Please look at our Facebook page. http://www.facebook.com/pages/The-Fullerton-Informer/606854526009581?ref=stream
Arrow down a few inches and have a look at the proposed real world classroom application of wireless technology in action. This photo truly puts it into perspective. I remember growing up where there were ashtrays everywhere and now I see the poor folks on oxygen.  And then there are those who sadly checked out way too early from an insidious in-your-face out of control marketing strategy that went unchallenged for way too long. Yes, they were lied to in the most egregious manner.   So this begs the question: Does this child know what this is doing to him? Do his parents?




By the way, hook up an earpiece to any WiFi enabled laptop or tablet and guess what? You get a 300% plus increase in the level of EMF emissions as the wire acts as an antenna. What is in the speaker in the child’s ear? The speaker contains a small magnet and a coil which takes it up another couple of notches, and you guessed it, right to the child’s head special delivery. Low intensity is safe you say?


We won’t even get into the children’s orthodontic fixtures at this time. They all come complete with that necessary metallic alloy array that is required for reception. Ok, just a little aside, I digress. Those industrial WiFi systems which already are, or will be installed in the FSD, will STAY ON ALL DAY in the classrooms. They have plenty of power to spare. They go right through wire mesh and concrete unlike those cheap ones you have at home. It’s just what the doctor ordered. Remember, the electrical conductivity of the human body can act as an antenna. Keep in mind that this is all courtesy of what you thought would help your child’s smile but mostly because of what you are being told by the experts that the child needs to learn and can no longer live without.





  1. #1 by dianeh on March 31, 2013 - 7:01 am

    Teachers, administrators, FSD board members: If you are reading this, your role is one that requires public trust. You have a moral duty to make sure that our children are in a safe environment. That includes addressing the EM radiation issues being brought forward at this website. Unless each of you can guarantee to all of the parents (which you cannot), the safety of our children, the use of these tablets is unethical. We are here to make sure that the truth comes out and our children are in a safe learning environment.

  2. #2 by Joe Imbriano on March 31, 2013 - 1:01 pm

    dianeh :

    Teachers, administrators, FSD board members: If you are reading this, your role is one that requires public trust. You have a moral duty to make sure that our children are in a safe environment. That includes addressing the EM radiation issues being brought forward at this website. Unless each of you can guarantee to all of the parents (which you cannot), the safety of our children, the use of these tablets is unethical. We are here to make sure that the truth comes out and our children are in a safe learning environment.

    ….. and a legal requirement as well. I personally believe it is possible that our elected leaders and our public employees actually are beholden more to the RF industry and the Fullerton School District’s legal counsel and advisers instead of the taxpayers, the parents and the children’s safety. Is this the reason why we get the silent treatment? Are the classroom EMF emission levels LEGAL? Perhaps one would assume. We don’t know for sure. I am still awaiting approval to film and record measurements from the administration. However, what is questionable is whether the legal limits of exposure are truly safe. Many other experts that have more than a few of the first five letters of the alphabet after their names believe that the acceptable levels of exposure are too high and not enough is known about the long term effects.
    Oh the experts, who do you trust? Who do you believe? Remember, they are your children. That is what we are here to challenge. It certainly is turning out to be a very bizarre succession of events unfolding. We promise that we will keep all who dare to care posted. Check back soon.

    • #3 by Anonymous on April 1, 2013 - 7:31 pm

      I can’t refute your arguments completely as they appear to have merit. I have never heard this side before. What kind of response have you had from your school?

      • #4 by Joe Imbriano on April 1, 2013 - 11:05 pm


    • #5 by Anonymous on April 1, 2013 - 9:46 pm

      You actually think the schools will put this in all the classrooms? They don’t have the money. You are dreaming.

      • #6 by Eleanor on April 2, 2013 - 7:47 am

        Well, maybe not all schools will embrace this idea but as long as people fight for what they believe is right there sure will be some progress and some results will make difference.

