His death was a  tragic, untimely loss, seemingly without reason. The hope of many is that this field of dreams in our home town will offer the next generation what may seem impossible: a chance at the big league and the big time. My sincere hope in this article is, maybe in his memory, I can expose what I believe has stolen the best years of Gary’s and many other ballplayers’ lives. That is what I will attempt to explore and assert. The cruel twists and turns of this arduous life don’t make sense at times, especially when it seems the good die young and the impetuous inherit the earth. I never had the pleasure of personally meeting Mr. Gary Carter,  but his reputation preceded him. His career in the major leagues spanned decades and his philanthropy will span even more. He was known as “Kid” for his ebullient demeanor. He was known to all as number 8 on the field, to some as dad, to some as one of a kind to many more, he will be forever remembered as Gary Carter, one of baseball’s great players.

On Saturday, Febuary 21st, field two at the Fullerton Sports complex will be dedicated and officially named Gary Carter field.

One of my sons is a catcher and wore number 8 for several years. My older son will be playing in the tribute game being held in Mr. Carter’s honor, ironically here, just a few miles to the east of where Gary used to play in his younger years in the empty fields on the corner of Rosecrans and Sunny Ridge drive. Today there you can find a 20+ acre golf course which is meticulously landscaped and cared for which is now known as the McColl superfund site.

Gary attended Sunny Hills High School and would eventually write his own ticket because of his athletic gifts. He had what it took to make the big leagues and that he did. In 1972 he signed with the Expos. Life would never be the same. Gary was drafted as a shortstop but several years later he would permanently change positions to catcher. He would spend the better part of the next 20 years behind home plate. This would be the “kid’s” new home. Throughout his remarkable career,  Gary Carter caught more major league games than all but three players in baseball history. Some would estimate that Gary Carter caught upwards of three to four hundred thousand pitches behind home plate.

Gary Carter eventually developed a very aggressive form of terminal cancer in his brain that led to his tragic, untimely death. The type of cancer is known as glioblastoma. Brain cancer seems to be increasingly prevalent in our society and even more so in some sports. Baseball, in particular seems to be the sport where the tumors are becoming the most prevalent. You would initially suspect that head trauma would be responsible and that contact sports like hockey or football would lead the way statistically. Oddly enough, that is not the case. Baseball players like catchers and pitchers seem to be the ones plagued by this dreaded disease.

Cancer is a disease whose causes can vary just a widely as the different forms and is very difficult to prove what specifically is responsible.  With respect to the big leagues, the experts are baffled as to causation but in agreement that there is indeed a strange correlation to baseball. Time magazine had a piece a few years back on it:

another-case-of-brain-cancer-in-baseball-whats-going-on

There are many baseball players that spend time behind home plate and on the mound. and they live long healthy lives. However there is definitely an inordinate amount that do not.  I believe there are reasons that he and other players met the same fate and succumb to this disease and while many who spend their lives out on that field do not.’

I would like to explore what I believe to be the common denominator and and cause of what is being observed. I believe there is a logical explanation for we are witnessing.

Gary Carter was a catcher. He had tumors that resembled a snake wrapped around the back of his brain. Let us look at some of baseballs other players that suffered a similar fate.

Dan Quisenberry was a right handed pitcher who developed brain cancer on his left temporal lobe.

Dan Quisenberry 1953-1998

Bobby Bonds, the father of Barry Bonds, was an outfielder. He developed a brain tumor and lung cancer.

Bobby Bonds 1946-2003

One of the more notable anomalies in baseball’s bizarre brain tumor incidence is what went on with The Phillys  at veterans stadium.

Five players, Tug McGraw, John Vukovich, Johnny Oates, Ken Brett and Darren Daulton all had brain tumors.

Tug Mcgraw was a pitcher. The location of his tumor was located on his left temporal lobe.

Tug McGraw 1944-2004

John Vukovich was an infielder spending most of his career at 3rd base.

John Vukovich 1947-2007

Johnny Oates was a catcher. His tumor was in the back of  his head in the brain stem.

Johnny Oates 1946-2004

Ken Brett was a pitcher. His tumor was on his frontal lobe.

Ken Brett 1948-2003

Darren Daulton is a catcher. He has a brain tumor.

Darren Daulton

Ricky Stone is a pitcher. He developed a malignant brain tumor.

