Today I interview Camilla Rees, a patient of mine for almost 30 years. Camilla is a thought leader on health care reform and an award-winning health and environmental activist best known for her work on the biological and health effects of electromagnetic fields. Presently, she is working to unify the field of EMF activism to support a new national legal and legislative initiative started by Children’s Health Defense to restore local control over cell towers and antennas. Since 1996, local governments have been unable to influence the siting of cell towers and antennas on health or environmental grounds.
Dr. Breiner: Camilla, I’ve noticed an ever-increasing number of cell towers. I see them everywhere–driving along the highway, above fire stations and police stations, near schools, behind hospitals, in recreation areas, and commercial areas, and of great concern, in residential neighborhoods next to homes. Now we’re seeing smaller, less obvious antennas placed on utility poles and street lamps, right outside homes, beaming into 2nd floor windows. I’ve heard enormous cell towers are even going up right on New York City sidewalks! The non-stop proliferation of antenna infrastructure in our midst raises a lot of questions. What are the health risks of cell towers and antennas and should we be concerned?
Camilla Rees: Yes, we definitely should be concerned about antenna infrastructure going up in our living environments! Many people are being impaired, and some seriously injured, by the radiation emitted by cell towers and antennas. People experiencing acute symptoms are aware of the risks, but many others aren’t aware because they don’t notice any symptoms, or are not connecting the dots with the conditions they do have, like heart irregularities, sleep problems, blood sugar issues, cancers, neurological problems, cognitive problems, erectile dysfunction and much more.
There’s a mistaken belief that if one doesn’t experience acute symptoms that one is resilient to the radiation but nothing can be further than the truth. Eventually, biological functioning will degrade, due to these assaults, leading to oxidative stress, mitochondrial dysfunction, systemic inflammation, autonomic dysfunction, calcium channel effects, DNA damage and more. And people end up with serious health effects from the chronic and cumulative exposures, from all sources of exposure including radiation exposures from cell phones, wearable devices and wireless exposures in the home.
Dr. Breiner: How much science exists showing risk from wireless radiation–and does the industry claim wireless exposures are safe in spite of the evidence?
Camilla Rees: There is a tremendous amount of science showing risk, literally many thousands of studies, going back decades, including from military and industrial science even before there was a consumer cell phone industry. There is also a wealth of international studies, including important early science from Russia and from universities globally. Joel Moskowitz, PhD of U.C. Berkeley maintains a log of these studies.
Of interest, in a recent paper I co-authored with my colleague Richard Lear, “Safety of Wireless Technologies–the Scientific View“, we demonstrate today’s chronic illness problem was actually predicted by a U.S. Navy report in 1971.
The author of the Navy report, Lt. Colonel Zorach Glaser, PhD, reviewed over 2,300 studies showing biological effects from wireless radiation published by that time. The studies cited 132 different biological effects, symptoms and diseases associated with wireless exposures. This was over 50 years ago! Effects included impacts on the central and autonomic nervous systems, genetic and chromosomal changes, cognitive effects, blood disorders, changes in physiological function, gastrointestinal disorders, endocrine gland changes, metabolic disorders, vascular disorders, and much, much more.
Twenty-three of today’s fastest growing chronic diseases were identified in the Navy report in 1971 as risks from wireless exposures. These include well-known conditions such as ADHD, anxiety, hypertension, blood glucose concentration, insomnia, erectile dysfunction, cancers and stroke, all of which dramatically increased after the cell tower roll out began in the early 1990s. So, while we can’t go into all the science here, my point is we’ve known for over half a century about risks for many serious conditions from wireless exposures, including from U.S. government science.