        • #7 by Joe Imbriano on April 2, 2013 - 1:47 pm

          Thank you for your post. Make no mistake, the goal is a 1:1 ratio of student to device with it ALL being wireless. It is not up to the individual schools. This is a top down process. That photo is touted as progress and I beg to differ. Stay involved. Let us hope they wake up or the parents will simply have to.

          • #8 by acacia parent on April 16, 2013 - 1:47 pm

            It sure is beginning to look that way. My daughter will be in 5th grade next year and she will probably have an ipad. The kids that don’t have them now want them and think that they are cool. What a dilemma as a parent. This is going to be difficult either way.

      • #9 by Joe Imbriano on April 2, 2013 - 1:52 pm

        FJUSD already has purchased all the network equipment according to the director of administrative services. In the FSD, the Fullerton Technology Foundation’s 990 form shows over 1 million dollars running into it over the last several years. If you couple that with the federal, state, and industry monies and the other foundations that have sprung up in recent years, the money is clearly there and/or on its way. There are foundations lobbying full time to fund these programs. It really boils down to whether the district does what it wants or what the parents want. Most parents don’t know about this side of the story so that is why we are here.

  3. #10 by Anonymous on March 31, 2013 - 5:35 pm

    You have a big battle on your hands.

    • #11 by Joe Imbriano on April 1, 2013 - 5:20 pm

      I agree and one definitely worth fighting.

  4. #12 by amom on April 1, 2013 - 7:58 pm

    Wow, this photo shows how it can be seen as progress to some and a danger to others. Your perspective sheds some serious light on the latter. Thank you. We haven’t bought these for our children yet and probably won’t now. No need. Books are fine. Why the rush?

    • #13 by Joe Imbriano on April 1, 2013 - 11:05 pm

      Thank you for your post. Good questions. Good decision on your part as parents. I hope others will figure it out. I believe the rush is due to the money involved and the market potential for these devices. Making merchandise of our kids at the expense of the unknown is tragic.

  5. #14 by Anonymous on April 2, 2013 - 10:19 am

    Wow they actually see nothing wrong with this photo and proudly display it on the district FB page?

    • #15 by Joe Imbriano on April 2, 2013 - 1:41 pm

      It is all perspective-one which we aim to change.

    • #16 by move on on April 3, 2013 - 8:17 pm

      It is progress man so deal with it.

      • #17 by mom1 on April 4, 2013 - 6:38 am

        If you, personally, decide to embrace this as “progress”, that is up to you. The rest of us can read and reason, and will choose otherwise.

        • #18 by Joe Imbriano on April 4, 2013 - 8:18 am

          CHOC has no vacancy and is lit up like a Vegas hotel at night and that is progress for you. Special Ed is all that is hiring and that is progress for you. The science is called junk and that is progress for you. When it hits home with one of your own then it will truly be progress for you. We will stand in the gap in the meantime and when you are done with the Kool Aid IV, send me an email. We can use a few extra hands on the sidewalks.

  6. #19 by Anonymous on April 2, 2013 - 5:57 pm

    I just found out our principal is telling parents that, given her science background, she knows very clearly that WiFi is safe.

    This is despite being presented with thousands of studies that show adverse biological and health effects, and despite being presented with expert testimonials from some of the world’s top scientists and medical experts.

    • #20 by Joe Imbriano on April 2, 2013 - 11:02 pm

      Great-have her put in writing and email me a copy of it at info@thefullertoninformer.com. We will make her position widely known.

    • #21 by mom1 on April 3, 2013 - 9:31 pm

      Wow, she is actually contradicting evidence presented in scholarly works?
      Not the way to go . . . . . .

      • #22 by Anonymous on April 4, 2013 - 4:01 am

        Yes, the principal personally is contradicting the science. It shows how little she has even looked at. This is happening with another friend as well. She presented the information to her principal – a 12 page letter. The principal responded with an iPad party. Parents need to make a stand.

  7. #23 by Anonymous on April 2, 2013 - 9:45 pm

    Joe nice to see you back at City Hall tonight. Someone has to stand up for the children. Where the heck are all the teachers?

    • #24 by Joe Imbriano on April 2, 2013 - 11:03 pm

      Thank you. The Fullerton teachers are silent so far.

