair of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Sciences, Yale School of Medicine and Yale-New Haven Hospital
Lennart Hardell, MD, PhD, Professor
Department of Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and Health, Örebro University, Sweden (retired)
The Environment and Cancer Research Foundation
Linda S. Birnbaum, PhD
Former Director National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences and National Toxicology Program, Scholar in Residence, Duke University, Former President, Society of Toxicology, Adjunct Prof. Yale University/UNC, Chapel Hill
Frank Clegg
CEO Canadians For Safe Technology
Former President Microsoft Canada
David O. Carpenter, M.D.
Director, Institute for Health and the Environment
University at Albany, World Health Organization Collaborating Center
Joseph M. Sandri
CEO Thought Delivery Systems
President National Spectrum Management Association
COO The Balance Group
Anthony B. Miller, MD
Professor Emeritus, Dalla Lana School of Public Health, Univ. of Toronto. Senior Epidemiologist for the International Agency for Research on Cancer, formerly Director of the Epidemiology Unit of the National Cancer Institute of Canada, Chair of the Department of Preventive Medicine & Biostatistics at Univ. of Toronto
Hillel Z Baldwin, MD
Neuroscience Solutions, LLC
Theodora Scarato MSW
Executive Director Environmental Health Trust
ehtrust.org and healthytechhome.org
Download the Doctors and Experts letter to Girl Scouts on 5G Patch here.
ATTACHMENTS
American Academy of Physicians (2012, 2013) Letters to the FCC regarding the Need to Update Wireless Radiation Laws
California Department of Health Recommendations on Cell Phone Radiation (2017)
New Jersey Educational Association: Minimize health risks from electronic devices (2017)
Environmental Working Group: Protecting kids from wireless radiation in school and at home
RESOURCES
Santa Clara Medical Association Magazine Articles
Girl Scouts 5G IOT Patch Resources
SCIENTIFIC REFERENCES
Belpomme, D., Hardell, L., Belyaev, I., Burgio, E., & Carpenter, D. O. (2018). Thermal and non-thermal health effects of low intensity non-ionizing radiation: An international perspective. Environmental Pollution, 242, 643–658.
Choi, Y.-J., Moskowitz, J. M., Myung, S.-K., Lee, Y.-R., & Hong, Y.-C. (2020). Cellular Phone Use and Risk of Tumors: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 17(21), 8079.
Directorate-General for Parliamentary Research Services (European Parliament), & Belpoggi, F. (2021). Health impact of 5G: Current state of knowledge of 5G related carcinogenic and reproductive/developmental hazards as they emerge from epidemiological studies and in vivo experimental studies. Publications Office of the European Union.
Fernández, C., de Salles, A. A., Sears, M. E., Morris, R. D., & Davis, D. L. (2018). Absorption of wireless radiation in the child versus adult brain and eye from cell phone conversation or virtual reality. Environmental Research, 167, 694–699.
Gandhi, O. P. (2019). Microwave Emissions From Cell Phones Exceed Safety Limits in Europe and the US When Touching the Body. IEEE Access, 7, 47050–47052.
Hardell, L., & Carlberg, M. (2019). Comments on the US National Toxicology Program technical reports on toxicology and carcinogenesis study in rats exposed to whole-body radiofrequency radiation at 900 MHz and in mice exposed to whole-body radiofrequency radiation at 1,900 MHz. International Journal of Oncology, 54(1), 111–127.
Hardell, L., & Carlberg, M. (2015). Mobile phone and cordless phone use and the risk for glioma – Analysis of pooled case-control studies in Sweden, 1997–2003 and 2007–2009. Pathophysiology, 22(1), 1–13.
International Commission on the Biological Effects of Electromagnetic Fields (ICBE-EMF), (2022). Scientific evidence invalidates health assumptions underlying the FCC and ICNIRP exposure limit determinations for radiofrequency radiation: implications for 5G. Environ Health. Oct 18;21(1):92.