Ricky Stone

Bobby Mercer was a center fielder and a broadcaster and his tumor was on his right frontal lobe.

Bobby Mercer
1946-2008

Curt Schilling, one of the Phillies’ all-time greatest pitchers and recently announced  he was recently diagnosed with cancer

Giants pitcher Dave Dravecky, 32, had a cancerous tumor on his left arm.

Lets look at some umpires. Although they rotate their positions on the field, they spend plenty of time behind the plate.

Orioles long-time umpires attendant Ernie Tyler, who has worked 51 consecutive Opening Days including  3,819 consecutive home games  in Baltimore, was diagnosed with a brain tumor.

Longtime big league home plate umpire Harry Wendelstedt had a career that spanned from 1966-98  and was diagnosed with a brain tumor. 

Henry Wendelstedt
1938-2012

Frank Dezelan,  a major league home plate umpire,  umpired for 10 years in the minor leagues and then in the major leagues from 1966-1971. Surgery to remove a brain tumor ended his career when he was 42.

Frank Dezelan
1929-2011

Lanny Harris was a home plate umpire in the National League for 7 full seasons, from 1979 to 1985. In 1985, he was diagnosed with an inoperable brain tumor, and given six months to live.

Lanny Harris
1940-1991

Todd Felis walked away from a coordinator position with Big League Dreams to return to umpiring logging 5000 games. He was diagnosed with a brain tumor.

A lot goes on behind the plate as that is where all the action is. There are a lot of eyes and ears 30 feet back in the stands. What most people don’t realize is that part of the action behind the plate and elsewhere involves radar. The radar is aimed at the pitcher from behind home plate and at times, in center field aimed at the catchers to get the velocities off of the bat. It is used on almost every ball that is pitched and caught, whether it be at practice, spring training or during regular season, a radar gun is in operation aimed directly at the pitcher. The catcher is also smack dab in the middle of the radar beam. Gary Carter was no exception. He was in the radar gun’s line of fire almost all of the time. For that matter, so are most catchers, pitchers and even umpires. So why then, do not all pitchers, catchers and umpires get brain tumors?

Let’s talk about radar. Radar employs microwave technology to determine the velocity of the ball as it travels to home plate from the pitcher’s mound. It emits a precisely focused, directional beam of electromagnetic radiation that travels right through the catcher, umpire and to the pitcher. Just how many radar guns were in use at each respective game is anyone’s guess. The frequency of the radiation these devices operate on is similar to the microwave oven in your home, which is around 2.4 GHz. This is also the same frequency that your WiFi and WiFi enabled wireless devices, including some cordless and cellular phones operate on as well. This particular frequency has been shown to make the blood brain barrier permeable to toxins and metals.

I believe this unique combination of cause and effect is why Gary and these individuals fell victim to this tragedy and many others, although exposed to the toxins, were not exposed to the radar failed to develop tumors. Those exposed to the radar that were not exposed to the toxins failed to develop tumors as well. I believe that both are required for the brain tumors to form and this explains what we are observing.

Below is an excerpt from Joel M. Moskowitz, Ph.D. Director, Center for Family and Community Health School of Public Health, University of California, Berkeley  that confirms what low intensity microwaves do to the blood brain barrier:

“Since exposure to low intensity microwave radiation can open the blood-brain barrier, toxic chemical exposure may be more harmful to anyone who is exposed to wireless radiation. For example, see http://bit.ly/14HDUpZ.]”

‘Putting the next generation of brains in danger’

Saundra Young, CNN, Feb 14, 2014

The number of chemicals known to be toxic to children’s developing brains has doubled over the last seven years, researchers said.

Dr. Philip Landrigan at Mount Sinai School of Medicine in New York and Dr. Philippe Grandjean from Harvard School of Public Health in Boston, authors of the review published Friday in The Lancet Neurology journal, say the news is so troubling they are calling for a worldwide overhaul of the regulatory process in order to protect children’s brains.

“We know from clinical information on poisoned adult patients that these chemicals can enter the brain through the blood brain barrier and cause neurological symptoms,” said Grandjean.

“When this happens in children or during pregnancy, those chemicals are extremely toxic, because we now know that the developing brain is a uniquely vulnerable organ. Also, the effects are permanent.”