  8. #25 by Anonymous on April 3, 2013 - 7:13 pm

    That photo shows that the teachers really don’t understand the dangers either. Who is watching these kids in the classroom? These things are not toys. These should be up on the desk.

  9. #26 by Joe Imbriano on April 4, 2013 - 8:13 am

    There is clearly more to this issue than we are being led to believe by the placating administrators. The silent treatment from the administration is a passive form of opposition. The weight of the evidence cannot and eventually will not be ignored. The light of day is beginning to shine on this issue. We will just keep increasing the lumens.

  10. #27 by acacia parent on April 5, 2013 - 7:11 am

    Mr. Imbriano I have seen you at the school handing out flyers and at the city council meeting and I heard you were at the school board meeting as well. Yesterday my daughter brought home a newsletter from Acacia that stated that they are expanding the wireless device program “throughout all the upper grades”. I have a question. What did these people at the school district say to you when you presented them with this information?

    • #28 by Joe Imbriano on April 5, 2013 - 8:43 am

      Thank you for your post.


      My children brought that newsletter home yesterday as well. Predictably, it appears that they are going to continue to completely ignore this side of the argument and ignore the safety concerns that are readily available in the literature as well as on this and many other sites. There truly is another side to this argument and hence the reason for our efforts and this site. Acacia Elementary School is ground zero for the district wide roll out of this potentially dangerous classroom application of this technology. The facts will come out. Ignoring this issue will not make it go away. It will only put the district in a more costly position down the road when they could potentially have to forgo wireless, and retrofit the classrooms, and possibly face legal challenges.

      Has anyone from the Fullerton School District told you this side of the story? How is that for objectivity? Yes they are moving right along with their plans to put a high frequency microwave transmitter in the lap of every child in the district and install and operate WiFi systems that are potentially hundreds of times more powerful than the ones you may have at home. At this point the FSD has to now try to sell the idea to all of you in light of the awakening that is happening instead of just shoving it down your throats. Ironically it appears that is exactly what they are doing. Do your part and get informed. Spread the word. The time has come to get involved. This is a clarion call to all of you who truly care about all of the kids.

      • #29 by Anonymous on April 5, 2013 - 10:21 am

        Mr. Imbriano, thank you for what you are doing.

        • #30 by Joe Imbriano on April 5, 2013 - 5:55 pm

          Thank you for your support and spread the word.

  11. #31 by Anonymous on April 5, 2013 - 4:49 pm

    I cannot believe that there is so much information on how this is dangerous and we have never heard this before. What gets me is the school never mentioned it. What on earth is going on?

    • #32 by Joe Imbriano on April 5, 2013 - 5:54 pm

      Thank you for your post. I believe your school principal would in a better position to answer your question. My belief is that it is a combination of denial and ignorance, both of which have no place when it comes to children’s safety.

  12. #33 by boneheads on April 6, 2013 - 6:30 am

    They sure look like them.

    • #34 by Anonymous on April 6, 2013 - 11:02 pm

      I definitely agree on that. You know, we as parents need to stand up to all these dangers that our children face in their daily lives. None of us would ever want to harm our children in any way; so why let them get irradiated? The choice is yours. Make your decision wisely.

  13. #35 by mom1 on April 6, 2013 - 7:21 am

    Here is some information about FSD’s intentions: http://fsd.haikulearning.com/ted_lai/ipod/cms_page/view

    You can contact them here:

    Never forget that we, as parents, have the final say on our children’s health.

  14. #36 by Anonymous on April 7, 2013 - 8:44 am

    I am sure there is much more to the dangers than what we are being told. This is a multi billion dollar industry.

    • #37 by Joe Imbriano on April 11, 2013 - 12:07 pm

      The Common Core Standards require the technology to build the algorithms on the students and their families. The wireless push is merely a needless industry move to create a market for their products. Overall it is a lose lose for the students, their parents, local control and the taxpayers. People need to wake up and that is why we are here. The devices need to be hardwired regardless. I see optometry, oncology and reproductive endocrinology and infertility as the fields of choice for the next generation unless we change course.

