Saturday, January 16, 2016
NASA, Navy, Air Force Report Harmful Effects from RF Radiation. Tobacco
NASA Report, 1981
A NASA report published in April 1981, titled “Electromagnetic Field Interactions with the Human Body: Observed Effects and Theories,” discussed EMF and microwave RF radiation caused to humans. Effects of microwave radiation reported: headaches, sleep problems, neurological symptoms, cardiac symptoms, memory problems, increased cholesterol, gastritis, ulcers, increased fasting blood glucose, irritabiity, inability to concentrate, apprehension, and cataracts (clouding of posterior part of lens in those caused by microwave radiation instead of anterior clouding as seen with regular types). Information for the NASA report was collected from over 1,000 written sources that “included journals, conference proceedings, technical reports, books, abstracts, and news items,” http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/
Navy Report, 1971
On October 4, 1971, the Naval Medical Research Institute published a research report,“Bibliography of Reported Biological Phenomena (‘Effects’) and Clinical Manifestations Attributed to Microwave and Radio-Frequency Radiation,” which was a compilation of over 2000 references on the biological responses to RF microwave radiation. It lists well over 100 negative biological effects caused by RF microwave radiation - here's a partial list from their report: corneal damage, tubular degeneration of testicles, brain heating, alteration of the diameter of blood vessels, liver enlargement, altered sex ratio of births, decreased fertility, sterility, altered fetal development, decreased lactation in nursing mothers, altered penal function, death, cranial nerve disorders, seizures, convulsions, depression, insomnia, hand tremors, chest pain, thrombosis, alteration in the rate of cellular division, anorexia, constipation, altered adrenal cortex activity, chromosome aberrations, tumors, altered orientation of animals, birds and fish, loss of hair, and sparking between dental fillings. http://www.magdahavas.com/
wordpress/wp-content/uploads/ 2010/06/Navy_Radiowave_Brief. pdf
Air Force Report, 1994
A June 1994 US Air Force document, titled, “Radiofrequency/Microwave Radiation Biological Effects and Safety Standards: A Review,” acknowledges the non-thermal health effects. Stated in its abstract, “It is known that electromagnetic radiation has a biological effect on human tissue.” The introduction of the report states that “researchers have discovered a number of biological dysfunctions that can occur in living organisms” and that “exposure of the human body to RF/MW [radio frequency/microwave] radiation has many biological implications” that range from “innocuous sensation of warmth to serious physiological damage to the eye,” and added that “there is also evidence that RF/MW radiation can cause cancer.” Biological impacts: “damage to major organs, disruption of important biological processes, and the potential risk of cancer,” among many others which include “mutagenic effects,” “cardiovascular effects,” negative effects on chromosomes, and notes that “Soviet investigators claim that exposure to low-level radiation can induce serious CNS [central nervous system] dysfunctions.” http://www.emfacts.com/2014/
09/us-air-force-rf-review-in- 1988-acknowledges-non-thermal- biological-effects/ https://electroplague.files. wordpress.com/2014/09/rf- microwave-radiation- biological-effects-rome-labs. pdf
What's interesting is that these reports from US government agencies all document negative health effects from microwave RF radiation at levels below thermal thresholds, and they were all published before the 1996 Telecommunications Act was passed by Congress. Section 704 of the TCA disallowed siting decisions for cell tower facilities based on health considerations as long as they don't exceed FCC's limits, which are thermal. The only valid reason for rejection allowed by the TCA is aesthetics, so many cell tower facilities are camouflaged so that people would not see them. This is why cell towers are on school property and next to schools and residential areas, and you don't even know they are there. How could this happen? The 1996 TCA was passed after $50 million dollars in political contributions was made (p. 115, Zapped, by Ann Louise Gittleman, http://www.amazon.
com/Zapped-Shouldnt-Outsmart- Electronic-Pollution/dp/ 0061864285/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8& qid=1452930604&sr=8-2& keywords=zapped ) Since then telecom continues to obtain legislation in their favor, first with 6409a of the Middle Class Tax Relief Act which allows for colocations and approval of an additional 20' to a cell tower, then with AB 57 passing in California which allow for automatic approvals of cell tower applications if they are not processed within a certain time (150 days for new towers, 90 days for colocations) that they are submitted, and now they are lobbying to remove proof of significant gap from the 1996 TCA and replace with capacity.
