EMF-L members lead Congressional briefing
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: EMF-L members lead Congressional briefing (Kelley)..
Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2001 19:33:13 -0500
From: Roy Beavers <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Organization: EMF-L List
Most of the EMF leaders that carried out the following congressional (staff) briefing are members of this list...... (Two news stories below.)
They are doing one WHALE of a good job at forcing attention where MUCH attention is needed!!! Congressional awareness that the EMF issue is badly in need of research funding.....
HOWEVER!!! The need is NOT MERELY for funding $$$$$$, but for INDEPENDENT research. Research that will be conducted totally OUTSIDE of the purview or usual control of the vested interests: The electrical and telecom industries AND the government ... that have controlled virtually all of the (U.S.) research in the past.....!!!.
Both industry and government EMF research in the past has been replete with bias and obfuscation that arises out of a maize of CONFLICT OF INTEREST relationships ... between congruent industry and government goals ... and the POLITICAL INFLUENCE staffing that is "business as usual" within the bureaucracies -- including the RICH $$$$$$$$ government bureaucracies, FDA, FCC, EPA, NIH, etc.....!!! I believe the latter is a direct result of the CORRUPTED GOVERNMENT we get under our present campaign finance laws.
I saw that clearly demonstrated, first hand, in the case of the EMF RAPID study..... THAT WAS AN EXAMPLE OF THE KIND OF THROW MONEY INTO THE CORRUPTED GOVERNMENT/INDUSTRY 'SCIENCE' MACHINE THAT WE DO NOT WANT TO SEE AGAIN!!!!
[Please read the guru's Mission Statement which appears on the homepage of his website. That Mission Statement fully describes the problems with the RAPID study..... http://emfguru.com ]
Roy Beavers (EMFguru)
It is better to light a single candle than to curse the darkness.....
PEOPLE ARE MORE IMPORTANT THAN PROFIT$$$$
All that is necessary for evil to prevail is for good men to do nothing.....
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Press coverage on Congressional briefing
Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2001 10:04:53 -0700
From: Libby Kelley <email@example.com>
To: "CWTI Friends and Advisors" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Weighing In On Health
By Allyson Vaughan
July 16, 2001
WASHINGTON—Lookout Mountain in Colorado is known as a quiet, peaceful community, but growing protests over wireless antennas and broadcast towers looming over the residential area are changing that.Now Congress is about to weigh in on the matter. Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., and Rep. Bernard Sanders, I-Vt., will introduce three bills regarding tower and antenna construction, which could have a dramatic impact on the wireless and broadcast industries as well as tower companies themselves.
Two of the bills would restore control over zoning issues involving towers and antennas–for wireless and broadcast use–to local authorities. The FCC currently has the power to pre-empt local restrictions.
A third bill would set aside funding for additional research on the possible harmful effects of radio frequency emissions. As the number of towers increased on Lookout Mountain near Denver in recent years, so did instances of people contracting brain tumors and cancer, contends resident Deb Carney. She told a congressional briefing on Capitol Hill last week that legislation is needed to give control over tower placement to local authorities, instead of the FCC.
The community of about 10,000 people recently objected to tower construction in their area and won their initial fight, which the broadcasters appealed in court. The broadcasters lost but have asked the FCC to pre-empt local zoning authority over the matter. The issue is pending at the commission.
Carney says that it's time for legislative action, stating that legal victories by local residents will mean nothing if the FCC can simply pre-empt local zoning decisions. "We fought this fair and square. We won our zoning battle," she says. Carney could not say how many people in Lookout Mountain have cancer or list the number of towers there, but she contends there is plenty of anecdotal evidence that makes it "unconscionable" to expose residents to more potentially harmful RF emissions. "We're trying to stand up for what our rights are," she says. A neighbor of Carney's died about four years ago from cancer, and Carney has since put up for sale the house she has lived in since 1984. She says that she wants to be out of the line of sight of the cluster of antennas on the mountain.
Libby Kelley, a board member of the EMR Network, a nonprofit organization whose goal is to mitigate hazardous exposure to electromagnetic radiation, says she is alarmed that the FCC doesn't do more to protect the health of citizens in the midst of so much wireless buildout. "Isn't it about time we found out about health and safety issues?" she asks.
