A huge NO to the project

0747-EX-PL-2015 Informal Objections

Google Inc.

2018-11-27ELS_220304

Global  Union  Against  Radiation  Deployment  from  Space   www.stopglobalwifi.org                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               December  17,  2015   E-­Filed     Ms.  Marlene  H.  Dortch   Secretary   Federal  Communications  Commission   445  12th  Street,  S.W.   Washington,  D.C.,  20554             Re:  Informal  Objection  Under  Section  5.95  to  Application  of  Google,  Inc.,  Application  for   Experimental  License,  File  No.    0747-­EX-­PL-­2015       Dear  Ms.  Dortch,     We  are  writing  in  opposition  to  the  request  by  Google,  Inc.  for  an  experimental  permit  to  blanket  88.6  -­  99.6%  of   the  land  area  of  the  continental  U.S.  with  radiofrequency  (RF)  radiation.    Due  to  the  documented  harmful  effects   of  RF  radiation  exposure  on  human  health  and  the  environment,  along  with  the  fact  this  project  violates  the  U.N.   Convention  on  the  Rights  of  Persons  with  Disabilities,  several  sections  of  the  U.N.  Convention  on  the  Rights  of   the  Child,  and  International  Human  Rights  Law  in  the  Universal  Declaration  of  Human  Rights,  approval  of  this   permit  should  be  denied.    Question  9  of  the  Google,  Inc.  FCC  application  asks  if  there  will  be  an  Environmental   Impact  from  the  project  and  the  applicant  has  answered  in  the  negative.  We  emphatically  disagree.     GUARDS  is  an  international  coalition  against  global  WiFi  from  space,  a  technology  that  endangers  all  life  on   Earth.    The  insurance  industry  currently  recognizes  the  immense  risks  of  insuring  companies  against   radiofrequency  injury  claims,  and  coverage  from  the  major  firms  like  Lloyds  and  Swiss  Re  is  no  longer  available.   With  the  lack  of  adequate  insurance,  and  RF  radiation  (including  the  microwave  radiation  utilized  by  wireless   WHFKQRORJ\ FXUUHQWO\FODVVLILHGD³SRVVLEOHKXPDQFDUFLQRJHQ´E\WKH:RUOG+HDOWK2UJDQL]DWLRQWKHUHDUHOHJDO implications  related  to  irradiating  entire  countries  and  their  citizens  without  their  informed  consent.    Strong   correlations  exist  between  RF  radiation  exposure  from  wireless  technologies,  increasing  rates  of  Radiofrequency   Sickness  and  many  cancers.  In  several  countries  (Italy,  France,  Spain  Australia),  plaintiffs  have  gone  beyond   correlation  to  successfully  prove  causation,  and  damages  have  been  awarded  by  the  courts.    It  is  also  important  to   highlight  the  potential  for  satellites/upper  atmosphere  antennas  and  their  communications  to  be  hijacked,  posing   serious  security  risks.         RF  Radiation  -­  Environmentally  Harmful  and  a  Public  Health  Hazard     U.S.  Department  of  Interior  States:  Current  Radiation  Standards  Inapplicable     2Q)HEUXDU\WKH86'HSDUWPHQWRI,QWHULRU '2, VWDWHG³the  electromagnetic  radiation  standards  used   by  the  Federal  Communications  Commission  (FCC)  continue  to  be  based  on  thermal  heating,  a  criterion  now   nearly  30  years  out  of  date  and  inapplicable  today,´  in  reference  to  the  current  limits  governing  radiation  utilized   by  WiFi.    The  DOI  letter  discusses  a  number  of  studies  in  which  birds  appear  harmed  by  low-­level  RF  radiation   associated  with  cell  towers  and  other  wireless  technologies,  as  are  planned  by  Google,  Inc.   1

http://www.ntia.doc.gov/files/ntia/us_doi_comments.pdf     FCC  Investigation  of  Current  Exposure  Limits  Underway   With  the  FCC  finally  beginning  re-­evaluation  of  current  irrelevant  and  obsolete  non-­ionizing  RF  exposure   guidelines,  it  seems  imprudent  to  approve  technology  applications  encouraging  global  proliferation  of  RF   microwave  radiation.     In  the  Inquiry  the  FCC  requests  comment  to  determine  whether  its  RF  exposure  limits  and  policies  need  to   be  reassessed.    Since  consideration  of  the  limits  themselves  is  explicitly  outside  of  the  scope  of  ET  Docket   No.  03-­137,  the  FCC  opens  a  new  docket,  ET  Docket  No.  13-­84,  with  the  Inquiry  to  consider  these  limits  in   light  of  more  recent  developments.    The  Inquiry  is  intended  to  open  discussion  on  both  the  currency  of  our   RF  exposure  limits  and  possible  policy  approaches  regarding  RF  exposure.     https://www.fcc.gov/encyclopedia/radio-­frequency-­safety     International  Recognition  of  Need  for  More  Conservative  RF  Safety  Limits   Countries  around  the  world  are  increasingly  recognizing  the  risks  of  RF  radiation  and  advising  action  to  protect   the  public  http://www.cellphonetaskforce.org/?page_id=128.    Even  the  U.S.,  as  cited  above,  is  in  the  process  of   reviewing  RF  exposure  guidelines.    Countries  such  as  China,  Russia,  Italy  and  Switzerland  already  have  wireless   radiation  safety  limits  100  times  lower  than  the  United  States.       