For Immediate Release July 1, 2013 FULLERTON SCHOOL DISTRICT RELEASES REPORT ON RESPONSIBLE USE OF WIRELESS TECHNOLOGY IN THE CLASSROOM Robert Pletka, Ed.D. Superintendent, Fullerton School District (Fullerton, CA)





  1. #1 by Joe Imbriano on July 1, 2013 - 9:12 am

    I would like to thank the FSD for providing this information and making it available to the public. Now, truly the open public debate on the facts will begin as we await written permission to conduct and film our own measurements. At the last Board of Trustees meeting, Trustee Chris Thompson, advocated for my right as a parent and a taxpayer to do just that. The Fullerton Informer eagerly awaits Dr. Pletkas’s permission and is grateful to Mr. Thompson for his steadfast commitment to his constituents. We believe that the egregiousness of the actions of those who are entrusted with the well being of our children will truly become patently obvious very shortly.

    • #2 by Trust on July 2, 2013 - 6:55 am

      I want to commend Chris Thompson for advocating that a parent and taxpayer has every right to take measurements. The fact that the rest of the FSD school board cannot be open and forthright speaks to the public’s ability to trust these individuals.

  2. #3 by sayitlikeitis on July 1, 2013 - 11:19 am

    FSD school board is worthless

  3. #4 by Rude Awakening on July 1, 2013 - 12:09 pm

    Quote from Dr. Pletka’s letter to you Mr. Imbriano on May 16, 2013 regarding your request to conduct and film your own measurements in the classrooms:

    “In regards to performing any further testing, the District respectfully declines your request to perform your own independent testing. We believe that it is a disruption to the learning environment for our students. ”

    How then did the FSD allow their film crew conduct this? When the students were at lunch? Yeah, right! They obviously did it after school or on a Saturday when the school was not in session. Why can’t they allow you to do the same thing? Boy, he sure is dumb. Either he didn’t think about that when he stated that on the letter or it was the only excuse he was able to come up with to stop you from conducting your own TRUE measurements of the EFM readings in the classrooms.

    By the way, I wouldn’t doubt it if all the ipads were on airplane mode when they took the measurements.

    • #5 by amateur night on July 1, 2013 - 9:27 pm

      I wouldn’t doubt if they took those measurements FROM AN AIRPLANE. You would have to be up at around 25,000 feet to get those numbers.

  4. #6 by Technology, Mr Pletka's Sacred Cow on July 1, 2013 - 12:15 pm

    ” . . . . , the safety of our students has been and will always be our first priority.” Mr. Bob Pletka, Ph.D.

    Not really, Mr. Pletka, Ph.D., not when numerous MDs, Ph.D scientists and researchers ALL say the WiFi in classrooms is HARMFUL to our children. You choose to not even look at what the credentialed experts are documenting and cherry pick two “industrial hygienists” report based on FCC guidelines that are 17 years old! Think how much technology has changed in 17 years!!!!
    And, to top the whole thing off, we taxpayers paid for this! How much did this report cost us? How much are you costing us?
    You need to be dismissed, Mr. Pletka, Ph.D. You won’t look at anything but what serves your technology agenda, at the expense of our children.

    • #7 by Joe Imbriano on July 1, 2013 - 1:11 pm

      For the record, Dr. Pletka does not hold a PHD, he holds an EdD

  5. #8 by Ray on July 1, 2013 - 5:03 pm

    This industrial hygienist firm made serious and gross errors in their report.

    Anyone with experience measuring RF radiation will immediately recognize that the peak data values provided are not even in the right universe.

    It is plainly obvious that this crew had no idea what they were doing.

    The report details that “Executive Environmental” consultants came in the first time with a rented RF meter that wasn’t able to detect WiFi. How telling. This was not a firm with experience measuring RF radio frequency microwave radiation.

    “After further research and discussion with the District, it was decided to rent a much more sophisticated instrument, which could detect lower levels of RF”. What this indicates is that they were learning as they went. This is unacceptable given that they were investigating a health and safety issue in a school environment.

    The school district went with firm who they knew would give them the kind of treatment and results that they were seeking. They didn’t want a firm with expertise, experience, or know how. It’s obvious that this was not a priority for the school district.

    • #9 by oh yeah on July 2, 2013 - 9:19 pm

      tax dollars hard at work?
      sounds like “Executive Environmental” was doing on-the-job training

  6. #10 by Comments on report? on July 1, 2013 - 6:44 pm

    Would anyone in the RF industry care to comment on this report? Do the numbers add up?

    • #11 by amateur night on July 1, 2013 - 9:20 pm

      This isn’t happening. I don’t know what kind of circus these people are running but it sure looks like they got the best clowns in town. So how much did the taxpayers cough up for that hack job?

  7. #12 by EMR Safety Consulting on July 2, 2013 - 4:16 am

    I have over 20 years experience measuring EMR radiaiton. I can say without a doubt that the readings presented in this report are absolutely false and misleading.

    In this day and age, I recommend that everyone have access to a basic RF meter. Decent ones can be purchased for as little as $100. Currently I recommend the Cornet ED78S.

    There are a large number of doctors and scientists who have recognized the relationship between the exponential rise in the levels of EMR radiation that we are now exposed to, and the unprecedented increases in health issues.

    See: Freiburg Appeal

    What the public most needs to understand is that the industry plays a numbers game on the unaware and uneducated public, leading them to believe that the emissions from wireless devices are “low”.

    They may be low as compared to placing your child in a microwave oven, but that is not what you want to be comparing to. We should instead compare to natural background levels. If you do, you will see that the microwave radiation levels emitted by iPads are over 50 million times higher than what your father, mother, grandfather and grandmother, great grand parents, and all ancestors before you ever experienced.