A May report issued by the General Accounting Office, the investigative arm of Congress, called for additional research to replicate previous studies that indicated a potential harmful effect from RF exposure from wireless phones. The report also noted, however, that the majority of studies to date do not link wireless phones and cancer.
It's too early to gauge how much support the Leahy-Sanders legislation will generate, but the bill is sure to fuel the debate over RF safety and the proliferation of communication towers.
RCR Wireless News
Lawmakers push bill to fund wireless health research
July 16, 2001
By Jeffrey Silva
WASHINGTONHouse and Senate lawmakers plan to introduce legislation after the August recess that would provide federal funding for mobile-phone health research and repeal a 1996 law prohibiting local officials from considering health as a factor in reviewing tower-siting applications, a top Senate staffer said last week.
The legislation comes as the mobile-phone industry faces increased health-related litigation in courts across the country. Some lawsuits, such as those in Maryland, Georgia, Nevada and California, claim cell phones caused brain tumors. Class-action suits in various states allege industry knew from the start of possible health risks from mobile phones and should now supply consumers with hands-free headsets to reduce injury or compensate those who have already paid for the radiation-protection accessory.
An Illinois state court last week rejected industry’s attempt to block a partial settlement in a health-related privacy case, paving the way to create a first-ever registry of subscribers who believe they’ve been injured by mobile-phone radiation. The database will be managed by Dr. George Carlo, the epidemiologist who headed a $28 million industry-funded research program that found genetic damage from cell-phone radiation. Edward Barron, deputy chief counsel to the Senate Judiciary Committee, said another bill will be offered to return full jurisdiction of broadcast antenna siting to state and local authorities. Mobile-phone antennas are sometimes placed on broadcast towers.
The three bills will be sponsored by Sens. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) and James Jeffords (I-Vt.) and Reps. Bernard Sanders (I-Vt.) and Thomas Tancredo (R-Colo.). The lawmakers hosted a congressional briefing last Thursday, hoping to drum up additional support from colleagues.
Presentations were made by Barron, the EMR Network and individual activists who want local control of antenna siting and stronger federal oversight of health issues associated with mobile-phone and base-station radiation exposure, Dr. Theodore Litovitz, director of bioelectromagnetics research at Catholic University of America and attorney Gerry Lederer. “This [excessive mobile-phone-radiation exposure] enhances the probability of cancer,” said Litovitz.
Litovitz said recent research, some replicated, has documented non-heating, adverse bioeffects from mobile-phone radiation and from electromagnetic fields produced by power lines. Litovitz acknowledged some researchers do not believe mobile phones or power lines cause non-thermal bioeffects. But he said science is gravitating toward the non-thermal view. Federal Communications Commission radiation guidelines for mobile phones and towers do not take non-thermal radiation consequences into effect. “The standards that protect you are based on the heating of tissue. … It’s an enormously important issue,” said Litovitz. Litovitz has funding from millionaire Baltimore lawyer Peter Angelos to study therapeutic applications of radiofrequency radiation. Angelos is involved in brain cancer and headset lawsuits against the mobile-phone industry.
The mobile-phone industry claims the preponderance of scientific studies say cell phonesThe U.S. government is doing very little research, though the National Toxicology Program recently announced it plans to spend $10 million over the next five years on experiments that expose rodents to mobile- phone radiation. FDA is working with the cellular industry on limited studies, but that research has been criticized for possible conflict of interest.
In the past, similar bills championed by the Vermont congressional delegation have not gone far. The bills likely will be referred to the House and Senate commerce committees. Barron said the bills’ sponsors plan to work with Senate Commerce Committee Chairman Ernest Hollings (D-S.C.). Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) refused to consider previous health-antenna siting bills when he headed the panel.
In the House, the Vermont bills will face an uphill battle in getting a hearing from Commerce Committee Billy Tauzin (R-La.), who has championed various pieces of mobile-phone industry legislation.
Council on Wireless Technology Impacts
415 892-1863 (voice)
415 892-3108 (fax)
http://www.energyfields.org (web site)
To join the citizen's call for improved public health protections from man-made electromagnetic radiation (EMR), we urge you to support the EMR Network - http://www.EMRNnetwork.org