Canada:  Previous  Safety  Code  6  Inadequate   ,Q-XQH&DQDGLDQ3DUOLDPHQW¶V6WDQGLQJ  Committee  on  Health  (HESA)  issued  a  report  with  12  unanimous   recommendations  for  increased  caution,  investigations,  reporting  and  data  gathering  with  regard  to  RF/EMF  and   ZLUHOHVVGHYLFHV&DQDGD¶V6DIHW\&RGHSURYLGHGJXLGHOLQHVIRU5)H[SRVXUHYLUWXDlly  identical  to  1996  FCC   guidelines  until  recently  (March  2015)  when  Canada  reduced  its  maximum  permissible  exposure  limits  by  nearly   ³The  [HESA]  Committee  agrees  that  the  potential  risks  of  exposure  to  RF  fields  are  a  serious  public  health   issue  that  needs  to  be  brought  to  the  attention  of  Canadians  so  that  they  have  the  knowledge  to  use  wireless   devices  responsibly  and  are  able  to  make  decisions  about  the  use  of  wireless  devices  in  a  manner  that  protects   their  health  and  the  health  of  their  families.´The  Standing  Committee  report  shares  themes  including  cancer,   illness,  fertility,  autism,  public  awareness,  school  environments,  and  medical  responsibilities.  It  discusses  studies   demonstrating  adverse  effects  at  levels  below  Health  Canada's  guidelines.     http://www.parl.gc.ca/Content/HOC/Committee/412/HESA/Reports/RP8041315/412_HESA_Rpt13_PDF/412_H ESA_Rpt13-­e.pdf     World  Health  Organization  (WHO)  Scientists  Warn  of  Increased  Risk  to  Public  Health   We  are  also  concerned  spatial  and  temporal  increases  in  microwave  radiation  caused  by  this  and  other  planned   airborne  Wi-­Fi  deployments  will  be  harmful  to  public  health.    Wireless  technology  operates  using  pulsed   PLFURZDYHUDGLDWLRQ³The  human  body´VD\V'U*-+\ODQG ,QWHUQDWLRQDO,QVWLWXWHRI%LRSK\VLFV1HXVV-­ +RO]KHLP*HUPDQ\ ³is  an  electrochemical  instrument  of  exquisite  sensitivity´QRWLQJWKDW³like  a  radio,  it  can   be  interfered  with  by  incoming  radiation.´  If  a  signal  is  strong  enough  to  operate  a  device,  it  is  strong  enough  to   disturb  every  cell  in  the  human  body.       In  2011,  the  International  Agency  for  Research  on  Cancer  (IARC),  a  committee  of  the  WHO,  classified  RF   radiation  as  a  Group  2B  carcinogen  in  the  same  category  as  lead  and  DDT.    Alarmingly,  several  scientists  who   were  members  of  the  IARC  working  group  involved  with  this  classification  now  conclude  the  risks  are  much   greater  than  originally  thought.    For  example,  Dr.  Dariusz  Leszczynski  warns  that  RF-­EMF  should  be  classified  as   a  Group  2A  carcinogen,  and  Dr.  Lennart  Hardell  reports  that  several  studies  indicate  a  Group  1  classification  is   justified,  placing  RF-­EMF  in  the  same  category  as  tobacco,  asbestos,  and  benzene.       Dr.  Dariusz  Leszczynski  MSc,  DSc,  PhD   https://betweenrockandhardplace.wordpress.com/2014/08/14/carcinogenicity-­of-­cell-­phone-­radiation-­2b-­or-­not-­ 2b/   ³In  conclusion,  I  consider  that  currently  the  scientific  evidence  is  sufficient  to  classify  cell  phone   radiation  as  a  probable  human  carcinogen  ±  $FDWHJRU\LQ,$5&VFDOH7LPHZLOOVKRZZKHWKHUµWKH SUREDEOH¶ZLOOFKDQJHLQWRµWKHFHUWDLQ¶+RZHYHULWZLOOWDNHWHQVRI\HDUVEHIRUHLVVXHLVUHDOO\UHVROYHG 2

In  the  mean  time  we  should  implement  the  Precautionary  Principle.  There  is  a  serious  reason  for  doing   so´     Dr.  Lennart  Hardell  MD,  PhD  http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24192496   ³Based  on  the  Hill  criteria,  glioma  and  acoustic  neuroma  should  be  considered  to  be  caused  by  RF-­EMF   emissions  from  wireless  phones  and  regarded  as  carcinogenic  to  humans,  classifying  it  as  group  1   according  to  the  IARC  classification.  Current  guidelines  for  exposure  need  to  be  urgently  revised´     Statements  like  these  support  our  contention  that  no  new  large-­VFDOHLUUDGLDWLRQRIWKHSXEOLFOLNH*RRJOH¶V proposed  project,  should  be  allowed  prior  to  establishment  of  biologically  protective  RF  safety  limits.    In  fact,   permitting  such  a  project  without  first  updating  RF  safety  limits  to  be  biologically  protective  of  the  whole   population  for  the  exposures  they  are  likely  to  experience  daily  would  be  in  direct  violation  of  the  entire   Nuremberg  Code  of  Ethics  (http://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/archive/nurcode.html).     International  Scientists  Warn  of  High  Risk  and  Multigenerational  Effects   The  1,500-­page  BioInitiative  Report  on  RF/MW  health  effects  was  published  in  2012.    The  authors  are  29   scientists  from  10  countries.    They  reviewed  thousands  of  studies  showing  interference  with  chemical  processes  in   the  body,  implicating  RF/MW  in  a  whole  spectrum  of  alarming  effects  including  genetic  damage,  cancer,  immune   dysfunction,  neurological  injury,  and  infertility  www.bioinitiative.org.     More  recently,  in  2015,  from  40  countries  over  200  scientists  with  over  2,000  peer-­reviewed  journal  articles  to   their  collective  credit  in  the  field  of  biological  impacts  from  RF/EMF  appealed  to  the  U.N.  and  the  WHO  for   greater  precautions  with  regard  to  exposures  from  wireless  technologies.    This  is  the  latest  in  many  such  alerts  to   the  health  effects  of  RF/EMF  exposure  https://www.emfscientist.org/.         