Page 39 - Winter2014

continuously in cafés, stores, libraries, classrooms, on buses and trains, and from personal Wi-Fi enabled devices (such
as iPads, tablets, and PDAs).
The largest single source of community-wide, pervasive RFR yet rolled out is the “smart meter” infrastructure. This
program places a wireless device (like a mini-mobile phone base station) on the wall, replacing the electromechanical
(spinning dial) meter. They are to be installed on every home and classroom in every building with an electric meter.
Utilities from California to Maine have installed tens of millions already, despite the deep alarm of experts and enormous
public resistance. The wireless meters produce spikes of pulsed radio frequency radiation continuously, and in typical
operation, will saturate living spaces at levels that can be much higher than those already reported to cause bioeffects
and adverse health effects (utilities can only say they are compliant with outdated federal safety standards, which may
or may not always be true—see http://sagereports.com/smart-meter-rf). These meters, depending on where they are
placed relative to occupied space in the home or classroom, can produce RFR exposure levels similar to those within
the first 100 feet to 600 feet of a mobile phone base station (cell tower).
The cumulative RFR burden within any community is largely unknown. Both involuntary sources (like cell towers,
smart meters, and second-hand radiation from the use of wireless devices by others) plus voluntary exposures from per-
sonal use of cell and cordless phones, wireless routers, electronic baby surveillance monitors, wireless security systems,
wireless hearing aids, and wireless medical devices like implanted insulin pumps, all add up. No one is tallying up these
combined exposure levels. Billions of new RFR transmitters from the “smart” meter rollout alone will raise the baseline
RFR levels and add significantly to the existing RFR background.

DO WE KNOW ENOUGH TO TAKE ACTION?
There is more evidence than we need. Over the last five years, new scientific studies indicate the situation is much
worse than in 2007 and yet people around the world have so much more daily exposure than even five years ago. Ex-
posures are linked to a variety of adverse health outcomes that may have significant public health consequences. When
considering billions of people world-wide, no argument to maintain the status quo can be persuasive now.
In twenty-one technical chapters of the BioInitiative Report 2012 update, the contributing authors discuss the content
and implications of 1800 new studies. Overall, there is reinforced scientific evidence of risk where there is chronic expo-
sure to low-intensity electromagnetic fields and to wireless technologies (radio frequency radiation including microwave
radiation).
There is more evidence in 2012 that such exposures damage DNA, interfere with DNA repair, and are hazardous
to the nervous system. More and better studies on the effects of mobile phone base stations (wireless antenna facilities
or cell towers) report lower RFR levels over time can result in adverse health outcomes. An increasing number of studies
have examined the effects of wireless laptops as well as cell phones worn on the belt or in the pocket of men on sperm
quality, motility, and sperm death. A dozen new studies focus on the fetus, infant and young child, and child-in-school.
The levels of exposure we face in 2012 are higher, and have crept into everyday life, even for children. The levels at
which undesirable effects on health and well-being are seen is much lower. There is much greater involuntary exposure,
and it is nearly unavoidable even for people who choose not to “go wireless” via second-hand radiation effects. Safe
forms of communication by land-line telephone are being phased out without general public knowledge or agreement.
There is no informed consent for consumers (warning labels on cell phones, for example, have been defeated by telecom
industry lobby groups). It is still difficult or impossible for consumers to get reliable information on levels of exposure from
wireless devices. It is simply beyond the reach of people to identify where excessively high levels of exposure occur in
their communities, and it is very rare for a county or state health department to accommodate requests for information
or provide measurements.
The range of possible health effects that are adverse with chronic exposures has broadened. The most serious health
endpoints that have been reported to be associated with extremely low frequency (ELF) and/or radio frequency radia-
tion (RFR) include childhood and adult leukemia, childhood and adult brain tumors, and increased risk of Alzheimer’s
and amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS). In addition, there are reports of increased risk of breast cancer in both men and
women, genotoxic effects, pathological leakage of the blood–brain barrier, altered immune function including increased
allergic and inflammatory responses, miscarriage, and some cardiovascular effects. Insomnia is reported in studies of
people living in very low-intensity RFR environments with Wi-Fi and cell tower-level exposures.
We could do otherwise. Each wireless version had a wired counterpart with none of the wireless-associated health
effects. It is time to re-think the wireless tsunami and educate people about health, privacy and security risks. It is past
time to develop new safety standards. Now we must look to less harmful ways to communicate, move ourselves from
place to place, shop, sleep, recreate, save energy and educate our children in school.
Adapted from the 2012 BioInitiative Report and reprinted with permission.

Wise Traditions WINTER 2014 Wise Traditions 35

145881_text.indd 35 12/23/14 12:16 AM