The two have been studying industrial chemicals for about 30 years. In 2006, they published data identifying five chemicals as neurotoxicants — substances that impact brain development and can cause a number of neurodevelopmental disabilities including attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder, autism, dyslexia and other cognitive damage, they said.

Those five are lead, methylmercury, arsenic, polychlorinated biphenyls, or PCBs, and toluene.

Banned in the United States in 1979, PCBs were used in hundreds of products including paint, plastic, rubber products and dyes. Toluene is in household products like paint thinners, detergents, nail polish, spot removers and antifreeze.

7 chemicals in your food

Now, after further review, six more chemicals have been added to the list: manganese; fluoride; tetrachloroethylene, a solvent; a class of chemicals called polybrominated diphenyl ethers, or flame retardants; and two pesticides, chlorpyrifos, which is widely used in agriculture, and dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane, or DDT.

“The continuing research has identified six new chemicals that are toxic to the developing human brain,” said Landrigan. “We’re turning up chemicals at the rate of about one a year that we’re discovering are capable of damaging the developing brain of a human fetus or human infant.”

To examine fluoride, which is in tap water in many areas, Landrigan and Grandjean looked at an analysis of 27 studies of children, mostly in China, who were exposed to fluoride in drinking water at high concentrations. The data, they said, suggests a decline on average of about seven IQ points.

There’s another big concern: “We are very worried that there are a number of other chemicals out there in consumer products that we all contact every day that have the potential to damage the developing brain, but have never been safety tested,” Landrigan said.

“Over the last six or seven years we are actually adding brain toxic chemicals at a greater speed than we are adding toxicity evidence in children’s brains,” Grandjean said.

“At least 1,000 chemicals using lab animals have shown that they somehow interfere with brain function in rodents — rats and mice — and those are prime candidates for regulatory control to protect human developing brains. But this testing has not been done systematically.”

At greatest risk? Pregnant women and small children, according to Grandjean. According to the review, the biggest window of vulnerability occurs in utero, during infancy and early childhood.

The impact is not limited to loss of IQ points.

“Beyond IQ, we’re talking about behavior problems — shortening of attention span, increased risk of ADHD,” Landrigan said.

“We’re talking about emotion problems, less impulse control, (being) more likely to make bad decisions, get into trouble, be dyslexic and drop out of school. … These are problems that are established early, but travel through childhood, adolescence, even into adult life.”

BPA, phthalate exposure may cause fertility problems

It’s not just children: All these compounds are toxic to adults, too. In fact, in 2006 the pair documented 201 chemicals toxic to the adult nervous system, usually stemming from occupational exposures, poisonings and suicide attempts.

The American Chemistry Council, meanwhile, called the review a “rehash” of the authors’ first review.

“This iteration is as highly flawed as the first, as once again the authors ignore the fundamental scientific principles of exposure and potency,” said council spokesman Scott Jensen.

“What is most concerning is that the authors focus largely on chemicals and heavy metals that are well understood to be inappropriate for children’s exposure, are highly regulated and/or are restricted or being phased out. They then extrapolate that similar conclusions should be applied to chemicals that are more widely used in consumer products without evidence to support their claims. Such assertions do nothing to advance true scientific understanding and only create confusion and alarm.”

Landrigan and Grandjean now say all untested chemicals in use and all new chemicals should be tested for developmental neurotoxicity.

This is not a new concept. In 2007, the European Union adopted regulations known as REACH — Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals — to protect human health from risks posed by chemicals. REACH covers all chemicals, placing the burden of proof on companies to prove that any chemicals they make are safe.

“We are behind right now and we’re falling further behind,” Landrigan said. “… I find it very irritating some of the multinational manufacturers are now marketing products in Europe and the U.S. with the same brand name and same label, but in Europe (they) are free of toxic chemicals and in the U.S. they contain toxic chemicals.”

The best example of this, he said, is cosmetics and phthalates. Phthalates are a group of chemicals used in hundreds of products from cosmetics, perfume, hair spray, soap and shampoos to plastic and vinyl toys, shower curtains, miniblinds, food containers and plastic wrap.

You can also find them in plastic plumbing pipes, medical tubing and fluid bags, vinyl flooring and other building materials. They are used to soften and increase the flexibility of plastic and vinyl.