A  paper  by  Microwski,  Electromagnetic  Fields:  High  Level  Microwave  Technology  Concerns   http://c4st.org/images/documents/wifi-­in-­schools/doclinks/RFCorrosion,etc-­1.pdf  references  a  study  by,  Magras   and  Xenos  1997,  RF  Radiation-­induced  Changes  in  the  Prenatal  Development  of  Mice   http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9261543.  The  study  indicates  at  environmental  wireless  exposure  levels   ȝ:FPWRȝ:FP ORZHUWKDQWKRVHQRZFRPPRQSODFHRXWGRRUVLQ0HWUR7RURQWR+DPLOWRQ Mississauga,  mice  become  infertile  between  third  and  fifth  generations.         The  continuous  exposure  to  microwave  radiation  proposed  in  this  Google,  Inc.  project  along  with  that  emitted   from  a  myriad  of  wireless  devices  may  have  implications  far  greater  than  we  could  imagine  with  nothing  less  than   the  continuation  of  the  human  race  at  stake.         Violation  of  International  Human  Rights       This  Google,  Inc.  proposal  violates  Article  3  of  The  UN  Declaration  of  Human  Rights,  ratified  by  the  General   Assembly  in  1948,  ZKLFKVWDWHV³everyone  has  the  right  to  life,  liberty  and  security  of  person´Data  exist   showing  RF  radiation  can  cause  serious  biological  effects  at  levels  far  below  the  existing  FCC  RF  limits   (www.bioinitiative.org).    These  include  damage  to  DNA  which  can  lead  to  an  increased  risk  for  cancer  and   deleterious  genetic  mutations  passed  on  to  future  generations.    Decreases  in  sperm  count  and  quality  and  increases   in  miscarriage  and  infertility  have  also  been  demonstrated  in  response  to  exposure  to  RF  radiation.    Although   much  of  the  recent  research  focuses  on  frequencies  in  WiFi  and  cellphone  ranges,  prior  research  is  available   showing  serious  biological  effects  in  the  mm  wavelengths  that  Google,  Inc.  proposes  to  use.         Observed  higher  resonance  frequencies  of  a  living  cell  coincide  with  frequencies  of  radiation  of   communications  satellites.  The  power  densities  and  duration  of  irradiation  created  by  these  satellites  will   significantly  exceed  (by  ten  or  more  orders  of  magnitude²such  irradiation  is  possible  over  the  course  of  a   whole  lifetime)  the  energetic  doses  inducing  changes  in  living  cells.     3

Negative  consequences  of  this  may  be  changes  in  cell  structures  and  physiological  processes,  genetic   changes,  and  alteration  of  psychophysiological  conditions  and  behavior;;   http://www.salzburg.gv.at/2001_kositsky_et_al._-­_ussr_review-­2.pdf).     More  recent  scientific  publications  look  specifically  at  causality,  such  as  0/3DOOLQ³Microwave  Frequency   Electromagnetic  Fields  (EMFs)  Produce  Widespread  Neuropsychiatric  Effects  Including  Depression´ -&KHP Neuroanat.  2015  Aug  20;;  http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0891061815000599).    It  discusses  the   causal  relationship  between  exposure  to  radiation  from  wireless  technology  and  neuropsychiatric  effects.     Mechanisms  of  action  are  also  discussed.         Yakymenko  et  al.  discuss  the  fact  that  RF  radiation  is  documented  in  numerous  studies  to  cause  oxidative  damage   and  discuss  mechanisms  (Low  Intensity  Radiofrequency  Radiation:  A  New  Oxidant  for  Living  Cells;;  Oxid   Antioxid  Med  Sci  2014;;  3(1):1-­3;;     (https://www.researchgate.net/publication/269995792_Low_intensity_radiofrequency_radiation_a_new_oxidant_ for_living_cells).       A  more  recent  study  by  Yakymenko,  et  al.,  2015,  Oxidative  Mechanisms  of  Biological  Activity  of  Low-­intensity   Radiofrequency  Radiation  finds  in  93  of  100  reviewed  studies  a  wide  pathogenic  potential  of  the  induced   Reactive  Oxygen  Species  (ROS)  and  their  involvement  in  cell  signaling  pathways  explains  a  range  of   biological/health  effects  of  low  intensity  RF  radiation,  which  include  both  cancer  and  non-­cancer  pathologies.   Their  concluding  analysis  demonstrates  low-­intensity  RF  radiation  is  an  impressive  oxidative  agent  for  living   cells  with  a  high  pathogenic  potential  and  that  the  oxidative  stress  induced  by  RF  radiation  exposure  should  be   recognized  as  one  of  the  primary  mechanisms  of  the  biological  activity  of  this  kind  of  radiation.     (http://www.mainecoalitiontostopsmartmeters.org/wp-­content/uploads/2015/07/Yakymenko-­et-­al-­2015.pdf)     Lerchl,  et.  al.  in  2015  performed  a  replication  experiment  of  work  done  by  Tilmann,  et.  al.  in  2010  but  increased   the  N.  Their  work:  Tumor  Promotion  by  Exposure  to  Radiofrequency  Electromagnetic  Fields  Below  Exposure   Limits  for  Humans  found  tumors  in  mice  promoted  by  exposures  to  levels  of  RF  at  below  government  exposure   limits  for  the  use  of  mobile  phones.  Numbers  of  tumors  of  the  lungs  and  livers  in  exposed  animals  were   significantly  higher  than  in  sham-­exposed  controls.  In  addition,  lymphomas  were  also  found  to  be  significantly   elevated  by  exposure;;  (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25749340).     Non-­ionizing  radiation  does  act  through  oxidative  mechanisms  on  cells.  Oxidative  mechanisms=formation  of  free   radicals.  Free  radicals  may  cause  cancer.  Therefore  non-­ionizing  radiation  may  cause  cancer.     