WHAT’S IN A NUMBER? 2.4 GHZ-The most dangerous frequency-ideal for cooking food and running a chemical reaction. Just perfect for WiFi, wireless tablets and laptops and wireless classrooms. Why? Because the FCC DOESN’T REQUIRE A LICENSE AT THIS FREQUENCY!

They told us cigarettes were safe and thalidomide was good. The experts never seem to learn.  They are the gift that keeps on giving.  They continue to bequeath  us with drugs like  Epilim and Phen-Phen, things like cases of Diet Joke stacked to the ceilings in all the pharmacies and all of the other dangerous petrochemical poison that will land you on the pharmaceutical industry’s fly paper if you are not paying attention.  Folks, 20-20 hindsight and a quarter won’t even get you a cup of coffee today and that is why we cannot rely on it. When the damage is done, it is done. It is then too late.

2.45  GHz IS A MEDICAL AND SCIENTIFIC FREQUENCY. Do we have the making of an experiment on our hands? Do we have willing subjects?  Do we have a laboratory?  Do we have informed consent?  It appears that quite possibly, unbeknownst to many of us, that we do.  This particular frequency of the electromagnetic spectrum is commonly employed in laboratories and medicine.  It is used to move chemical reactions along, anneal, synthesize and polymerize compounds, and among other things, to destroy tissue.

Columbia University actually owns a patent for taking DNA that responds to the EMF and transferring  it to another piece of DNA, which can be turned on. It has been shown that this piece of DNA can be used as an electromagnetic trigger.  A trigger for what? With 75,000 miles of circulatory system in the incredible machine called the human body, there are a lot of variables.  Both the thermal and  non thermal EMF actions elicit responses in DNA and  DNA picks up all kinds of frequencies.  The nucleic structure of DNA is an incredible  fractal antenna on a molecular scale.  The six foot double helix molecule crammed into less than a one micron space is coiled and coiled and coiled many times over.  This DNA response to the EMF emissions’ phenomenon is observed at the very lowest power levels in the 2.45 GHz frequency range. Talk about reception and gain!

Fullerton’s classroom WiFi routers and the WiFi enabled wireless devices all utilize a pulsed  high frequency microwave emission at 2.45 GHz.  It just so happens that maximum dielectric loss of water molecules, the essence of life, begins at 2.45 GHz and it is taking place right in your child’s lap where the essence of your grandchildren will begin.

This is also the same frequency that your microwave oven operates on, however, with the WiFi, the data is sent in ‘packets’ or ‘pulses’ along the waves.

It is this ‘pulse’ and the resulting square waves that many scientists contend is one of several properties of this particular form of microwave radiation that is responsible for the mechanism for adverse health effects that are being reported in the scientific literature.

Although the intensity is supposedly perceived as ‘low’, wireless classroom levels can potentially be trillions of times above the natural background levels in that part of the electromagnetic spectrum. The resulting  high frequency pulsed square waves that these tablets and laptops emanate are a man made freak of nature, and are being emitted right in your child’s lap. Is this a coincidence or is it by design? Is this being foisted on an unsuspecting populace as part of a larger clandestine attempt to effect fertility? I believe that it is.

The current ISM standards were established in 1985 when this application of  the technology was unthinkable. They rolled WiFi out  in 1997 with NO SAFETY TESTING.  Even more compelling is that the  current ICNIRP guidelines are intended to protect in the very short term against gross heating effects-in other words “does it burn” from short term exposures.  In addition to the aforementioned, the long term non-thermal effects and the pulsed square waves are where the additional, in my opinion, far more serious concerns lie.  Studies have been undertaken at length confirming that non- thermal dangers are real. There are NO studies to date, that I am aware of,  on the long term non-thermal dangers or biological effects associated with the exposures to the levels and intensity of high frequency pulsed non-ionizing microwave radiation in the wireless classroom settings- similar to what some of the Fullerton School District’s children are already being exposed to.

Will the Fullerton School District and its Board of Trustees allow the expansion of this technology to continue unabated,  in what I believe to be, the complete absence of concrete and conclusive evidence that this technology is safe in its proposed classroom setting applications?  REMEMBER, THESE DEVICES EMIT IN DIRECT PROXIMITY TO THE SENSITIVE DEVELOPING REPRODUCTIVE AREAS OF OUR CHILDREN -RIGHT IN THEIR LAPS. WOULD YOU PUT YOUR CELL PHONE IN YOUR LAP ALL DAY AND TALK ON IT?

I find it odd that the principal of my child’s school uses a hardwired device on their desk.  If it works in the office, why can it not work in the classroom?  I wonder why what is good for the goose isn’t good for the gander?

I urge all of you to please take  the time to educate yourself and read up on the science which is I believe is  largely being ignored by the main stream media and the Fullerton School District.  The evidence for potential harm predates even many of us.