Even though doctors, scientists, and various groups have made about 1000 submissions asking the FCC to revisit limits since 2012, little has been done by the FCC. ( Proceeding Number 13-84 on the FCC web site. You can see the 1000 submissions here, http://www.saferemr.com/2015_
08_01_archive.html ) Tom Wheeler, ex-President of the CTIA (Cellular Telecommunications and Internet Association) and FCC chairman since 2013, has done nothing but to promote the wireless industry since his appointment by President Obama after Wheeler bundled $700,000 in political contributions to Obama (bundling is a process of consolidating political contributions without having to identify the actual contributors) http://www. huffingtonpost.com/craig- aaron/who-owns-the-media- obamas_b_3313197.html Comcast and Verizon contributed about $1 million to Obama https:// sunlightfoundation.com/blog/ 2014/04/24/obama-bundler-tom- wheeler-helps-his-former- industry-from-fcc-perch/ He approved $5 billion for school Wi-Fi http://www.dailydot. com/politics/fcc-approves- wifi-expansion-schools/ , fined wireless companies paltry amounts ($50,000) for exceeding FCC's thermal limits http://www. journalinquirer.com/ connecticut_and_region/fcc- keeps-secret-records-from- radiation-probe-at-verizon-s/ article_0dbb367e-62d9-11e5- 99da-ebeab2025003.html, and made changes to the Telecom Act to encompass wireless internet in March 2015 (after Net Neutrality passed) when wireless internet was not included in the 1996 TCA prior to that. Tom Wheeler is now helping Verizon to implement 5G https://insidetowers.com/ verizon-and-fcc-work-on-5g/ and pushing higher speeds by fining AT&T a record $100 million in June 2015 for not providing speeds as fast as advertised http://finance. yahoo.com/news/fcc-seeks-100- mn-t-fine-over-unlimited- 174431152.html
Cell towers, cell phones, Wi-Fi, laptops may all be FCC compliant, but understand that FCC limits only means that there is not enough microwave radiation from it to cook you (i.e. cause a thermal effect). FCC limits do NOT protect you from all health effects that are well below the thermal threshholds as found in peer reviewed studies. FCC compliance is limited only to preventing heating effects. Realize that this is the "safety" standard which our government is using to protect our children and all citizens.
You can read more on the FCC in Captured agency: How the Federal Communications Commission is dominated by the industries it presumably regulates written by NormAlster, Cambridge, MA: Edmund J. Safra Center for Ethics, Harvard University. 2015. http://ethics.harvard.
edu/files/center-for-ethics/ files/capturedagency_alster. pdf
Lesson from History of Tobacco
The tobacco industry knew since the '50s that tobacco caused cancer. But they funded scientific research that was intended to obfuscate its effects on health for decades. This has been done by, on the one hand denying the existing evidence, whilst on the other demanding absolute proof of causation and calling for more research. This research, much of which has been covertly funded by the tobacco industry, is designed to look at other causes of cancer and to water down the evidence linking smoking and disease. For example, the industry statements are peppered by fudging comments such as “unresolved” and "inconclusive.," Nothing has been “statistically proven”, no “scientific causality”, and no “conclusive proof”. http://cebp.
aacrjournals.org/content/16/.. . http://www.who.int/tobacco/ media/en/Toba... Sound familiar?
The mobile telecom industry is about twice the size of the tobacco industry, which means the telecom industry is even more powerful. The tobacco industry generated sales of $500 billion globally and $35 billion profit in 2012 http://www.theguardian.
com/business/2012... The mobile telecom industry has generated almost $1 trillion revenue globally. http://www.vodafone. com/content/annualre...