Replicated  double-­blind  studies  show  that  a  cordless  phone  base  station  operating  at  WiFi  frequencies  can  cause   cardiac  arrhythmias  in  susceptible  individuals  (http://  www.magdahavas.com/wordpress/wp-­ content/uploads/2012/01/Havas-­HRV-­Ramazzini.pdf  and  www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23675629#).     Blanketing  the  continent  with  radiation  that  can  have  such  a  serious,  even  deadly  effect,  is  unethical.    A  study  in   rabbits  found  that  not  only  did  WiFi  change  heart  function  parameters,  but  it  dramatically  changed  the  cardiac   effects  of  both  dopamine  and  epinephrine:    Saili  L,  et  al.    Effects  of  Acute  Exposure  to  WIFI  Signals  (2.45  GHz)   on  Heart  Variability  and  Blood  Pressure  in  Albinos  Rabbit.    Environmental  Toxicology  and  Pharmacology  40   (2015)  600±605;;  (http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1382668915300594).    Therefore,  ubiquitous   RF  radiation  may  not  only  cause  cardiac  emergencies,  but  prevent  treatments  from  working  and  cause  deaths.     The  threat  to  cardiac  health  is  also  supported  by  epidemiological  studies  showing  increased  death  from  cardiac   events  and  heart  disease  -­    Criticism  of  the  Health  Assessment  in  the  ICNRP  Guidelines  for  Radiofrequency  and   Microwave  Radiation  (100  kHz  -­  300  GHz).     (www.electricalpollution.com/documents/Cherry2000EMR_ICNIRP_critique_09-­02.pdf)     Forced  exposure  to  an  agent  that  has  the  effects  discussed  above  and  enumerated  in  the  resources  listed  above   would  have  to  be  considered  as  violations  of  the  Nuremberg  Code  of  Ethics   (http://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/archive/nurcode.html *RRJOH,QF¶VSURMHFWZRXOGIRUFHVXFKDQH[SRVXUH     Furthermore,  this  proposal  violates  Article  25  RI,QWHUQDWLRQDO+XPDQ5LJKWV  ZKLFKVWDWHV³Everyone  has  the   right  to  a  standard  of  living  adequate  for  the  health  and  well-­being  of  himself  and  of  his  family,  including  food,   4

clothing,  housing  and  medical  care  and  necessary  social  services,  and  the  right  to  security  in  the  event  of   unemployment,  sickness,  disability,  widowhood,  old  age  or  other  lack  of  livelihood  in  circumstances  beyond  his   control´       Exposure  to  an  agent  that  disrupts  hormones,  sleep,  cardiac,  and  neurological  function,  and  has  forced  numerous   people  from  their  homes  and  into  poverty  is  an  obvious  violation  of  numerous  fundamental  rights  which  are    to  be   universally  protected  according  to  The  U.N.  Declaration  of  Human  Rights.           Violation  of  U.N.  Convention  on  the  Rights  of  the  Child     Under  the  Convention  on  the  Rights  of  the  ChildVWDWHVFRXQWULHVDUHUHVSRQVLEOHIRUDFWLQJLQWKHLUFKLOGUHQ¶VEHVW LQWHUHVW,QWKLVFDVHWKDWZRXOGPHDQGHQ\LQJ*RRJOH,QF¶VUHTXHVWIRUDQH[SHULPHQWDOSHUPLWWREODQNHWWKH country  in  RF  radiation.         In  a  letter  to  Congress,  the  American  Academy  of  Pediatrics  stated:     ³Children  are  disproportionately  affected  by  environmental  exposures,  including  cell  phone  radiation.   7KHGLIIHUHQFHVLQERQHGHQVLW\DQGWKHDPRXQWRIIOXLGLQDFKLOG¶VEUDLQFRPSDUHGWRDQDGXOW¶VEUDLQ could  allow  children  to  absorb  greater  quantities  of  RF  energy  deeper  into  their  brains  than  adults´   http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/view?id=7520941318     No  child  should  be  forced  to  be  exposed  to  RF  radiation  and  therefore  forced  to  incur  an  increased  risk  of  cancer,   functional  impairment  leading  to  ill  health  or  cognitive  impairment,  or  genetic  damage  in  their  children.     $Q\RIWKHVHRXWFRPHVZKLFKUHVHDUFKVXSSRUWVDVOLNHO\YLRODWHFKLOGUHQ¶VULJKWVElectromagnetic  Radiation,   Health  and  Children  2014  by  Dr.  Erica  Mallery-­Blythe  (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sNFdZVeXw7M)  is  a   must-­watch  presentation  about  the  hazard  that  RF  radiation  emitted  by  wireless  technology  poses  to  children.     Dr.  Mallery-­%O\WKH¶VSUHVHQWDWLRQUHIHUHQFHVVHYHUDO81&RQYHQWLRQVRQWKH5LJKWVRIWKH&KLOGWKDWZRXOGEH violated  by  this  project  including:     Article  3  (best  interests  of  a  child)  The  best  interests  of  a  child  must  be  a  top  priority  in  all  decisions  and  actions   that  affect  children.     Article  23  (children  with  a  disability)  A  child  with  a  disability  has  the  right  to  live  a  full  and  decent  life  with   dignity,  and,  as  far  as  possible,  independence  and  to  play  an  active  part  in  the  community.  Governments  must  do   all  that  they  can  to  support  disabled  children  and  their  families.       Article  24  (health  and  services)  Every  child  has  the  right  to  the  best  possible  health.  Governments  must  provide   good  quality  health  care,  clean  water,  nutritious  food  and  a  clean  environment  and  education  on  health  and  well-­ being  so  that  children  can  stay  healthy       Article  28  (right  to  education)  Every  child  has  a  right  to  education.       The  United  Federation  of  Teachers,  representing  200  000  members,  currently  provides  information  on  their   website  advising  members  to  reduce  to  RF  radiation,  with  resources  for  pregnant  mothers  in  order  to  protect    their   XQERUQFKLOGUHQQRWLQJWKDW³Wireless  radiation  is  emitted  by  the  myriad  of  wireless  devices  we  encounter  every   day.  