In Europe, cosmetics don’t contain phthalates, but here in the United States some do.

Phthalates previously were used in pacifiers, soft rattles and teethers. But in 1999, after a push from the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, American companies stopped using them in those products.

“We certainly have the capability, it’s a matter of political will,” Landrigan said. “We have tried in this country over the last decade to pass chemical safety legislation but the chemical industry and their supporters have successfully beat back the effort.”

However, the Food and Drug Administration said two of the most common phthalates, — dibutylphthalate, or DBP, used as a plasticizer in products such as nail polishes to reduce cracking by making them less brittle, and dimethylphthalate, or DMP used in hairsprays — are now rarely used in this country.

Diethylphthalate, or DEP, used in fragrances, is the only phthalate still used in cosmetics, the FDA said.

“It’s not clear what effect, if any, phthalates have on human health,” according to the FDA’s website. “An expert panel convened from 1998 to 2000 by the National Toxicology Program (NTP), part of the National Institute for Environmental Safety and Health, concluded that reproductive risks from exposure to phthalates were minimal to negligible in most cases.”

But Grandjean is unfazed.

“We know enough about this to say we need to put a special emphasis on protecting developing brains. We are not just talking about single chemicals anymore. We are talking about chemicals in general.”

“This does not necessarily mean restrict the use of all chemicals, but it means that they need to be tested whether they are toxic to brain cells or not,” he said.

“We have the test methods and protocols to determine if chemicals are toxic to brain cells. If we look at this globally, we are looking at more than a generation of children — a very high proportion of today’s children have been exposed to lead, mercury and other substances, including substances that have not yet been tested but are suspect of being toxic to brain development.”

The Environmental Working Group is an environmental health research organization that specializes in toxic chemical analysis and has long called for reforms. In 2004, the group tested 10 samples of umbilical cord blood for hundreds of industrial pollutants and found an average of 200 in each sample.

“Here in the U.S., the federal law put in place to ostensibly protect adults and children from exposures to dangerous chemicals, including those that can present serious risks to the brain and nervous systems, has been an abject failure,” said Environmental Working Group spokesman Alex Formuzis.

“The 1976 Toxic Substances Control Act has instead been largely responsible for the pollution in people beginning in the womb, where hundreds of industrial contaminants literally bathe the developing fetus.”

Landrigan is recruiting pregnant women for a new study that will test for chemical exposures. He said it’s inevitable that over the next few years more chemicals will be added to the list.

His concern? “The ability to detect these chemicals lags behind the chemical industries’ ability to develop new chemicals and put them into consumer products. That’s why we need new legislation in this country to close that gap.”

“We are lagging behind,” Grandjean said. “And we are putting the next generation of brains in danger.”

http://cnn.it/MUg2sK

Joel M. Moskowitz, Ph.D.
Director, Center for Family and Community Health
School of Public Health, University of California, Berkeley
Center: http://cfch.berkeley.edu

There are many studies and research papers that confirm that microwaves allow toxins to get into the brain that would under normal circumstances, not be able to enter:

Increased blood–brain barrier permeability in mammalian brain

Mark Merila

Colorado Rockies scout Chris Forbes came down with two brain tumors.

Tom Pratt was the 12-year pitching coach for the MLB’s Chicago Cubs and has a brain tumor.

Michael Weiner, the executive director of the Major League Baseball Players Association died of brain cancer. I believe it was probably due to his cell phone use. 

Gliomas (brain cancers) have been linked to wireless exposure.

http://www.pathophysiologyjournal.com/article/S0928-4680(09)00009-1/abstract

As a matter of fact, the Italian supreme court ruled that microwave radiation from cell phones did in fact cause tumors. Remember that radar guns emit microwave radiation.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/10/19/us-italy-phones-idUSBRE89I0V320121019

How about other sports like tennis that use radar?

tennis radar system

So how many tennis players are getting brain tumors?

Tim Gullikson, the uncommon tennis player who never made an enemy and who became the coach of the best player in the world, died of the brain cancer he had been fighting for nearly 18 months at the age of 44.

Timothy Ernest “Tim” Gullikson
1951-1996

Helen Kelesi  had a brain tumor.

Helen Kelesi

James Broach had just become the first and only Trinity men’s tennis player to win a national championship in singles and doubles. He died after a three-year battle with brain cancer. He was 37

James Broach
1986-2013

Renee Simpson died of brain cancer at age 47.