  15. #38 by Joe Imbriano on April 7, 2013 - 12:17 pm

    Acacia’s classroom frequency with a lower power output but yet all soon to be deployed on your children.


    Sometimes less is more. In this case, a lower power level could end up being more dangerous because flying below the radar can circumvent immune and cellular defense mechanisms.

    WiFi enabled tablets have a SAR rating of 1.05 with a maximum permissible SAR of 1.6. Please look at this experiment with SAR of 3.21 for 28 days for an hour a day of the same type of pulsed emissions. The FSD students will get a lot more time of exposure. Yes, the pupil’s SAR exposure is roughly 1/2- 1/3 but the duration of the exposure is over 50 X higher conservatively in just a single school year. Look at its potential reproductive system ramifications-In this study the authors conclude that electromagnetic field exposure affects spermatogenesis and apoptosis. Hey, they are your children folks.


  16. #39 by Anonymous on April 8, 2013 - 10:40 am

    As parents we need to get this out of our homes and schools.

    • #40 by Joe Imbriano on April 8, 2013 - 7:23 pm

      I agree and in that order.

  17. #41 by Anonymous on April 8, 2013 - 11:39 am

    I’m impressed.

  18. #42 by technology on April 8, 2013 - 4:47 pm

    So what does this do to the children Joe?

    • #43 by Joe Imbriano on April 8, 2013 - 7:32 pm

      Thank you for your post. The fact is that we truly don’t know. What we do know is that there are thousands of studies that yielded results that indicate that it is potentially dangerous. We will all know in about 10-15 years. By then or even sooner the school kids, which are about to unwillingly participate in clinical trials of the effectiveness of using the 2.45 GHz frequency and the resultant pulsed emissions instead of using a cable, the results will be available. At that time, they will either be published in the medical literature or have to be subpoenead from the hospital admissions records, unless of course, that I am wrong. Let us hope that I am.
      For a more direct answer, which by the way, is what I believe that you are after, please look through all the links provided on this site and extrapolate and infer from there. The dots are easily connected.

  19. #44 by Ray on April 9, 2013 - 2:32 pm

    I’ve recently come across a phenonenon called the Semmelweis Reflex. It describes to a T how school officials respond to evidence that WiFi is harmful.

    It is defined as a reflex-like tendency to reject new evidence or new knowledge because it contradicts established norms, beliefs, or paradigms.

    I recommend looking up the term, because it shows exactly how stubborn people can be.

    It doesn’t matter if there are 5,000 studies, or if experts from Harvard say that this is dangerous. It doesn’t matter that thousands of medical doctors have signed appeals regarding dangerously high electromagnetic radiation levels.

    It also won’t matter if there are 10,000, 15,000 you name it, studies. Even if RF is classfied as a probable human carcinogen tomorrow, the truth is you would need a crowbar to pry the wireless technology out of their hands.

    This is why it is so important that parents contact each other and take action. This issue will not get resolved, and by the time this really gets underway, the schools won’t know how to function without the kids glued to a screen.

    • #45 by Joe Imbriano on April 9, 2013 - 10:07 pm

      Ray, thank you for your post and I am in agreement with you. Cognitive dissonance must be a side effect of the 2.45 GHz frequency exposure and a prerequisite for employment at the FSD. This information was presented first to my child’s principal, then the superintendent, then a board member, then the entire board, the entire FSD’s administration, to the director of administrative services for the FJUSD and finally the Fullerton City Council. There are 15,000 children in the K-8 system here in Fullerton and thousands more in the High Schools and we intend to reach each and every last one of them and their parents with the information that the school district does not want them to know. The truth will stand on its own. Ray, this thing is only going to get bigger. It is always better to be on the right side of it.

  20. #46 by someday you will see on April 10, 2013 - 10:08 am

    Monday is around the corner and back to the reality of these emissions in your children’s laps. Listen to Joe people, he is right and there is cause for concern. The WiFi in and of itself is a problem, but as he points out, the inverse square law applies to this child in the photo as well as your children.