It  was  once  thought  to  be  relatively  harmless.  However,  we  now  know  that  wireless  radiation  can  cause  non-­ thermal  biological  effects  as  well,  including  damage  to  cells  and  DNA,  even  at  the  lowest  levels.´ (http://www.uft.org/our-­rights/wireless-­radiation).   $%ULHIIURPWKH&DQDGLDQ7HDFKHUV¶)HGHUDWLRQ³7KH8VHRI:L)LLQ6FKRROV  ZDUQVWKDW³7HDFKHUVDQG school  communities  have  not  been  informed  regarding  the  implementation  of  WiFi  and  any  inherent  potential   hazards´DQGJRRQWRVKDUHWKDW³Teachers  are  rightly  concerned  for  their  personal  safety  and  the  safety  of  the   children  in  their  care´(http://www.ctf-­fce.ca/Research-­Library/wifi-­final-­2014-­ENG.pdf).   5

    Violation  of  U.N.  Convention  on  the  Rights  of  Persons  with  Disabilities     Increasing  numbers  of  countries,  such  as    Sweden  and  France,  (as  do  the  Canadian  Human  Rights  Commssion  and   European  Parliament)  recognize  Electrohypersensitivity  (EHS)  as  an  environmentally  induced  functional   impairment  or  disability  triggered  by  exposure  to  electromagnetic  fields  (including  RF).    Continental  or  global   WiFi  would  contravene:  Article  1  ³promote,  protect  and  ensure  the  full  and  equal  enjoyment  of  all  human  rights   and  fundamental  freedoms  by  all  persons  with  disabilities,  and  to  promote  respect  for  their  inherent  dignity´ $UWLFOH³Full  and  effective  participation  and  inclusion  in  society´$UWLFOH  VWDWHV³Parties  shall  take  all   effective  legislative,  administrative,  judicial  or  other  measures  to  prevent  persons  with  disabilities,  on  an  equal   basis  with  others,  from  being  subjected  to  torture  or  cruel,  inhuman  or  degrading  treatment  or  punishment´DQG violate  the  intent  of  many  more  Articles,  since  the  planet  would  be  blanketed  with  microwave  radiation  that  those   suffering  EHS  could  not  escape.     The  European  Economic  and  Social  Committee  (EESC)  is  an  E.U.  advisory  body  comprising  representatives  of   ZRUNHUV¶DQGHPSOR\HUV¶RUJDQL]DWLRQVDQGRWKHULQWHUHVWJURXSV.    It  issues  opinions  on  E.U.  issues  to  the   European  Commission,  the  Council  of  the  E.U.,  and  the  European  Parliament,  thus  acting  as  a  bridge  between  the   E.U.'s  decision-­making  institutions  and  E.U.  citizens.    In  February  2015,  a  formal  letter  of  notice  was  sent  to  the   EESC  by  the  Radiation  Research  Trust  (based  in  U.K.)  and  approximately  90  other  organizations  from  around  the   world  in  support  of  millions  of  people,  estimated  to  be  between  22,000,000  and  37,000,000  throughout  Europe   currently  suffering  EHS  due  to  exposure  to  the  proliferation  of  RF  emissions  and  emitters  (i.e.,  mobile  phones,   DECT  cordless  phones,  cordless  baby  monitors,  phone  masts,  WiFi,  smart  meters,  the  smart  grid,  et  al.)   (http://www.radiationresearch.org/images/rrt_articles/EM-­Radiation-­Research-­Trust-­Letter-­of-­Notice-­Served-­on-­ Mr-­Richard-­Adams.pdf).       Some  researchers  estimate  approximately  3%  of  the  population  has  severe  symptoms  of  EHS  and  another  35%  of   the  population  has  moderate  symptoms  such  as  impaired  immune  system  and  chronic  illness  (Havas,  2007).     Hallberg  and  Oberfeld  published  in  Electromagnetic  Biology  and  Medicine  (2006)  historical  EHS  data  and  project   if  past  trends  continue  that  50%  of  the  total  population  is  expected  to  suffer  due  to  EHS  by  year  2017   (http://www.next-­up.org/pdf/EHS2006_HallbergOberfeld.pdf).     &DQDGLDQV)RU6DIH7HFKQRORJ\ &67 SRLQWVRXW³EHS  is  accepted  as  a  functional  impairment  in  Sweden  and   the  Canadian  Human  Rights  Commission  recognizes  it  as  an  environmental  sensitivity  and  classifies  it  as  a   disability.´:LWKVRPHFRXQWULHVDOUHDG\UHFRJQL]LQJWKHPHGLFDOQHHGVRIWKRVHDIIHFWHGE\(+6DQGWKH potential  for  millions  of  people  around  the  world  to  suffer  EHS  from  increased  exposure  to  radiation  from   wireless  technology,  further  proliferation  of  wireless  technology  on  a  wide  scale  is  unacceptable.         Jenny  Fry  (age  15)  hanged  herself  when  her  school  refused  to  understand  that  being  in  classrooms  with  WiFi   caused  her  to  experience  serious  physical  discomfort  and  harassed  and  bullied  her  by  requiring  her  to  serve   detentions  for  leaving  classes  due  to  WiFi  induced  symptoms  in  rooms  where  she  experienced  intense  functional   impairment  (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-­news/school-­girl-­found-­hanged-­after-­suffering-­from-­ allergy-­to-­wifi-­a6755401.html).         ,QWHUQDWLRQDO+XPDQ5LJKWV$UWLFOHVWDWHVWKDW³  Everyone  has  the  right  to  education´3HRSOHZLWK GLVDELOLWLHVDQGIXQFWLRQDOLPSDLUPHQWVOLNH-HQQ\¶VKDYHDULJKWWRJRWRVFKRROLQDQHQYLURQPHQWIUHHIURP5) radiation,  in  a  school  that  will  not  make  them  sick.  Her  rights,  like  the  rights  of  all  those  experiencing  this  type  of   functional  impairment,  should  be  protected  under  the  Universal  Declaration  of  Human  Rights.     0DQ\RWKHUSHUVRQVH[SHULHQFHVLPLODUIXQFWLRQDOLPSDLUPHQWZKHQH[SRVHGWR5)UDGLDWLRQ³3DUHQWV6XH School,  Claim  Wi-­)L0DNHV6RQ´  (https://www.yahoo.com/parenting/parents-­sue-­school-­claim-­wi-­fi-­makes-­son-­ sick-­127644771007.html ³:L)LLQ6FKRROV+RZ6DIH´ http://www.publicnewsservice.org/2014-­09-­22/health-­ issues/wifi-­in-­schools-­how-­safe/a41810-­1 DQG³Maryland  women  suffers  acute  radiation  exposure  from  a  bank  of   smart  meWHUV´  (https://www.youtube.com/watch?x-­yt-­cl=84503534&x-­yt-­ts=1421914688&v=F9QZuWPw6Y0).     6