Retraction of: EUROPAEM EMF Guideline 2015 for the prevention, diagnosis and treatment of EMF-related health problems and illnesses
Retraction of: EUROPAEM EMF Guideline 2015 for the prevention, diagnosis and treatment of EMF-related health problems and illnesses
Igor Belyaev1 / Amy Dean2 / Horst Eger3 / Gerhard Hubmann4 / Reinhold Jandrisovits5 / Olle Johansson6 / Markus Kern7 / Michael Kundi8 / Piero Lercher9 / Wilhelm Mosgöller10 / Hanns Moshammer8 / Kurt Müller11 / Gerd Oberfeld12 / Peter Ohnsorge13 / Peter Pelzmann14 / Claus Scheingraber15 / Roby Thill16
1Cancer Research Institute, Slovak Academy of Science, Bratislava, Slovak Republic; and Prokhorov General Physics Institute, Russian Academy of Science, Moscow, Russia
2American Academy of Environmental Medicine, Wichita, Kansas, USA
3Association of Statutory Health Insurance Physicians of Bavaria, Medical Quality Circle “Electromagnetic Fields in Medicine – Diagnostic, Therapy, Environment”, Naila, Germany
4Center for Holistic Medicine “MEDICUS”, Vienna, Austria; and Wiener Internationale Akademie fur Ganzheitsmedizin (GAMED), Vienna, Austria
5Medical Association Burgenland, Environmental Medicine Department, Eisenstadt, Austria
6The Experimental Dermatology Unit, Department of Neuroscience, Karolinska Institute, Stockholm, Sweden
7Medical Quality Circle “Electromagnetic Fields in Medicine – Diagnosis, Treatment and Environment”, Kempten, Germany; and Kompetenzinitiative zum Schutz von Mensch, Umwelt u. Demokratie e.V, Kempten, Germany
8Institute of Environmental Health, Medical University Vienna, Vienna, Austria
9Medical Association Vienna, Environmental Medicine Department, Vienna, Austria
10Institute of Cancer Research Medical University Vienna, Vienna, Austria
11European Academy for Environmental Medicine, Kempten, Germany
12Department of Public Health, Government of Land Salzburg, Austria
13European Academy for Environmental Medicine, Wurzburg, Germany
14Department of Electronics and Computer Science Engineering, HTL Danube City, Vienna, Austria
15Working Group Electro-Biology (AEB), Munich, Germany; and Association for Environmental- and Human-Toxicology (DGUHT), Wurzburg, Germany
16Association for Environmental Medicine (ALMEN) Beaufort, Luxembourg
Corresponding author: Gerd Oberfeld, Department of Public Health, Government of Land Salzburg, Austria, E-mail:(email)
European Academy for Environmental Medicine (EUROPAEM) – EMF working group:
- Published Online:
Retraction of: Igor Belyaev, Amy Dean, Horst Eger, Gerhard Hubmann, Reinhold Jandrisovits, Olle Johansson, Markus Kern, Michael Kundi, Piero Lercher, Wilhelm Mosgöller, Hanns Moshammer, Kurt Müller, Gerd Oberfeld*, Peter Ohnsorge, Peter Pelzmann, Claus Scheingraber and Roby Thill. 2015. EUROPAEM EMF Guideline 2015 for the prevention, diagnosis and treatment of EMF-related health problems and illnesses. Volume 30, issue 4, pages 337–371. (DOI: 10.1515/reveh-2015-0033).
The authors regret to announce the following: The EUROPAEM EMF Guideline 2015 has been retracted by the authors. During the preparation of the EUROPAEM EMF Guideline 2015 several citations were lost and other errors were detected. This was completely unintentional and the authors are very sorry for this. However, the content and conclusions of the Guideline are not altered by this. A revised version will be published as soon as possible.
Loon Attack! Google Balloon Knocks Out Power Lines During Descent
by DEVIN COLDEWEY
What goes up must come down — but with a high-tech, high-altitude balloon,where it comes down isn't always so easy to tell. That's what Google's ambitiousProject Loon was reminded of when one of its floating Internet hot spots knocked out power lines in south-central Washington state.