    • #47 by Joe Imbriano on April 10, 2013 - 11:32 pm

      Thank you. You are correct. We are in uncharted territory here scientifically with latent effects on these children.

  21. #48 by Joe Imbriano on April 11, 2013 - 9:32 pm

    This study was undertaken with the test subject located 2 meters from the emission source. Unlike the child in the photo who is in direct physical contact with the microwave transmitter, the lab rat had some distance between him and the antenna. Look at the results after 2 hours a day.


  22. #49 by Joe Imbriano on April 12, 2013 - 6:21 pm

    Have a nice weekend – enjoy-


  23. #50 by mom1 on April 12, 2013 - 6:30 pm

    The letter from Martha R. Herbert, Ph.D., M.D, Harvard Medical School, makes self-evident the harm to our kids:


    In Dr. Herbert’s own words:
    “I urge you to step back from your intention to go wifi in the LAUSD and instead opt for wired technologies, particularly for those subpopulations that are most sensitive. It will be easier for you to make a healthier decision now than to undo a misguided decision later.”

  24. #51 by mom1 on April 12, 2013 - 6:36 pm

    FSD, relative to Dr. Herbert’s statement, “it will be easier for you to make a healthier decision now than to undo a misguided decision later.”

    Parents will not think kindly of FSD’s silence on this matter, and that is putting it mildly. It is much better to be upfront with parents, now, and address the issue. There is a lot at stake here, not the least being trust in the teachers, administrators, and school board.

  25. #52 by Joe's shadow on April 13, 2013 - 10:03 am

    It doesn’t add up. Something is not right with how this is going down.

    • #53 by Joe Imbriano on April 13, 2013 - 2:12 pm

      I hope this can be stopped but it looks like they are plowing right along with the ill conceived, potentially dangerous and most foolish courses of action-installing and operating extremely powerful WiFi systems instead of ethernet connections and going with wireless tablets instead of hardwired computers. We will make sure EVERY PARENT HEARS THIS SIDE OF THE STORY AS WELL AS HAVING ACCESS THE INFORMATION THAT THE DISTRICT DOES NOT WANT THEM TO KNOW ABOUT.

  26. #54 by Anonymous on April 13, 2013 - 11:17 am

    How can people that are not medical doctors, scientists, and researchers ignore what medical doctors, scientists and researchers say, and ignore concerned parents like you and others on this site? How can these people that are in charge and on the board ignore this?

    • #55 by Joe Imbriano on April 13, 2013 - 2:06 pm

      That is a great point. I think you should ask the administrators at the FSD. What kind of leadership is demonstrated by refusal to allow me to test EMF levels in my children’s school, placation, and refusing to address an issue that has the potential to endanger the safety and well being of the students? Is that what they are taught in grad school? As far as the Board of Trustees go, Tuesday night has an open microphone. You get three minutes.

      • #56 by mom1 on April 13, 2013 - 4:01 pm

        Where does the meeting take place and at what time?

        • #57 by Joe Imbriano on April 13, 2013 - 8:26 pm

          1401 W Valencia Drive, Fullerton, Ca 92831 on April 30th at 6pm. Come on out and show your support.

  27. #58 by another mom on April 13, 2013 - 3:16 pm

    Hi there! I just wanted to ask if you ever have any problems with the principal at your child school since you started this? Do you have any solutions to stop this?

  28. #61 by mom1 on April 17, 2013 - 3:57 pm

    In thinking about the silence from FSD, they are making a conscious decision to ignore the research and expose our children to the harmful health consequences of this technology. I don’t know how else to say it, this is really ugly.

  29. #62 by mom1 on April 17, 2013 - 4:01 pm

    More thoughts on this, FSD has weighed the risks of harming the children against their agenda of pushing the technology and have voted in favor of their agenda.
    Yes . . . . . mean and ugly.