The  EUROPAEM  EMF  Guideline  2015  for  the  prevention,  diagnosis  and  treatment  of  EMF-­related  health   problems  and  illnesses  has  found:  "The  health  problems  may  range  in  severity  from  benign,  temporary  symptoms,   such  as  slight  headaches  or  paresthesia  around  the  ear,  e.g.  when  using  a  cell  phone,  or  flu-­like  symptoms  after   maybe  some  hours  of  whole  body  EMF  exposure,  to  severe,  debilitating  symptoms  that  drastically  impair  physical   and  mental  health.  It  has  to  be  stressed  that,  depending  on  the  individual  state  of  susceptibility,  EHS  symptoms   often  occur  only  occasionally,  but  over  time  they  may  increase  in  frequency  and  severity.  On  the  other  hand,  if  a   detrimental  EMF  exposure  is  sufficiently  reduced,  the  body  has  a  chance  to  recover  and  EHS  symptoms  will  be   reduced  or  will  vanish."  (http://www.degruyter.com/view/j/reveh.2015.30.issue-­4/reveh-­2015-­0033/reveh-­2015-­ 0033.xml)       Environmental  Impacts     A  parade  of  studies  continue  to  be  published  implicating  wireless  technology  in  the  die-­off  of  forests,  the  demise   of  frogs,  bats,  and  honey  bees,  the  threatened  extinction  of  the  house  sparrow,  and  damage  to  the  DNA  of  the   human  species.    It  is  vital  to  the  continuation  of  life  that  large  parts  of  Earth  are  spared  the  incessant  radiation  that   accompanies  wireless  technologies.     ‡ ³7KH5HSRUWRQ3RVVLEOH,PSDFWVRI&RPPXQLFDWLRQ7RZHUVRQ:LOGOLIH,QFOXGLQJ%LUGVDQG%HHV´ commissioned  on  30th  August  2010  by  the  Ministry  of  Environment  and  Forest,  Government  of  India    http://www.moef.nic.in/downloads/public-­information/final_mobile_towers_report.pdf     ‡ ³,PSDFWVRIUDGLR-­frequency  electromagnetic  field  (RF-­EMF)  from  cell  phone  towers  and  wireless  devices   on  biosystem  and  ecosystem  ±  DUHYLHZ´  http://www.biolmedonline.com/Articles/Vol4_4_2012/Vol4_4_202-­216_BM-­8.pdf     ‡ %DOPRUL$³(OHFWURPDJQHWLFSROOXWLRQIURPSKRQHPDVWV(IIHFWVRQZLOGOLIH´Pathophysiology  (2009),   doi:10.1016/j.pathophys.2009.01.007  http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19264463     ‡ October  31,  2014  presentation  to  the  Manitoba  Entomological  Society,  reviewing  91  studies  on  the  effects   of  RF/MW  radiation  on  honey  bees,  insects,  birds,  etc:   https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/mobilfunk_newsletter/0RUPGTI4qQY     United  Nations  Rio  Declaration  on  Environment  and  Development   The  Precautionary  Principle  as  drawn  up  in  Rio  in  1992  -­  the  Rio  Declaration:  http://www.gdrc.org/u-­ gov/precaution-­7.html     In  order  to  protect  the  environment,  the  precautionary  approach  shall  be  widely  applied  by  States  according  to   their  capabilities.  Where  there  are  threats  of  serious  or  irreversible  damage,  lack  of  full  scientific  certainty   shall  not  be  used  as  a  reason  for  postponing  cost-­effective  measures  to  prevent  environmental  degradation.     Principle  15  codified  for  the  first  time  at  the  global  level  the  precautionary  approach,  which  indicates  that  lack   of  scientific  certainty  is  no  reason  to  postpone  action  to  avoid  potentially  serious  or  irreversible  harm  to  the   environment.  Central  to  principle  15  is  the  element  of  anticipation,  reflecting  a  requirement  that  effective   environmental  measures  need  to  be  based  upon  actions  which  take  a  long-­term  approach  and  which  might   anticipate  changes  on  the  basis  of  scientific  knowledge.         From  the  U.N.  General  Assembly:  Resolution  adopted  by  the  General  Assembly  July  2012  66/288   The  Future  We  Want   We  recognize  the  importance  of  strengthening  international,  regional  and  national  capacities  in  research  and   technology  assessment,  especially  in  view  of  the  rapid  development  and  possible  deployment  of  new   technologies  that  may  also  have  unintended  negative  impacts,  in  particular  on  biodiversity  and  health,  or  other   unforeseen  consequences.   http://www.un.org/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=A/RES/66/288&Lang=E   7