Last week's incident was first reported in the Yakima Herald Republic shortly after the balloon crashed. Google confirmed Tuesday that the balloon, originally launched in Nevada, was in the process of a controlled landing when it struck power lines around 1 A.M., causing a few local outages.
Project Loon is an experiment in providing Internet access to distant areas by means of long-range wireless transceivers suspended from weather balloons. The floating access points are meant to stay aloft for about three months, travelling at a safe altitude and eventually coming down in more or less predictable fashion.
But a sudden breeze can still knock one off course during descent — which may be what happened to bring this one down near the town of Yakima County town of Harrah.
Google's balloons are operated with FAA approval, and the company said in a statement that "we coordinate with local air traffic control authorities and have a team dedicated to recovering the balloons when they land." In this case, that also meant working with the local utility company, Pacific Power, to fix things up.
Of course, anything from a falling branch to a stray kite can take out a power line, and the problem is usually resolved in short order.
Google Loon Wi-Fi balloon creates panic in New Zealand
Friday, January 15, 2016
Electrosensibilité: des marqueurs qui n’éteignent pas la polémiqueLe 11 janvier 2016 par Romain Loury
Un rapport de l'Anses fin 2016
Ca y est, enfin des marqueurs sanguins de l’électrohypersensibilité: c’est une nouvelle étude du chercheur Dominique Belpomme, publiée fin 2015, qui l’affirme. Si elle ouvre quelques pistes intéressantes, l’étude souffre de failles majeures, dont celle, cruciale, d’une absence de contrôle avec des individus sains.
Publiée dans les Reviews on Environmental Health, cette étudede l’Association pour la recherche thérapeutique anticancéreuse (Artac), présidée par Dominique Belpomme, est revendiquée par ses auteurs comme la première à décrire des marqueurs sanguins de l’électrohypersensibilité aux ondes.
Un espoir pour les patients, qui souffrent d’une absence d’écoute médicale face à un mal dont les mécanismes physiologiques demeurent inconnus, et sans marqueurs biologiques détaillés à ce jour. En bref, une souffrance sans explication officielle, longtemps (et encore) prise pour un mal psychosomatique, voire psychiatrique.
Menée sur 727 patients atteints d’électrohypersensibilité ou de sensibilité chimique multiple, l’étude affirme l’existence de marqueurs sanguins, précédemment mis en évidence lors d’études chez l’animal: hausse du taux d’histamine chez 40% des patients, de la nitrotyrosine chez 28%, de la protéine S100B chez 15% , des anticorps anti-O-myéline chez 23%, et des protéines chaperonnes hps27 et hsp30 chez 33%. Des examens d’imagerie cérébrale suggèrent aussi une inflammation dans certaines parties du cerveau, dont le système limbique et le thalamus.
UNE PREUVE DE LA MALADIE
Contacté par le JDLE, Philippe Irigaray, directeur des recherches scientifiques à l’Artac et co-auteur de l’étude, indique qu’une surélévation des marqueurs histamine, nitrotyrosine ou S100B est retrouvée chez 71,8% des patients électrohypersensibles et chez 75% de ceux atteints de sensibilité multiple chimique.
Selon les auteurs, les deux maladies, impliquant inflammation, stress oxydatif, réponse auto-immune et perméabilité hémato-encéphalique, sont deux formes d’une maladie liée à un même mécanisme. «Notre étude démontre qu’il y a de vrais facteurs [biologiques] à l’origine de cette maladie, que ce sont de vrais malades, et qu’il ne s’agit pas d’une maladie psychologique», commente Philippe Irigaray.
C’est aussi une étape importante pour les associations: dans un communiqué, Etienne Cendrier, porte-parole de Robin des Toits, estime que ces résultats sont «de nature à éteindre cette polémique scientifique artificielle qui ne sert que les intérêts économiques de court-terme des industriels au détriment de la santé publique».
Pourtant, et c’est un euphémisme, Dominique Belpomme, lanceur d’alerte très soutenu par les associations d’électrosensibles, n’est pas homme à faire consensus scientifique. Ou s’il le fait, c’est plus souvent contre lui qu’en sa faveur. Ce qui ne l’a pas empêché, bravant les critiques, de lever de sacrés lièvres, notamment en 2007 lors de l’affaire du pesticide chlordécone aux Antilles françaises.