    • #63 by Joe Imbriano on April 17, 2013 - 4:37 pm

      Thank you for your post. At Acacia Elementary, in a recent Panda Newsletter, they outlined the EXPANSION of the Ipad program for next year “throughout all the upper grades”. Folks at Acacia, your kids are next. While the fundraising is commendable, I question the rush to and the necessity of the allocation of funding to wireless technology. I have visited almost every campus in the entire FSD. I have not see one water filter on any drinking fountain. Is that a wise thing with the lead laden galvanized plumbing, metallic flux, and a myriad of potentially dangerous disenfectant chemicals coming out of the plumbing systems? Do you think that the teachers or staff drink unfiltered tap water? St Julianna has filters under their drinking fountains. Do you know how little they cost? Simply amazing. Look at all the disposable polyethylene terephthalate or the polycarbonate water bottles (in the hundreds of thousands if not millions each year in the FSD) that the kids needlessly bring to school, all the while they are being taught to conserve and to respect the environment.

      This announcement was right on the heels of the 3-22-13 mass email that was sent to every administrative office in the FSD, the information being personally handed to the principal, the announcement at the 3-12-13 Board of Trustees meeting and 2 days of sidewalk literature distribution. One would expect that someone with the FSD would want to discuss safety concerns as they have been laid out. There has been absolutely NO COMMUNICATION WHATSOEVER from the FSD after these events. They must fully believe that all of the science out there outlining the potential dangers of this technology is complete junk. Isn’t that amazing how people in the FSD make a living off of and pride themselves on preparing the bright students to go on into careers in science and medicine. When confronted with the sound scientific opinions of those that they have ostensibly educated, they ignore the very work of the hands that they have trained.

      I believe that you are correct with respect to your inference. Pretty shocking indeed. Right now I believe they are merely dealing with this issue as a public relations issue instead of a safety concern. It makes you wonder whether they may be drinking the unfiltered tap water too or if their filter is long overdue for a replacement.

  30. #64 by Anonymous on April 22, 2013 - 7:52 am

    You need to defend and grow this site. The information here is vital to the public.

  31. #65 by mom1 on April 22, 2013 - 8:04 pm

    This is a statement on the FSD website in regard to bullying:


    The Board of Trustees for the Fullerton School District recognizes the harmful effects of bullying on student learning and school attendance and desires to provide safe school environments that protect students from physical and emotional harm. District employees shall establish student safety as a high priority and shall not tolerate bullying of any student.

    I guess FSD cares about the harm done by bullying, not by Electromagnetic Radiation!!! Why don’t you care, FSD?

    • #66 by Joe Imbriano on April 22, 2013 - 10:54 pm

      The FSD is only following legal advice, Ed Code, and the like. Sadly, although it could, It really doesn’t operate outside of that framework. It is a merely a bureaucracy that looks and smells like old coffee grinds. Everything it does is a second or third pressing. It only does what it is told from the top down. It only listens to the parents if the clamor resonates with the District’s agenda. If it does not, they use their psychology degrees to merely placate or pretend that you are not there and wait for you to go away. I am really shocked at how the Board of Trustees has clammed up as well.

      Quantifying harm from RF emissions with potential latent deleterious effects is extremely challenging. This provides all the more reason for precautions to be taken. The RF emissions could be legal in the classrooms but that does’t necessarily mean that they are safe. There is really no way for any of us to know at this point. They have refused to answer my repeated requests to record and film measurements inside the classrooms. They apparently feel that the emissions are safe. It appears that they have chosen NOT to address the potential health concerns presented by far more qualified experts in the field than themselves as well as the information contained on this site.

      Do they care? You will know a tree by its fruit. Right now the thing is in full bloom but will the fruit set? We shall see by summer.

      • #67 by Anonymous on April 23, 2013 - 10:12 am

        “you’re killing me Larry”

  32. #68 by mom1 on April 22, 2013 - 8:14 pm

    California Healthy Kids Survey

    The CHKS allows districts to identify the health and safety needs of students, . . . . . It is designed to be part of a comprehensive decision making process to help guide the development of more effective health, prevention and youth development programs, such as Safe Schools and our mandated wellness policy.