  An  ETC  Group  Press  Release  UN  Moves  Towards  an  Early  Listening  System  VKDUHV³The  decision  paves  the  way   for  a  badly  needed  early  warning  system  on  the  impacts  of  new  technologies´DQGH[SODLQV     ETC  Group  proposed  the  creation  of  a  technology  assessment  capacity  in  the  UN  in  the  lead  up  to  the  2012   Rio  Summit.  At  that  time,  the  proposal  was  backed  by  the  G-­77  and  China  and  a  few  OECD  states  such  as   Sweden  and  Norway.  The  Summit  concluded  with  a  surprisingly  strong  call  for  technology  assessment  from   local  to  global  levels  warning  that  new  technologies  could  pose  significant  health  and  environmental  risks.   http://www.etcgroup.org/content/un-­moves-­towards-­technology-­early-­listening-­system     And  from  The  Lancet:     Planetary  health  is  a  new  science  that  is  only  beginning  to  draw  the  coordinates  of  its  interests  and  concerns.   It  demands  new  coalitions  and  partnerships  across  many  different  disciplines  to  meet  the  pervasive  knowledge   failures  identified  by  this  Commission.  It  demands  new  attention  to  governance  and  implementation.  And,   perhaps  most  of  all,  it  demands  more  creative  imagination  among  scientists  and  practitioners  working  in   health²redefining  the  meaning  of  human  progress,  rethinking  the  possibilities  for  human  cooperation,  and   revitalising  the  prospects  for  the  health  of  human  civilizations.  (par  7)     and       Second,  planetary  health  concerns  the  natural  systems  within  which  our  species  exists²for  example,  the   health  and  diversity  of  the  biosphere.  Human  beings  live  within  a  safe  operating  space  of  planetary  existence.   If  the  boundaries  of  that  space  are  breached,  the  conditions  for  our  survival  will  be  diminished."  Currently,   natural  systems  are  being  degraded  to  an  extent  unprecedented  in  history,  with  known  and  as  yet  unknown   and  unquantified  effects  on  human  health.  (par  2)                  http://www.thelancet.com/pdfs/journals/lancet/PIIS0140-­6736(15)61038-­8.pdf       Insurance  Companies  Warn  of  Large  Losses  Due  To  Electromagnetic  Fields     We  also  note  that  insurance  in  the  event  of  injury  due  to  RF/MW  radiation  is  not  likely  to  be  adequate  ±  see  pages   1  and  2  in  the  document  at  the  following  link:   http://www.gao.gov/assets/600/591391.pdf     Stop  Smart  Meters  UK  shares  that³Insurance  Firm,  Swiss  Re,  Warns  of  Large  LRVVHVIURP³Unforeseen   CRQVHTXHQFHV´RIWireless  Technologies:  http://stopsmartmeters.org.uk/insurance-­firm-­swiss-­re-­warns-­of-­large-­ losses-­from-­unforeseen-­health-­claims-­due-­to-­wireless-­technologies/  (Source:  swissre.com)     Specialists  from  the  Emerging  Risks  team  at  leading  global  reinsurance  firm,  Swiss  Re,  are  warning  the   LQVXUDQFHLQGXVWU\WKDW³XQIRUHVHHQFRQVHTXHQFHVRIHOHFWURPDJQHWLFILHOGV´FRXOGOHDGWRDUDIWRIFODLPVDQG significant  product  liability  losses  in  the  next  10  years.       In  LWV6ZLVV5H621$5(PHUJLQJ5LVNVUHSRUWZKLFKFRYHUVULVNVWKDWFRXOG³impact  the  insurance   industry  in  the  future´WKHFRPSDQ\FDWHJRUL]HVWKHLPSDFWRIKHDOWKFODLPVUHODWHGWRHOHFWURPDJQHWLFILHOGV (0)V DVµKLJK¶,WDFNQRZOHGJHVUHFHQWUHSRUWVRIFRXUWV¶UXOLQJLQIDYRURIFODLPDQWVZKRKDYHH[SHULHQFHG KHDOWKGDPDJHIURPPRELOHSKRQHVDQGDOVRVD\VWKDWDQ[LHW\RYHUULVNVUHODWHGWR(0)VLV³RQWKHULVH´     The  document  states  that  whilst  the  majority  of  the  topics  covered  in  its  pages  werHRI³PHGLXPLPSDFW´ health  issues  associated  with  EMFs  sit  in  the  highest  impact  category.  Other  topics  discussed  include  the   dangers  of  cyber  attacks,  power  blackouts,  workplace  safety  and  Big  Data  all  of  which  are  exacerbated  and/or   added  to  with  the  ill-­FRQFHLYHG³VPDUW´PHWHULQJSURJUDPV     /OR\G¶VOLVWHGKD]DUGVIURPQHZWHFKQRORJLHVLQFOXGLQJ(0)LQLWV7RS5LVNV&RYHUDJHIRU5)(0) injuries  typically  related  to  cell  phones  and  cell  towers  is  now  categorically  excluded.    In  their  2013  Risk  Report,   8

new  technology  risks  have  increased  slightly  in  risk  rank.    It  is  worth  noting  these  risks  are  classified  under   Environmental  (i.e.,  does  the  applicant  expect  to  have  an  adverse  environmental  impact?)  as  distinct  from  the   /OR\G¶VDSSUDLVDORIF\Eersecurity  risks  (also  applicable  to  Google,  Inc.  and  rated  much  higher  risk).   http://www.lloyds.com/~/media/Files/News%20and%20Insight/Risk%20Insight/Risk%20Index%202013/Report/ Lloyds%20Risk%20Index%202013report100713.pdf     GUARDS  asserts  the  Google,  Inc.  project  would  intensify  these  concerns  on  a  continental  and  global  scale.     Interference  with  Airplane  Instrumentation  and  Hazard  to  Flight  Crew  and  Passengers     The  proposed  Google,  Inc.  project  locates  transmitters  at  altitude  62,000  feet.    Commercial  airspace  extends  to   60,000  feet.    The  Google  transmitters  would  broadcast  at  up  to  300  kW  immediately  overhead  all  aircraft,  whereas   a  cell  tower  would  be  only  1  to  4  kW.    It  seems  likely  that  these  very  powerful  transmitters  pose  a  risk   to  commercial  aircraft.         Wireless  signals  are  already  causing  interference  with  aircraft  systems.    An  FAA  Airworthiness  Directive  (or  AD)   points  out  that  WiFi  on  board  aircraft  is  blanking  out  display  units  in  the  cockpit  (http://www.b737.org.uk/ad-­ 2014-­20-­06.pdf,  https://s3.amazonaws.com/public-­inspection.federalregister.gov/2014-­23231.pdf).    The  FAA  has   given  a  five-­year  time  limit  for  airlines  to  replace  all  these  display  units.    However,  even  new  units  may  not  be   able  to  withstand  the  strength  of  signal  that  the  Google,  Inc.  project  would  expose  them  to.    There  is  reason  for   FRQFHUQEHFDXVHWKHVDPH$'PHQWLRQV³7KHLQWHQWRIWKLV$'LVWRHOLPLQDWHWKLVNQRZQVXVFHSWLELOLW\RIWKH phase  3  DUs  to  RF  transmissions,  including  those  from  sources  outside  the  airplane.  