L’ABSENCE DE CONTRÔLES
Il n’est pas dit que la méthodologie utilisée soit très appréciée par la communauté scientifique. Sa faille majeure: l’absence de contrôles, à savoir des individus sains. Sans cela, difficile d’affirmer dans quelle mesure les chiffres avancés s’éloignent de la normale.
Contacté par le JDLE, Yves le Dréan, chercheur rennais à l’Irset  et spécialiste de l’effet cellulaire des ondes, estime que «l’étude ne présente pas de statistiques», et qu’«elle n’est donc pas très informative». D’autant que «beaucoup de marqueurs sont non spécifiques, par exemple l’histamine caractéristique des allergies, ou les protéines chaperonnes dans certains cancers».
Pour autant, Yves Le Dréan juge que «l’étude est intéressante d’un point de vue biologique, même si elle ne dit rien sur les relations de cause à effet. On sait très bien que ces personnes ont des problèmes de santé, mais on ne sait pas pourquoi elles les ont, et si les ondes sont responsables. Et cette étude ne montre pas que les ondes sont responsables».
NOUVELLE PISTE POUR LES ÉTUDES DE PROVOCATION?
«Ce sont juste des résultats bruts sur une population», ajoute-t-il. Malgré ses failles, l’étude ouvre des pistes intéressantes de recherche. Notamment avec les études dites «de provocation»: celles-ci consistent à installer des patients électrosensibles dans une pièce fermée, puis à les exposer ou non à des ondes. Pour l’instant, la plupart de ces études n’ont pas été concluantes, les personnes ne parvenant pas à se savoir exposées ou non. Pour Yves Le Dréan, «il serait intéressant de les reproduire en mesurant l’évolution de ces marqueurs sanguins».
L’échec des études de provocation est l’une des raisons principales du scepticisme scientifique vis-à-vis de l’électrosensibilité, et une source de colère pour les associations. «Peut-être que ce ne sont pas les ondes seules, peut-être que c’est les ondes plus quelque chose: c’est vraiment un mystère, et c’est très problématique pour ces personnes, qui souffrent. Elles n’ont pas plus de problèmes psychiatriques que la population générale: leur mal est réel», juge Yves Le Dréan.
Quid de la toxicité des ondes? «A court terme, les études montrent qu’il n’y a pas grand-chose à craindre. Mais à long terme, le doute n’est pas levé», estime le chercheur rennais. Dominique Belpomme «s’avance beaucoup trop dans ses conclusions»: «au pire, nous sommes peut-être face à un poison à très faible dose, avec de possibles effets cocktails» avec d’autres agents, conclut-il.
Entre autres travaux sur les ondes, cette étude sera au menu d’un groupe d’experts de l’Agence nationale de sécurité sanitaire de l’alimentation, de l’environnement et du travail (Anses), qui prépare pour la fin de l’année un rapport sur la question de l’électrohypersensibilité, a-t-on appris d’une source proche du dossier.
 La nitrotyrosine et la protéine S100B sont des marqueurs de perméabilité de la barrière hémato-encéphalique, qui sépare le système sanguin du cerveau. Selon quelques travaux, contredits par d’autres, elle serait fragilisée chez les électrosensibles.
 L’Institut de recherche sur la santé, l’environnement et le travail (Irset) est sous tutelle de l’Institut national de la santé et de la recherche médicale (Inserm), de l’université Rennes 1, de l’Ecole des hautes études en santé publique (EHESP) et du CHU de Rennes.
Electrosensitivity: markers that do not extinguish the controversy
January 11, 2016 Romain Loury
A report by the end of 2016 Anses
Posted in Reviews on Environmental Health, the study of the Association for Cancer Therapeutics Research (ARTAC), chaired by Dominique Belpomme, is claimed by its authors as the first to describe blood markers electrohypersensitivity the waves.