    All these taxpayer monies spent on the health of our kids. Where do the harmful effects of WiFi in the schools come in? Is it only in certain instances that FSD is interested in the health of our children? If it interferes with FSD’s WiFi technology agenda, then they really don’t care about our children’s health and safety. In fact, they won’t even discuss this with the parents.

    • #69 by Joe Imbriano on April 22, 2013 - 11:05 pm

      Besides this http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/4-year-old-ipad-addict-gets-18k-a-month-treatment-229185.html ,

      by the time the harmful effects become apparent, most of these administrators will be retired. However, their children and their children’s children could very well end up in the medical literature along with millions of others if we are right. May God help us.

      • #70 by Anonymous on April 23, 2013 - 11:07 am

        Joe, your readers may find this article disturbing. As a parent, I know that I did.

        • #71 by Joe Imbriano on April 23, 2013 - 12:58 pm

          This is truly tragic. I grew up on a small culdesac in Orange County with over 30 kids on my block. I knew everyone in that neighborhood within a half mile radius. This wasn’t happening when I was a kid in the 1970’s. Out of the HUNDREDS of kids that I knew growing up, I never encountered any of the disabilities in the article above. I grew up near a freeway and the gas still had the tetra ethyl lead in all the blends and we survived.

          Why were we all fine and today the kids are not? Is it due to more screening and early detection? More diagnostic equipment? Hogwash! Back then EVERYONE RODE BIKES AND SKATEBOARDS WITHOUT HELMETS, played outside all day with no sunscreen, running around until the street light came on, played with and used power tools, operated gas powered lawnmowers and edgers, and shot BB and pelet guns. I submit to you that if there ever were any litmus test that would have uncovered childhood disabilities, it would have been all of these activities leading to horrific accidents and ER visits. Guess what? There were none as the kids were all born with a full deck. They kept their full decks all throughout childhood too. Most, but not all, managed to hang on to their full deck throughout adulthood. So what the heck is going on with the kids today? I can only speculate as to what changed in the environment and how multiple factors are involved. I personally believe that the EMF emissions are clearly implicated.

          Back then, high frequency microwave emissions such as the 2.45 GHz wavelength were confined to the wealthier folk’s kitchens. The microwaves cost around $600 back then and that was what two transmission overhauls cost. Needless to say, most opted out until the prices came down. Regardless, they only ran for a few minutes at a time when food needed to be nuked away from the classrooms and bedrooms.

          Today, our children, in and out of the womb, are being BATHED in these emissions. As parents, were you aware that the FSD has high powered WiFi systems that are potentially hundreds of times more powerful than the ones you have at home turned on all day 158 days a year in your child’s classrooms?

          Now the Fullerton School District wants to place a high frequency microwave transmitter in every child’s lap in the district. It is called a wireless tablet or laptop.

          You draw your own conclusions. At the very least hardwiring the devices at school and at home is the only safe alternative. We need children to think critically and to learn. Kids did fine for thousands of years up until now. Won’t you please take a step back and realize that this is the first group of kids to be subjected to this level of EMF exposure in that part of the electromagnetic spectrum in history. That is why I believe this amounts to the largest radiation experiment on children that world has ever seen. Spread the word folks. Thank you.

  33. #72 by Anonymous on April 23, 2013 - 11:50 am

    Great piece, Mr. Imbriano.

  34. #73 by Debbi R on April 26, 2013 - 9:37 pm

    Study: Use of laptop computers connected to internet through Wi-Fi decreases human sperm motility and increases sperm DNA defragmentation.
    Read it here: http://www.wifiinschools.com/uploads/3/0/4/2/3042232/avendano_wi-fi_decreases_sperm_motility__increase_dna_fragments_2011.pdf

    • #74 by mom1 on April 26, 2013 - 9:39 pm

      FSD is liable for this unhealthy school environment they are subjecting teachers and students to.

  35. #75 by jane doe on April 29, 2013 - 6:22 pm

    The photo of this thing in the child’s lap is disturbing. Do these administrators not know of the potential for harm?

    Why then, after you put them on notice, do they ignore you?

    Did any of them comment or open any semblance of a discussion on this blog? My family has been toe to toe on this issue because of this blog. We all agree that there is need for concern with the abuse of this technology.