In a letter to a private school in Massachusetts where a child experienced challenging cognitive symptoms from WiFi, neurologist and neuroscientist, Dr. Martha Herbert of Harvard Medical School, summed up the science saying radiofrequency radiation “stresses cells, damages cell membranes, damages mitochondria in cells and in brains, causes free radical damage, is genotoxic and damages proteins, depletes glutathione, impacts tight junction barriers in the body, such as the blood brain barrier, impacts calcium channels with a significant downstream biological effects, degrades and disorganizes signals in the brain, interferes with melatonin production and sleep, contributes to immune problems, and increases stress at the chemical, immune and electrical levels.”
Dr. Herbert also is also the co-author of two early papers suggesting a plausible link between electromagnetic fields and autism, which exponentially increased just as cell towers started being erected nationwide, summarized here. Dr. Martin Pall, PhD, Professor Emeritus, Washington State University, mapped the biological mechanisms of action whereby electromagnetic fields can lead to autism in this paper in Brain Sciences in 2024. In 2022, he also published a paper in Current Alzheimer’s Research describing 18 distinct types of evidence showing that low-intensity electromagnetic fields act via Voltage Gated Calcium Channel activation to cause very early onset Alzheimer’s.
It’s worth noting, after the U.S. Navy study in 1971 many other government departments and agencies conducted scientific reviews or prepared memorandums about risks from wireless radiation. These include NASA (1972, 1981), Defense Intelligence Agency (1976), EPA (1990), FDA (1993), U.S. Air Force (1994), U.S. Army (1998), NIH/DoE (2001), EPA (2002), the partly government funded 13-country Interphone Study (2010), Department of Interior (2014) and the NIH/National Toxicology Program (2018). So, there is no lack of understanding about risks!
Clearly, there has been a tremendous regulatory failure. Had regulatory agencies responded appropriately to the very clear risks of this radiation, we wouldn’t be seeing anywhere near the size of the chronic illness problem we are today. Government inaction instead enabled what has become a trillion-dollar industry now deeply enmeshed in our economy.
The proliferation and densification of cell towers and antennas has been never-ending, though it is widely understood to be an inferior technology compared with hard-wired options like fiber optics and cable. On technological grounds alone, Tom Wheeler, the former FCC Chair said in testimony before Congress in 2021, “We must insist on ‘futureproof technology’ (fiber)… Wireless may be a last resort option in the most isolated areas, but it should not be a first resort for most of America…”.
And “No”, the industry has never publicly claimed its technology is safe. In court cases, when questioned, industry attorneys clearly make the point they are not saying the radiation is safe. But I’ve also encountered documents where building owners have falsely been told that both the FCC and the FDA have ‘certified’ the radiation emitted by the infrastructure is safe to convince the building owners to allow infrastructure on their premises.
The FCC says it relies on the FDA to determine safe exposure levels, but the FDA has never done a comprehensive analysis of the risks from telecommunications-related exposures, like it has for radiation-emitting medical equipment, like CT Scans and MRIs, or pharmaceutical drugs. But the FDA is clearly aware of the risks. An internal FDA memo, obtained by Microwave News under the Freedom of Information Act, the FDA stated the data strongly suggests this radiation “can accelerate the promotion of cancer”.
Dr. Breiner: What do we know about 5G risks? Is it more dangerous?
Fifth generation technologies (5G) bring additive exposures, meaning 5G is used in conjunction with 4G, not replacing it. 4G is used for voice, and 5G mostly for data. Newer technologies like 5G are more biologically disruptive due to intensive pulsations and other new signaling characteristics, and it will be using much higher and higher frequency bands going forward, as well as placed closer and closer to living environments, making the exposures more and more dangerous compared to earlier generations. This is important, as there are already thousands of studies showing risks from earlier generations like 2G, 3G and 4G.
Scott McCollough, Esq., Chief Litigation Counsel for Children’s Health Defense’s EMR & Wireless program, says the new small cell antennas may be less obvious but they still are extremely powerful, “employing a wider range of frequencies–from 700 Megahertz up to 90 Gigahertz–often simultaneously using several different bands and using far more intensive modulation and pulsation”.