Hope for patients who suffer from a lack of medical face listening to an evil whose physiological mechanisms remain unknown, and without detailed biomarkers to date. In short, without an official explanation suffering long (and again) taken for a psychosomatic ill or psychiatric.
Conducted on 727 patients with EHS or multiple chemical sensitivity, the study affirms the existence of blood markers previously identified in studies in animals: higher histamine levels in 40% of patients, nitrotyrosine in 28% of S100B protein in 15% , anti-O-myelin antibodies in 23%, and chaperone proteins hps27 and hsp30 in 33%. Brain imaging tests also suggest inflammation in parts of the brain, the limbic system and the thalamus.
Evidence of the disease
Contacted by JDLE Philippe Irigaray, director of scientific research at the ARTAC and co-author of the study indicates that histamine elevation of markers, nitrotyrosine or S100B was found in 71.8% of patients and 75 electrohypersensitive % of those with multiple chemical sensitivity.
According to the authors, both diseases involving inflammation, oxidative stress, autoimmune response and blood brain permeability, are two forms of the disease related to the same mechanism. "Our study shows that there are real factors [ biological] the origin of this disease, that these are real sick, and it is not a psychological disease, "commented Philippe Irigaray.
It is also an important step for associations: in a statement, Etienne Cendrier, spokesman Robin des Toits, believes that these results are "likely to settle the artificial scientific controversy that only serves the economic interests of short- industrial term at the expense of public health. "
Yet, and this is an understatement, Dominique Belpomme, whistleblower very supported by the electro associations, is not a man to make scientific consensus. Or if he does, it's usually against him in his favor. This does not prevent, defying critics raise sacred hare, notably in 2007 during the case of pesticide chlordecone in the French Antilles.
The lack of controls
It does not say that the methodology is highly appreciated by the scientific community. Its major flaw: the absence of controls, ie healthy individuals. Without it difficult to say to what extent the figures are far from normal.
Contacted by JDLE, the Yves Drean, Rennes researcher at Irset  and a specialist in cellular effect of waves, believes that "the study does not present statistics", and that "it is not so not very informative. "Especially that "many markers are nonspecific, eg histamine characteristic of allergies, or chaperone proteins in certain cancers."
However, Yves Le Drean judge that "the study is interesting from a biological point of view, even if it says nothing about the relations of cause and effect. We know very well that these people have health problems, but it is not known why they have them, and if the waves are responsible. And this study does not show that the waves are responsible. "
New track for challenge studies?
"These are just the raw results of a population," he added. Despite its flaws, the study opens interesting avenues of research. Especially with the so-called studies "provocative": they are to install electro patients in a closed room and then to expose or not to wave. For now, most of these studies have been inconclusive, people failing to know or not exposed. For Yves Le Drean, "it would be interesting to replicate by measuring changes in these blood markers."
The failure of provocation studies is one of the main reasons of scientific skepticism vis-à-vis the EHS and a source of anger for associations. "Maybe it's not the only waves can -be it's something most waves: it really is a mystery, and it is very problematic for those people who are suffering. They do not have more psychiatric problems than the general population: their evil is real, "Judge Yves Le Drean.
What about the toxicity of the air? "In the short term, studies show that there is not much to fear. But in the long term, the question is not lifted, "said the researcher Rennes. Dominique Belpomme "advances too in its conclusions": "the worst, we may be facing poisonous in very small doses, with possible effects cocktail" with other agents, he said.
Among other work on the air, this study will be on the menu of a group of experts of the National Health Security Agency for Food, Environment and Labour (Anses), which is preparing for the end of year a report on the issue of EHS, have we learned from a source close to the matter.
 The nitrotyrosine and S100B are markers permeability of the blood-brain barrier, which separates the blood system of the brain. According to some work, contradicted by others, it would be weakened in electro.
 Health Research Institute, Environment and Labour (Irset) is under the supervision of the National Institute of Health and Medical Research (INSERM), University Rennes 1, the school of public health (EHESP) and the University Hospital of Rennes.
The whole world is watching Google
Representatives of concerned groups from across Europe met with Mdme. Michele Rivasi, MEP, to discuss the launch of a European Citizen's Initiative to establish limits to microwave radiations.