    This needs to be addressed in a much larger forum.

    • #76 by Veritas on April 30, 2013 - 11:11 am

      “Why then, after you put them on notice, do they ignore you?”

      I think they are afraid of how disruptive this information is to their plans, so they just ignore it and hope we will go away.

      You are correct, it “needs to be addressed in a much larger forum.” Everyone is welcome to join in. ; )

  36. #77 by a good tablet on April 30, 2013 - 10:11 am

    Gotta love technology. I will certainly be back.

  37. #78 by Veritas on April 30, 2013 - 4:23 pm

    Is FSD trying to use technology as a panacea???
    FSD, do you believe that education of our children can only be achieved via technology??
    If you do, that is your problem. Technology is not a cure all for the education of our kids. A distraction? Possibly
    Are you clinging to your technology at the expense of other’s children?
    FSD school board: Do you have any of YOUR OWN children in the Fullerton school district? What makes you think that it is OK to ignore research from neuroscientists and medical doctors at the expense of my children?

  38. #79 by Joe Imbriano on April 30, 2013 - 11:50 pm

    Tonight we addressed the FSD Board of Trustees again presenting them with a few pieces of the LAUSD testimony after being completely ignored since the last meeting. After they moved the 2 non-agenda public comments (us) to follow after an agenda item with a room full of speakers to reduce the captive audience, we managed to get our 2 cents in. Slick move on their part but my intended audience was not the parents looking after their own wallets. It was the silent Board of Trustees and the entire administration, who in my opinion are not looking after the students but rather the top down agenda coming from their “superiors”. There were some refusing to look at me as I spoke all the while the room was emptying out as the clock was ticking while I was talking. No respect I tell you.

    Many received our handouts and information gladly on their way out. But tonight yet another teacher and principal refused to accept a letter from a Harvard Pediatric Neurologist and a Bio-physicist warning of the dangers of RF emissions, DNA strand breaks and other nasty stuff that I tried to offer them. The teacher stated that “there might be a problem with my superiors if I accept this”. Wow, that statement just paid for my gas tonight. Just more evidence that there is a concerted effort to block this side of the story from getting out. The genie is out of the bottle on this one already, so I feel that resistance, at this point, is futile.

    I even reminded him that this was public property, a public place and that this was an open meeting. As soon as the camera came, he went inside. That one teacher happened to be from my children’s school and was there accepting a check from the Rotary for more Ipads for the students. He stated in the presentation “It is what they need” A concerned parent came to his defense splitting hairs over how he really didn’t refuse the information but rather stated “he wasn’t really sure that he could accept the information.” I appreciated her concern and she later gladly accepted the handout. Is this Leningrad circa 1946, Orwell’s 1984 or Fullerton? A public servant that is more concerned with his superiors than public safety is neither serving the public or a servant. Look, where I come from you took it or you didn’t. The latter is the equivalent of refusal in my opinion.

    My 13 year old son and Diane running the cameras tonight did a great job. My son learned more tonight about human nature and establishment politics, than most College grads ever will. Life is the best schoolmaster. The sooner they figure out that things are not as they seem, the better they are. Certain cliques are not worth the dues, I explained to him. He watched in amazement, as almost all of the faces on the wall paraded right by, knowing full well that EVERYONE LAST ONE OF THEM RECEIVED AND COMPLETELY IGNORED THE MASS EMAIL I SENT LAST MONTH ON THE DANGERS OF WIRELESS CLASSROOMS.

    Yes, if a picture is worth a thousand words, then videos are just priceless and all, my friends, thanks to the Brown Act.

    • #80 by Veritas on May 1, 2013 - 7:41 am

      Teachers, principals, administration, school board, all refusing to looking at the information. It sounds like your son was witness to the dark side of humanity.

  39. #81 by culture of denial on May 2, 2013 - 8:45 am

    This is unbelievable.

    • #82 by Joe Imbriano on May 3, 2013 - 8:27 pm

      And the administration acts like we don’t even exist.

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!