This  susceptibility  is  not   limited  to  WiFi  transmissions,  but  has  been  verified  to  exist  in  a  range  of  the  RF  spectrum  used  by  mobile  satellite   communications,  cell  phones,  air  surveillance  and  weather  radaUDQGRWKHUV\VWHPV´     Furthermore,  the  signal  strength  will  certainly  be  strong  enough  to  cause  biological  functional  impairment  of  the   flight  crew  and  the  passengers.    Since  biological  functional  impairment  induced  by  exposure  to  RF  radiation  from   wireless  technology  can  range  from  minor  to  serious,  even  including  death,  it  is  of  paramount  importance  for  the   safety  of  air  travel  that  the  permit  be  denied.       NEPA  and  Environmental  Review     This  is  major  Federal  action  significantly  affecting  the  quality  of  human  environment;;  as  such,  a  NEPA  review   ZRXOGEHWULJJHUHG7KHSRWHQWLDOHQYLURQPHQWDODQGKXPDQKHDOWKKD]DUGVIURP*RRJOH,QF¶VSURMHFW necessitate  comprehensive  NEPA  review  [Envtl.  Def.  Fund  v.  Tenn.  Valley  Auth.,  468  F.2d  1164,  1174  (6th  Cir.   1972)]  and,  specifically,  a  formal  Environmental  Impact  Statement  (EIS).    The  EIS  should  include  a  full  review  of   environmental  effects,  as  well  as  human  health  and  safety.    The  FCC  has  an  obligation  to  evaluate  whether   ³services  or  capabilities  are  essential  to  public  health,  safety,  or  in  the  public  interest´ +55HSRUW1R-­204,   p.  94),  so  must  protect  the  public  from  possible  harm  caused  by  radiofrequency  radiation.         The  FCC  is  not  entitled  to  essentially  disregard  comments  that  do  not  provide  global  cost-­benefit  analysis  (Scenic   Hudson  v.  Federal  Power  Commission).  The  Commission  has  an  affirmative  duty  to  inquire  into  and  consider  all   relevant  facts.    The  FCC  must  use  government  resources  to  perform  the  relevant  analysis.    The  FCC  should   request  the  EPA  use  its  National  Risk  Management  Research  Laboratory  resources  and  experts  to  conduct  all  cost   analyses  necessary.     This  proposal  also  triggers  the  need  for  a  Memoranda  of  Understanding  (MOU)  with  U.S.  Fish  and  Wildlife   Service  under  Executive  Order  13186  concerning  effects  on  migratory  birds.    Legal  issues  and  liability  aside,  the   cumulative  and  additive  environmental  and  health  risks  of  microwave  radiation  (MWR)  saturation  from  the  upper   atmosphere  are  extremely  high.    Approval  of  such  technology  may  never  be  appropriate  given  the  high  risks  to   societies  but  certainly  at  present,  given  the  current  state  of  our  knowledge,  permit  approval  would  be  premature.           Conclusion   9

  Increased  health  care  costs,  increased  disability  and  associated  costs,  decreased  productivity  from  missed  or   substandard  work  performance,  lost  or  compromised  ecological  services  and  agricultural  harm  from  RF-­EMF   exposure  could  cost  societies  billions  of  dollars.    Not  only  is  RF-­EMF  proliferation  bad  for  health  and  the   environment  directly,  this  damage  has  a  major  economic  cost  as  well.           3OHDVHFRQVLGHURXUFRPPHQWVDVUHDVRQVDSHUPLWIRU*RRJOH,QF¶VSURSRVHGSURMHFWVKRXOGEHGHQLHG,QEULHI those  reasons  include  insurance  industry  recognition  of  serious  risk  to  health,  cyber  and  national  security,   demonstrated  detrimental  biological  effects  at  levels  far  below  existing  inadequate  RF  safety  limits,   UDGLRIUHTXHQF\UDGLDWLRQFXUUHQWO\FODVVLILHG³possible  human  carcinogen´E\WKH:RUOG+HDOWK2UJDQL]DWLRQ legal  implications  related  to  irradiating  the  entire  continent  without  informed  consent,  personal  security  risks,  and   resultant  violations  of  U.N.  Conventions  and  Universal  Declaration  of  Human  Rights.     Because  the  potential  global  effects  of  this  and  similar  proposals  from  Facebook,  SpaceX  and  others  are   devastating,  any  consideration  must  proceed  only  with  maximum  levels  of  due  diligence,  including  full  public   access  to  application  documents  and  all  project  specifications²not  heavily  redacted  secretive  applications  like   GoRJOH,QF¶V7KHSRWHQWLDOGDQJHUVWRVRFLHW\RXWZHLJKDQ\SURSULHWDU\ULJKWVRI*RRJOH,QF7KHSXEOLF should  have  a  chance  to  evaluate  and  comment  on  the  full  application.           Global  wireless  access,  with  all  its  serious  safety  problems,  is  an  unacceptable  hazard.    Widely  available  fast   internet  access  is  a  goal  that  can  be  safely  attained  using  various  forms  of  cabled  connectivity.     GUARDS  respectfully  requests  Google,  Inc.'s  application  be  denied.     Sincerely,     Ed  Friedman   42  Stevens  Rd.   Bowdoinham,  ME  04008   207-­666-­3372   edfomb@comcast.net       Marcey  Kliparchuk   10859-­147  Street   Edmonton,  AB,  Canada,  T5N  3E1   780-­760-­0872   marcey.klip@yahoo.ca     GUARDS  is  an  international  coalition  against  global  WiFi  from  space,  a  complex  technology  of  radiation  and   toxic  chemicals  endangering  all  life  on  Earth. 10


Document Created: 2560-05-11 00:00:00
Document Modified: 2560-05-11 00:00:00
© 2025 FCC.report
This site is not affiliated with or endorsed by the FCC