Pictured above (Left to right) are John Weigel, representing the Irish Environmental Radiation Victims Network (IERVN), Paolo Vale, Portugal, Dr. Isaac Jamieson, Scotland, Julio Carmona, PECCEM, Spain, Frank Berner, Germany, Barbara Galdzinska-Calik and Marta Patena, Poland
Photos by Julio Carmona, PECCEM.
Mdme. Michele Rivasi (centre) and participants in the Brussels discussion.
Participants included: Attendees included: Anna Zucherro, Italy. Frank Wilhelm Berner, Isaac Jamieson, Scotland, John Weigel, Ireland, Mona Nilsson Kövamees Vincent Lauer, France Julio Carmona, Spain, Nele Robberechts, Belgium, Marta Patena, Poland, Barbara Gałdzińska-Calik, Poland, Livio Giuliani, Italy, Paulo João Vieira Vale, Portugal, Pierre-Marie Theveniaud, France.
Vincent Lauer, an engineer from Nantes, France, indicated the June 24 has been selected as a day of action to alert the public to the dangers of microwave radiation.
375 groups from around the world unite to inform EU of dangers of 'Project Loon'
Mdme. Rivasi was presented with the petition from groups concerned about the activities of Google anf the drones programme announced by Facebook.
The petition presented to Mdme. Rivasi states, in part: We know that millions of people in the developed world have already become functionally disabled, due to the electromagnetically polluted environments produced by terrestrially based wireless communication infrastructures. Many persons have been forced to flee their homes and jobs, experiencing great difficulties finding a safe and sustainable place to live. Some have sought refuge in remote areas where wireless internet is spotty or nonexistent.With the deployment of Project Loon and other space-based wireless communications projects proposed or underway, and the Project’s widespread deployment of microwave radiation, such persons will have no place to go.
For full text see attached PDF.
Additional Endorsements for petition to Mme. Rivasi, MEP
Sarah Dacre sent around an email about your efforts in respect of Project Loon. I don't know if there is anything I can do to help, but morally I am behind you 100%.
Google and Facebook, and I believe one of the other major Silicon Valley players, have such arrogance, feeling that because they CAN do it, they WILL do this, and simply ignore any objections as being of the loony fringe. Silicon Valley is enamoured of the technology, but who gives them the right to force it upon the rest of humanity?
With my very best wishes,
Isle of Gigha, Argyll
Don Dennis <email@example.com>
Good luck John – how can Google even contemplate such an atrocity.
Una Gibbons in Oman
Testimony of Mary Coales, electrosensitive
ES-UK has passed to me, among others, your paper for the EU on Project Loon. I write to say that I fully support it. My circumstances are that I was rendered particularly sensitive to wi-fi, and also to mobile phone signals, among other forms of electromagnetic radiation, by exposure to a chemical agent (builders’ foam containing isocyanates), in 2012. I am a former senior UK civil servant, and first reacted to this chemical in 1988, in a refurbished Government building. The second major, accidental, exposure turned on sensitivity to wi-fi. Why this should be I have no idea. However, now I am very restricted in where I can go, and have had to give up my (second) career as a tour guide.
My primary symptom is severe pain in my tongue. Most of the time I can avoid or minimise the pain it if I avoid the stimuli as far as possible, and this means, for example, that even visiting neighbours’ houses I have to ask them in advance to switch off their transmitting machinery. My neighbours in the house attached to mine are luckily helpful. I wear a clothing layer of protective netting (manufactured for occupational protection to radiofrequency radiation), when in unfamiliar or problem places.
I spend a lot of time in the countryside well away from wi-fi, and this brings relief and recuperation. If wi-fi from the sky is beamed everywhere there will be no-where I can go for relief. It seems completely unreasonable to do this.
You may use this email or the details from it as a case in point should you so wish. I can provide more details on demand.
Mary Coales <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Mdme. Rivasi, MEP, accepts the petition from around the world signed by groups and citizens around the world expressing concerns about the proliferation of microwave radiation.