Dr. Martin Pall, PhD, says of 5G, “5G only makes sense as a conduit for artificial intelligence, which requires rapid transmission of vast amounts of information”. He predicts 5G’s extremely fast pulsations will lead to greatly increased incidence of blindness, hearing loss, skin and other cancers, and population wide neuropathy and neuropathic pain.
As Dr. Ronald Kostoff, PhD of Georgia Institute of Technology has called the roll out of massive amounts of wireless radiation emitting infrastructure “The Largest Unethical Medical Experiment in Human History“, as it violates a key ethical principle in science: the requirement for ‘informed consent’. And certainly most people wouldn’t give consent if they understood the risks.
In his paper, “Adverse health effects of 5G mobile networking technology under real-life conditions“, Dr. Kostoff emphasizes there is evidence “the nascent 5G mobile networking technology will affect not only the skin and eyes, as commonly believed, but will have adverse systemic effects as well” (countering claims that the effects will stop at the skin and not penetrate deeply into the body).
Dr. Pall, who has a background in biochemistry, physics and genetics, sounds the loudest warning, saying “5G presents threats of a sort that have only been equaled once in human history–the threat of instant nuclear annihilation.”
Dr. Breiner: Is there hope for change? And what can people do?
Camilla Rees: I believe there is hope if we focus on the “two core issues” enabling the continued roll out of this infrastructure: 1) the FCC’s inadequate, non-biologically based exposure guidelines, that provide liability cover for companies in this sector and 2) Section 704 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 which took away local government rights to influence the siting of cell towers and antennas on health and environment grounds, which needs to be reversed.
It is essential that we bring the larger issues driving the ongoing antenna proliferation into sight and together address the pressing need for well-funded legal and legislative efforts to reverse this harmful trajectory that is impacting all of biological life on Earth.
The D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals has already questioned the FCC as to how it can justify not strengthening its exposure guidelines, given the evidence for risk presented to the Court, calling its decision to not do so “arbitrary and capricious”. The court mentioned concerns like children’s vulnerability, effects from long-term exposures, environmental impacts to biological life, new technological developments, and the ubiquity of wireless, and how safety testing only assesses heating. No deadline for a response was indicated and the FCC has not replied.
The second “core issue” is the inability of local governments to protect their communities’ health by limiting the siting of cell towers and antennas on health or environmental grounds due to Section 704 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996. A new legal initiative called 704 No MoreTM, led by Children’s Health Defense, and comprised of 100+ health and environmental advocacy groups, myself included, aims to dismantle Section 704 and preserve several individual Constitutional rights. 704 
No MoreTM will use a multi-pronged approach involving strategic litigation, public education, grassroots mobilization, legislative advocacy, targeted marketing and sustainable fundraising.
Scott McCollough, Esq., Chief Litigation Counsel for the EMR & Wireless program and 704 No MoreTM, with the guidance of a prominent Constitutional lawyer from Yale Law School, Professor Jed Rubenfeld, aims to restore both individual rights as well as both state and local government control over the placement cell tower and antennas.
Because of ‘conflict preemption’ related to Section 704, persons injured by this infrastructure, including from health effects, environmental impacts, aesthetics, property devaluation or costs of relocation, presently have had no legal recourse. A search for plaintiffs for the litigation has begun and we welcome recommendations of injured parties at this time in MD, VA, WVA, NC and SC.
Now is an opportune time to bring these actions. I am leading the fundraising effort for the 704 No MoreTM initiative. Donations can be made through the 501-c-3 Children’s Health Defense at 704NoMoreTM or by contacting me if you’d like to send a check, wire transfer or contribute through a donor advised fund. Support of 704 No MoreTM is greatly appreciated and urgently needed. I hope people will consider supporting 704 No MoreTM either financially or as a volunteer. There are plenty of opportunities to become involved depending on one’s skill set. Fundraising house parties in NY or New England are very much welcome!