For those of you who need a PLAIN ENGLISH TRANSLATION-THEY DON’T KNOW WHAT THIS STUFF REALLY DOES TO THE KIDS-I for one don’t feel like sitting around for 10 years to find out and neither should you. The technology should be HARDWIRED in ALL of the classroom settings and that will eliminate the danger to our children.  Today’s kids already have the odds stacked against them.  Let’s not help the house on this one.  




  1. #1 by Anonymous on March 15, 2013 - 9:38 pm

    These links are loaded with studies. What the heck is going on? This is totally freaky.

  2. #2 by Joe Imbriano on March 15, 2013 - 10:08 pm

    It just so happens that maximum dielectric loss of water molecules, the essence of life, begins at 2.4GHz.

    • #3 by Anonymous on March 17, 2013 - 8:26 pm

      I’m a high school student and I’m a very worried one now. That is because I sit at lunch with a laptop on my lap looking at videos and doing research. What should I do?

  3. #4 by Anonymous on March 16, 2013 - 4:48 pm

    This is getting really bizarre. I don’t really understand a lot of this stuff but I do not like what I am reading here. Have you talked to the school principal about this information?

    • #5 by Joe Imbriano on March 16, 2013 - 8:41 pm

      Thank you for your post. As a matter of fact I did several weeks ago. I forwarded some of the information presented on this site to her. Her response was “thank you for the thought provoking information”. As of last week, she and other school officials have now chosen to ignore my emails on this subject and hence, that is why I have created this website to disseminate the information to the public, including the Fullerton School District.

  4. #6 by anon on March 17, 2013 - 1:03 pm

    If this information is true, which I have suspected and am leaning to believe, that it is, then you have a real fight on your hands. There is a love affair within the upper echelons of the administration with this new technology. They are on an ego trip to get name recognition for rolling it out. I wish you success in raising awareness. You seem to be doing just fine at that. There are a lot of people talking about this issue now. Most are afraid to face the fact that you could be right. Good luck.

    • #7 by syndicate on March 17, 2013 - 8:24 pm

      Same here. There are many people that need their eyes opened about this stuff. They all know it’s true, and like you said,” Most are afraid to face the fact that you could be right.” My hope is that this site will stay around long enough for everyone to know about this epidemic.

    • #8 by Anonymous on March 19, 2013 - 5:05 am

      It is looking more and more as if there is much more to the story. Big business and the establishment have never been a friend of the people. Diet Joke-that is a good one and how right you are. Mr. Imbranio, I respect your courage. This will not make you popular but what you are doing is very noble.

      • #9 by Joe Imbriano on March 19, 2013 - 8:13 am

        Thank you for your post. There always is more to the story than meets the eye. The issue will be getting parents and administrators to open theirs.

  5. #10 by Anonymous on March 20, 2013 - 7:34 pm

    Of everything on this site, this article hit me the hardest. I really need to do some fact finding on my own. I guess the info is out there if one just looks. Never though twice about this stuff and well…this is what happens.

    • #11 by Joe Imbriano on March 21, 2013 - 8:38 am

      There is much more science on the harmful effects and you will NEVER hear that side from the administrators. Just review the forms that you signed when you entered your child into one of the FSD’s pilot programs. They won’t touch this side of the argument with a ten foot pole. The teachers union UTLA in Los Angeles is attempting to stop the LAUSD from ramrodding this down the kids throats with a different angle which we are following very closely.


      • #12 by Anonymous on March 21, 2013 - 8:03 pm

        Where are all of the Fullerton teachers weighing in on all of this?

  6. #13 by foolerton on March 22, 2013 - 11:25 am

    this is solid gold right on the money pull your heads out of your holes people they are your kids

  7. #14 by Anonymous on March 24, 2013 - 2:45 am

    Hey brother! I want to say that this post as well as the others are awesome and concisely written. Don’t back down on this one Joe.

  8. #15 by curious on March 30, 2013 - 9:43 am

    Cordless phones? Wifi? Tablets, laptops? All fall into this category?

    • #16 by Joe Imbriano on April 1, 2013 - 5:23 pm

      yes-relatively close in frequency and emissions

  9. #17 by boycott on April 4, 2013 - 5:44 am

    Specifics being ignored and facts being distorted by the administrators and the industry cannot go unchallenged much longer. The tide will change. Parents just say no.

    • #18 by mom1 on April 4, 2013 - 10:55 am


  10. #19 by Anonymous on April 4, 2013 - 9:23 am

    Just how do you have the ability to build this kind of audience regarding commenters on your site?

    • #20 by Joe Imbriano on April 4, 2013 - 11:24 pm

      Build it and they will come.

  11. #21 by Anonymous on April 9, 2013 - 5:44 pm

    Wonderful web site. A lot of useful info here.