    Think about that. The microwave radiation levels in the classroom are over 50 million times higher than natural levels.

    These are levels that are millions of times higher than those at which biological effects are reported in today’s science.

    If you don’t have access to an RF meter, a good place to begin to understand RF emissoins is with the many videos online of health advocates meauring RF emissions from iPads and other wireless devices.

    Although these are amateur videos, they are valuable for many reasons, one of which is that they utilize a wide variety of different measuring instruments.

    The end result is that they all show much higher levels than what the Fullerton School District Claims are being emitted from their equipment.

    Video 1: Microwave Dangers in Your Home:

    Pause the video on 3:34 and see a Gigahertz Solutions HF59B measuring an iPad up close. The RF emissions from this iPad are so high that they are maxing out this professional grade instrument.

    Video #2 iPad WiFi Radiation with Wireless Router on

    Again, peak readings in direct contact with this iPad are so high that they max out this Accoustimeter RF meter.
    (6 V/m = 9.5 uW/cm2), which is 950 times higher than Fullerton readings.

    Video #3 Dangers of WiFi Radiation

    At around 2:26 the person is standing in another room, 25 feet away from the RF source, and the readings are still higher than Fullerton iPads at a 1 foot distance.

    Video #4 WiFi Laptop Emits More Microwave Radiation Than Cell Phone

    At around 1:30 there are measurements being taken of a small laptop at a one foot distance. Peak readings are in excess of 3 V/m = 2.4 uW/cm2 (300 times higher than Fullerton iPads)

    • #13 by Joe Imbriano on July 2, 2013 - 11:46 am

      Thank you for weighing in and shedding light on this very issue that appears to be baffling those who hold themselves out to be the experts.

  8. #14 by R.D. on July 2, 2013 - 10:35 am

    Sounds like more BS to avoid the real tests.

  9. #15 by disbelief on July 3, 2013 - 8:59 pm

    I can’t believe the report is so off and then the superintendent proclaims that everything is safe for the children.

  10. #16 by Irate Parent on July 4, 2013 - 10:27 am

    Dr. Pletka,

    It appears that from what I perceive to be multiple factual errors in your press release that you have spent little to no time researching this issue. You state to the public that the safety of the students is of your highest priority, however it appears that your inability to grasp even the most basic facts shows otherwise.

    You stated that the LAUSD District Precautionary Threshold Level is the same as FCC guidelines. Actually the FCC allows for public exposure levels of 1,000 uW/cm2 which is designed to protect against ACUTE BURNING and AND TOTALLY DISREGARDS NON THERMAL EFFECTS, when the LAUSD Precautionary Threshold Level is set at: 0.1 uW/cm2. This is a ridiculous assertion that I believe to be designed to confuse the unsuspecting parents of The FSD. Shame on you.

    The FCC and LAUSD Threshold Levels are 10,000 times apart.

    FCC: 1,000 uW/cm2
    LAUSD: 0.1 uW/cm2

    Given that this health and safety issue was placed before you months ago, it is unbelievable and unconscionable that you don’t even have a grasp of these basic facts.

    According to the Fullerton Executive Cabinet Salary Schedule, you are paid $200,000 (plus benefits, pension, etc) for only 224 days of public service per year.

    That is a substantial salary and with it comes substantial responsibility, the most basic of which is to ensure the health and safety of our children while they are at school.

    Given the depth of evidence placed before, including piles of peer reviewed studies and expert testimonies from many top scientific and medical authorities, you have had a personal responsibility to conduct a thorough investigation of this health and safety issue. In my opinion it appears to be clear that you have done no such thing.

    Dr. Pletka, what you fail to understand, on a most basic level, is that there is an enormous and compelling body of scientific literature reporting biological and health effects from RF microwave radiation at levels found in a WiFi classroom environment. Rather than to ignore this science, it is your responsibility to understand what levels are and are not safe.

    The scientific record currently reports biological effects at 0.003 uW/cm2, which is much lower than radiation levels present in a WiFi classroom. I believe that due to what I perceive is your authoritative arrogance, you issued in your public statement a false assurance that exposure levels within the school are safe, when in fact the science shows otherwise.

    Dr. Pletka, it appears that in my opinion you have mislead parents about the safety of their children, you have refused to properly investigate this issue, you have hired an unqualified firm that took slipshod measurements, and then you issued what appears to be a false assurance of safety to the community. In my opinion, you do not deserve the chair that you sit on.

    I can guarantee that your salary, no matter how cushy of a lifestyle that it affords you, is in no way worth the consequences that you face when parents realize what you have done.

    • #17 by amateur night on July 4, 2013 - 11:19 am

      Man alive, you go girl or boy or whatever you are and by the way stop calling him docktah.

  11. #18 by amateur night on July 4, 2013 - 10:47 am

    Dr. Pletka made a statement that this is “totally safe for the children” in the press release. What the heck are his qualifications? Is he a scientist? Obviously not if he can’t read what Mr. Imbriano has been emailing, passing out to every Tom, Dick and Harry and plastering all over this damn town. This is unbelievable. There are studies and research up the ying yang by real experts that I have read that say no way Jose with this stuff. Just a quick read off of one of Imbriano’s stinkin’ flyers will open anyone’ s eyes.

    • #19 by Anonymous on July 5, 2013 - 10:29 pm

      ur killin’ me larry

  12. #20 by amateur night on July 9, 2013 - 9:05 pm

    Hey Vern, ya’ all know how to mesure them there thingamajiggers? Someone from the exectives over at enviromentalism told me to put some dots next to all the numbers on this here paper towel. Whadya all do to my chili cheese fries?

Comments are closed.

Copyright © 2013 All rights reserved. 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!