James C. Lin. (2022) Carcinogenesis from chronic exposure to radio-frequency radiation. Front. Public Health, Sec. Radiation and Health. 31 October
Jangid, P., Rai, U., Sharma, R. S., & Singh, R. (2022). The role of non-ionizing electromagnetic radiation on female fertility: A review. International Journal of Environmental Health Research, 0(0), 1–16.
Kelley, E., Blank, M., Lai, H., Moskowitz, J., & Havas, M. (2015). International Appeal: Scientists call for protection from non-ionizing electromagnetic field exposure. European Journal of Oncology, Volume 20, 180–182.
Lai, H., & Levitt, B. B. (2022). The roles of intensity, exposure duration, and modulation on the biological effects of radiofrequency radiation and exposure guidelines. Electromagnetic Biology and Medicine, 41(2), 230–255.
Lerchl, A., Klose, M., Grote, K., Wilhelm, A. F. X., Spathmann, O., Fiedler, T., Streckert, J., Hansen, V., & Clemens, M. (2015). Tumor promotion by exposure to radiofrequency electromagnetic fields below exposure limits for humans. Biochemical and Biophysical Research Communications, 459(4), 585–590.
Luo, J., Li, H., Deziel, N. C., Huang, H., Zhao, N., Ma, S., Ni, X., Udelsman, R., & Zhang, Y. (2020). Genetic susceptibility may modify the association between cell phone use and thyroid cancer: A population-based case-control study in Connecticut. Environmental Research, 182, 109013.
Maluin, S. M., Osman, K., Jaffar, F. H. F., & Ibrahim, S. F. (2021). Effect of Radiation Emitted by Wireless Devices on Male Reproductive Hormones: A Systematic Review. Frontiers in Physiology, 12.
Markovà, E., Malmgren, L. O. G., & Belyaev, I. Y. (2010). Microwaves from Mobile Phones Inhibit 53BP1 Focus Formation in Human Stem Cells More Strongly Than in Differentiated Cells: Possible Mechanistic Link to Cancer Risk. Environmental Health Perspectives, 118(3), 394–399.
Melnick, R. L. (2019). Commentary on the utility of the National Toxicology Program study on cell phone radiofrequency radiation data for assessing human health risks despite unfounded criticisms aimed at minimizing the findings of adverse health effects. Environmental Research, 168, 1–6.
Miller, A. B., Sears, M. E., Morgan, L. L., Davis, D. L., Hardell, L., Oremus, M., & Soskolne, C. L. (2019). Risks to Health and Well-Being From Radio-Frequency Radiation Emitted by Cell Phones and Other Wireless Devices. Front. Public Health 2019; 7:223. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2019.00223
Moon, J.-H. (2020). Health effects of electromagnetic fields on children. Clinical and Experimental Pediatrics, 63(11), 422–428.
Panagopoulos, D. J., Karabarbounis, A., Yakymenko, I., & Chrousos, G. P. (2021). Human‑made electromagnetic fields: Ion forced‑oscillation and voltage‑gated ion channel dysfunction, oxidative stress and DNA damage (Review). International Journal of Oncology, 59(5), 1–16.
Shih, Y.-W., Hung, C.-S., Huang, C.-C., Chou, K.-R., Niu, S.-F., Chan, S., & Tsai, H.-T. (2020). The Association Between Smartphone Use and Breast Cancer Risk Among Taiwanese Women: A Case-Control Study. Cancer Management and Research, 12, 10799–10807.
West, J. G., Kapoor, N. S., Liao, S.-Y., Chen, J. W., Bailey, L., & Nagourney, R. A. (2013). Multifocal Breast Cancer in Young Women with Prolonged Contact between Their Breasts and Their Cellular Phones. Case Reports in Medicine, 2013, e354682.
Uche, U. I., & Naidenko, O. V. (2021). Development of health-based exposure limits for radiofrequency radiation from wireless devices using a benchmark dose approach. Environmental Health, 20(1), 84.
ADDITIONAL SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH HERE
Download the Doctors and Experts letter to Girl Scouts on 5G Patch here.
https://ehtrust.org/letter-to-girl-scouts-on-5g-patch/ Source: Environmental Health Trust