    • #22 by Joe Imbriano on April 9, 2013 - 10:12 pm

      Thank you and spread the word.

  12. #23 by Anonymous on April 11, 2013 - 3:41 pm

    This is the same as the microwave ovens we have in our kitchen? How about the cordless phones?

    • #24 by Joe Imbriano on April 11, 2013 - 9:50 pm

      WiFi and WiFi enabled devices transmit at 2.45 GHz. This is the same frequency that your microwave oven’s magnetron transmits at. The oven’s power level is about 1000 watts and that of the WiFi is around 1 watt. The older cordless phones transmitted in the 46 MHz range with the newer ones in the 900 MHz up to the 5.8 GHz range.

      The concerns we at The Fullerton Informer have are numerous. First, the distance to the source of the emissions with a WiFi enabled laptop or tablet in, or around the sensitive developing reproductive areas is problematic. Another element of concern is the duration of exposure which is 6-9 hours a day including homework and video games. Thirdly, the WiFi is present in almost every home and classroom. So we have almost 24/7 exposure. This level of exposure is unprecedented. If the thousands of studies are true, then we truly have a public health crisis in the making on our hands. Children have NEVER been forced to subject themselves to this amount of EMF bombardment. There is much more to this story. We most certainly will know in 10-15 years if I will need a tin foil hat or your children will need the help of a medical professional. Let us hope I look good in aluminum.

  13. #25 by the price is right on April 12, 2013 - 9:52 pm

    Follow the money honey. That is what they say. See where it leads? You will be surprised, very surprised.

  14. #26 by Anonymous on April 16, 2013 - 11:45 am

    Children’s tooth development begins while the baby is in the womb. Teething usually occurs between the ages of six and nine months. Children usually have their full set of 20 primary teeth (milk teeth, baby teeth or deciduous teeth) by the age of three years. At about the age of six years, the first permanent teeth erupt (push through the gum). At about age 9 the metal braces go on and become an antenna. This WiFi biz is no joke.

  15. #27 by Mao on April 16, 2013 - 1:40 pm

    This is turning out to be a nightmare the more I delve into this.

  16. #28 by hoping for change on April 18, 2013 - 11:55 am

    The community at large must be made aware of this danger to their children. How can you deny that there is a risk with all of the info out there? It takes more faith to trust that it is safe that to believe that it is not.

    Parents need to stand up for their children. This is not a popular cause right now but it is definitely a worthy one.

  17. #29 by Anonymous on April 18, 2013 - 9:21 pm

    Hey, buddy, they’ve got your number.

    • #30 by Joe Imbriano on April 18, 2013 - 11:20 pm

      Tell them to give me a call would you please. Thank you.

  18. #31 by Anonymous on April 23, 2013 - 11:04 am

    This is pretty intense stuff. How do we know who to believe?

    • #32 by Rude awakening on April 24, 2013 - 2:34 pm

      Are you kidding?!! You don’t know who to believe or you just don’t want to believe that this information is true? If everything you’ve read and seen from this website can’t convince you to believe that this stuff is bad for you, what will? Do you really want to wait until your children develop cancer from this crap someday? Wake up!

    • #33 by mom1 on April 24, 2013 - 9:28 pm

      Even if you don’t know who to believe, you have to know that Ph.D.s, M.D.s, neuroscientists, pediatric neurologists, have better things to do with their time than make up research and scientific conclusions on the dangers of wifi in schools.
      Even if you have doubts, you must err on the side of the health and well being of the children. That means that schools must be hard wired.

  19. #34 by Anonymous on May 4, 2013 - 6:34 am


  20. #35 by Anonymous on October 3, 2013 - 5:43 am

    Why are we being told that it is safe when it is not? How can this be allowed to go into classrooms all over the United States?

    • #36 by "How can this be?" on October 3, 2013 - 12:12 pm

      Once you get past how incredulous and unbelievable this situation is, you may want to look at the stakeholders involved and how this could ever come to be the case.

      Tech Industry-their market share (WiFi enabled devices) is now a huge part of the global economy, and they have been allowed to grow without restraint. They will continue to grow unless something is done. They are motivated by what best serves their business model and greed.

      Government – The Feds have given governance of wireless radiation to the FCC, via FCC guidelines. The guidelines have not been touched since 1996; that was 17 years ago. The FCC guidelines completely ignore non-thermal biological effects, which is the issue with wireless radiation. Stepping back and looking at this, it appears as if the FCC has given a pass to the Tech industry for 17 years, amounting to no regulation. The different “health” agencies, Center for Disease Control (CDC) and the National Institute of Health (NIH) are all busy denying/ignoring the ties being made between wireless radiation and: infertility, ADHD, autism, childhood leukemia, dizziness, headaches, nosebleeds, DNA damage, etc. I have read that the FCC has been governed by ex Tech Industry Execs, I can’t confirm this, only that the current guy that has been nominated by the US President to head the FCC is Tom Wheeler from the Tech Industry, “Tom has had an impressive career in the telecommunications and high-tech field that makes him eminently qualified for this position,”
      Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2013/04/tom-wheeler-fcc-chair-reports-90787.html#ixzz2ggMwDLjI
      The Federal government is motivated by something stronger than the legal and moral obligation to protect people from what are known wireless radiation harms.