Finally, I want to mention another reason for hope. And that is there exist superior alternatives to wireless internet access networks that are safer, faster, more secure, more energy-efficient and readily available, and that don’t involve blanketing our neighborhoods in radiation. You can learn more about the advantages of hard-wiring Internet access with fiber, like many other countries are deploying, in our paper, “Re-Inventing Wires–The Future of Landlines and Networks“. Cell phones certainly won’t be going away, but we can do much to make our living, working and educational environments much, much safer by hard-wiring with fiber or cable to the premises and eliminating the need for so much radiating infrastructure in our neighborhoods.
Dr. Breiner: Camilla, thank you for this important information. I hope we can do another interview soon. I agree, it is essential we start using safer technologies and take a stand together for change. I am grateful for your work.
Camilla Rees, MBA is Senior Policy Advisor, National Institute for Science, Law & Public Policy in Washington, D.C., where she oversees policy papers on electromagnetic fields, the smart grid and telecommunications. She has organized dozens of expert panels on technology risks across the country for over a decade, including groundbreaking programs on special risks to children, and on tech-life balance, including tech addiction. She has presented five times at the Commonwealth Club of California, the nation’s oldest and largest public affairs forum. Camilla received the “2018 Award in Public Health” from the Global Foundation for Integrative Medicines and the “The Jonathan Forman Award” from the American Academy of Environmental Medicine, its most prestigious award for outstanding contribution in the field of Environmental Medicine. She founded Manhattan Neighbors for Safer Telecommunications and is author of “The Wireless Elephant in the Room“. Please reach out to Camilla at [email protected] or via www.CamillaRees.com if you are in a position to support the new 704 No MoreTM campaign as a donor or a volunteer.
Mark A. Breiner, DDS, FAGD, FIOMT. Dr. Mark A. Breiner is a leading authority and pioneer in the field of holistic dentistry. He is the author of the popular consumer education book, Whole Body Dentistry, a guide to the “dental connection” to whole-body wellness. With more than 40 years of experience, Dr. Breiner has helped patients from across the US and other countries attain a higher overall level of dental health and general well-being. He is a Fellow of the Academy of General Dentistry, a past president and Fellow of The International Academy of Oral Medicine and Toxicology, and a Fellow of the College of Dentistry, American Association of Integrative Medicine. He is in private practice in Fairfield, Connecticut.
As a holistic dentist, Dr. Breiner views himself as a partner in his patient’s overall health and wellness plan. His innovative approach combines the use of leading-edge technology with a sound and broad, holistic strategy for healthy living, thus, minimizing invasive procedures which so often occur in traditional dentistry. As an author, lecturer, educator, and consultant, Dr. Mark Breiner is breaking ground in the world of integrative and complementary dentistry. To his patients, he is their champion for helping them discover the missing pieces to better health. Dr. Breiner is a pioneer and recognized authority in the field of biological and holistic dentistry. He is a health visionary with over 40 years of experience in helping patients find solutions to baffling, unresolved health problems—even those that are seemingly unrelated to dentistry.
Dr. Breiner treats patients for a myriad of dental concerns, including Aesthetics, Temporomandibular Joint Dysfunction, Sleep Breathing Disorders, Mercury Toxicity, Hidden Infections from Cavitations, Dead Teeth, and Root Canals. “If you have unexplained symptoms that won’t go away, no matter what you do, the answer could be in your mouth,” states Dr. Breiner. “Understanding the vital relationship between the teeth and the rest of the body allows me to provide added levels of diagnosis and care to improve your life. Consider an integrative approach to oral health care; you could improve your wellness in astounding ways.”
To Schedule an Appointment with Dr. Mark Breiner, please call his office at 203-371-0300. ext 1.
Please support our work by making
a tax-deductible donation.
We are 100% donation-based
and need your support to
educate, communicate and analyze
critical developments in this field.
Thanks so much for your help!
Please give generously.
We depend on you.
https://electromagnetichealth.org/electromagnetic-health-blog/qa-on-wireless-risks-with-mark-breiner-dds-and-camilla-rees/