Rene Simpson
1986 -2013

Todd Witsken was a three-time All-American at USC and died of brain cancer at age 34

Todd Witsken
1963-1998

Leander Paes, one of the world’s best doubles tennis players, was treated for a brain lesion that turned out to be a parasitic brain infection.

Alice Reen, is a professional tennis player and a two-time brain tumor survivor.

Stephen Bell, a champion tennis player died of a brain tumor at the age of 38.

Stephen Bell
1969-2009

Chuck McKinley was clearly among the most charismatic players of the early 1960s. He passed away far too young at 45 of a brain tumor. 

Chuck McKinley
1941-1986

I believe that so many are dead or dying from wireless microwave radiation this and yet government and the industry is trying to hide it from the public. How could major league baseball or the tennis associations not even mention any of this anywhere? Has no one ever put these pieces together?

Radar guns emit wireless microwave radiation.   Wireless microwave radiation has been determined to be a class 2B carcinogen by the World Health Organization. list of class 2B carcinogens begins on page 9

Some scientists believe if accurately assessed today, wireless microwave radiation would be listed as a class 1 carcinogen. Dr Hardell of the World Health Organization EMF Working Group,  now states radio frequency radiation meets criteria for a  group 1 carcinogen and that  “Current guidelines for exposure need to be urgently revised”. http://lennarthardellenglish.wordpress.com/2013/10/30/using-the-hill-viewpoints-from-1965-for-evaluating-strengths-of-evidence-of-the-risk-for-brain-tumors-associated-with-use-of-mobile-and-cordless-phones/

Think of the  tremendous industry influence over the scientific community and government regulators.

The FCC exposure guidelines for wireless radiation only take into consideration acute burning of tissue and ignore all non thermal biological effects that are found at much lower exposure levels.  There is much debate over this particular issue. For example:

fcc-allows-for-100-million-more-times-the-microwave-exposure-than-the-austrian-medical-association-recommends/

fccs-wireless-radiation-exposure-guidelines-ignore-an-entire-realm-of-effects

Epa scientist on wireless

Cell phones, WiFi routers, wireless TVs, dvr’s, blue tooth devices,iPads, tablets, laptops, security systems, printers, and any other wireless device emits this carcinogen. Depending on how toxic of an environment you live in, will determine how synergistically the radiation with work with the poisons around you and your children to produce disease.

I believe that Gary Carter and many others would possibly still be alive today if those we entrust with our safety and our very lives at times would stand up and face head on what has spent the better part of the last 35 years behind home plate. It sadly has now managed to enter our homes, schools and workplaces, and in some cases, without even our knowledge or consent.

Major league baseball as well as all sports need to act on this and end this needless tragedy of some of our finest men and women who tirelessly give of themselves for the game.

There is nothing more precious than to see the sun shine forever in a child’s eyes. Their excitement of being in the stands of a big league game or simply playing on the little league field is priceless.  We all know that without the children there is no tomorrow for any aspect of our society.  How much longer will we have to tolerate the silence on the wireless microwave radiation dangers especially to our children?

I would like to show you a photo of what I believe to be the biggest threat of all to our children. It is taking place in the classrooms and maybe even at home. This is a photo of a child, not with a radar gun in his lap, but something similar. It is a microwave transmitter.

The Fullerton Informer shared from:

Fullerton School District Superintendent

Like This Page · March 8, 2013

Student at Commonwealth creating a story on the iPad.

The wireless antenna is right on his zipper. Need I say more?

What is all this wireless doing to the unborn? Are the same mechanisms at work in Autism involving metals and microwave radiation?

http://thefullertoninformer.com/carbonyl-iron-and-orange-county-the-autism-capital-of-the-state/

You see, my son will be playing on that field tomorrow in honor of Gary Carter. Ironically my other son is number 8 on his little league team and my oldest will be wearing the “kid” shirt tomorrow at the game. My hope for my sons is that they will have a “kid” of their own someday and with any luck more than just one. Sadly I believe that what is taking place right before our very eyes may make that reality a mere impossibility some day.

When my father died of cancer some 12 years ago, I availed myself to warn others of the mistakes he made in the hopes of many others gaining insight into what may not be evident to the unsuspecting.