      Media – The predominant way we learn about new things is through the media. What comes through mainstream media automatically is given credulity, although this is changing. The general population has not learned of the harms of wireless radiation because the media has been “quiet”, at best. What is the media’s motivation in remaining “quiet” about this? Whatever it is, it must be stronger than the ethical and moral obligation the press has to the public. What if the ties to autism, childhood leukemia, ADHD, do have merit? Is the media complicit in keeping information from the public?

      General Public – The public has come to know that the FCC, CDC, NIH, etc all have within their mission statements the responsibility to protect the health of the people. It is taken for granted that the public can trust these Federal agencies to do their job. The general public hears very little, sporadic information on wireless radiation harms from the media. The result is that the general public is ignorant of what information exists that says wireless radiation is harmful. The parents do not know that putting their children in wireless classrooms is risking the health of their children. Because they are counting on and trust the agencies and governing bodies to do their job, they think everything is okay.
      The public is being told by the school district that these classrooms are “totally safe.” Challenging and questioning these superintendents is not something most are willing to do, but you must. What is at stake here is tremendous. What is your motivation for not speaking up? Does your lack of courage or not wanting to rock the boat exceed the obligation we have to our children and humanity to advocate on their behalf? Parents, are you thinking that your child will not be touched by childhood leukemia or ADHD, so it is okay?

      State and Local governing bodies – I believe they are being advised by their taxpayer funded risk management counsel that they are within the FCC guidelines and they are legally okay to proceed with these wireless classrooms. Since there is no significant public outcry, they are going ahead. The outcry from the few that know is dismissed. Ignorance and arrogance prevail and they don’t care enough to look at evidence contrary to their wireless classroom agenda. Are incomes and prestige at risk here? Perhaps, but how can the desire to preserve either ever outweigh the legal, moral, and ethical obligation of ensuring a safe school environment for our children?

      Drs Pletka and Giokaris, answer that question and explain to the parents how you are choosing wireless technology over the health of our children?

      • #37 by Joe Imbriano on October 3, 2013 - 11:45 pm

        Simple, they just follow orders for 20 grand a month, when in doubt, defer to taxpayer funded counsel, and totally rely on the complacency of a constituency of parents of 25,000 children that has zero interest in the meat and potatoes. The focus is instead on the frosting and decorations which are by default allowed to take precedent.

        Heck it’s a no brainer because it is not their kids on the classrooms anyway and they don’t have those Cisco access points in their offices with 35 Ipads running all day. Besides their reproductive days are long behind them.

  21. #38 by Joe Imbriano on October 3, 2013 - 11:49 pm

    Anonymous :

    Why are we being told that it is safe when it is not? How can this be allowed to go into classrooms all over the United States?

    Ask this guy:


Comments are closed.

Copyright © 2013 TheFullertonInformer.com. All rights reserved. TheFullertonInformer.com is the legal copyright holder of the material on this blog and it may not be used, reprinted, or published without express written permission. The information contained in this website is for entertainment and educational purposes ONLY. This website contains my personal opinion and experience based on my own research from scientific writings, internet research and interviews with doctors and scientists all over the world. Do not take this website, links or documents contained herein as a personal, medical or legal advice of any kind. For legal advice, please consult with your attorney. Consult your medical doctor or primary care physician for advice regarding your health and your children’s health and nothing contained on this website is intended to provide or be a substitute for medical, legal or other professional advice. The reading or use of this information is at your own risk. Readers will not be put on spam lists. We will not sell your contact information to another company. We are not responsible for the privacy practices of our advertisers or blog commenters. We reserve the right to change the focus of this blog, to shut it down, to sell it, or to change the terms of use at our discretion. We are not responsible for the actions of our advertisers or sponsors. If a reader purchases a product or service based upon a link from our blog, the reader must take action with that company to resolve the issue, not us. Our policy on using letters or emails that have been written directly to us is as follows: We will be sharing those letters and emails with the blogging audience unless they are requested to be kept confidential. We will claim ownership of those letters or emails to later be used in an up-and-coming book,blog article,post or column, unless otherwise specified by the writer to keep ownership. THE TRUTH WILL STAND ON ITS OWN AND THE TRUTH WILL SET YOU FREE-SEEK IT AT ALL COSTS!