While what has happened to Gary Carter and those that have gone before him cannot be changed, what can be gained is insight into what needs to change so that others don’t have to go down that road. Ladies and gentlemen, wireless radiation is not harmless, the trillion dollar wireless industry is not your friend and if you think the government is going to protect you, you have another thing coming. The dangers of microwave radiation have been known for the last 50 years and are still being actively suppressed to this day.

I am sure that if the players that gave their all to the fans that meant it all to them were here today and know what is now evident, they would want you to act in a way consistent with the values they collectively embodied as a team. The need to be strong, courageous, brave and to persevere in spite of at times, insurmountable odds, and to act in a way that was fair, kind, and loving towards those who are the most vulnerable would be the best tribute to Gary Carter and the others that any of us could ever make.

Do it for the “kid” and for all the “kids”. Help us end the largest radiation experiment that the world has ever known that is currently being conducted on all players in this game of life, including our children  so that the “kids” may live to display Gary Carter’s once youthful exuberance in perpetuity and have “kids” of their own someday. I am sure he would have wanted it that way.

The most recent Fullerton Observer hit the stands the other day. I have to give credit to the crew over there as The Observer is the only paper that will touch this wireless classroom issue with a ten foot pole and that is truly commendable. You know there is a lot going on in this town that would qualify under the term of “inconvenient truth”. The fact is, no one cares to deal with inconvenient truths. Sadly, when those two words end up in the same sentence, it’s lights out meatball for logic and hello Dolly for cognitive dissonance.

So how does one deal with these when confronted with something inconvenient? Well, prudent avoidance is extremely effective if no one else is looking. Denial is always an option unless the word is getting out and it is ending up in your face. Spin can be successful if your audience has a very myopic perspective and a limited memory. For the more sophisticated at heart and late in the game, you can call good old subterfuge  to the rescue.

A few weeks ago, a Fullerton resident, and mother along with her 87 year old mother were passing out fliers to the parents of children as they were dropping their kids off over at Acacia Elementary.

http://thefullertoninformer.com/the-public-sidewalk-free-speech-our-childrens-health/

As parents with a conscience and some critical thinking skills that have not been impaired by halide toxicity, they were legally attempting to warn parents of a potential imminent threat to the safety of school children. FSD staff, brass and board are no stranger to this information as they have been ignoring it long enough to birth a child. So these ladies, being freedom loving Americans that happen to take the “love your neighbor” scripture literally instead of allegorically, were freely and peacefully exercising their first amendment rights out on that sidewalk passing out fliers. These flyers were not printed on yellow paper being dropped out of an aircraft, rather they were clearly written warnings citing groups like the American Academy of Pediatrics, and some Harvard trained pediatric neurologist with links to thousands of scientific studies that warn against what Karen Whisnant and Robert Pletka with the tacit approval of the silent school board is doing to the Acacia kids with their wireless radiation experiment in the classrooms. http://thefullertoninformer.com/is-this-your-child/, You get the picture.

So at the drive thru, the kids can hold the pickles and hold the lettuce but  in the classrooms special orders do upset us. No wireless, no education at Acacia. That was the final from Brother Bob some time ago. So rather than crawl under a rock inside a Faraday cage with my kids, I had some of my colleagues filming these wonderful ladies do what they felt inclined to do, that is warn the parents that sending their children into that environment maybe isn’t such a good idea.  I will tell you what is not a good idea, and that is stepping on the egos of those who have dug their heels in on this issue all the way to China because Karen Whisnant who personally refused this information at least twice called the police on this law abiding, valiant 87 year old grandmother who puts all of these servile, spineless lackeys to shame.

So now enter Jim James from Fullerton who wrote into the Observer in response to my letter to all involved in this potentially unmitigated public health disaster in the making. You can read what I believe to be his subterfuge piece missing the boat right here on page 2 :http://www.fullertonobserver.com/

Yeah he says it costs a quarter for gas to have two Crown Victoria police interceptors show up to shake down an 87 year old grandmother passing out fliers. With super at 4 bucks a gallon, the lead foots down Commonwealth to Acacia and North to Dorothy, he is probably off by a few bucks. Sure the salaries are paid regardless of whether they are shaking down an 87 year old grandmother, murdering a homeless man or simply arresting a drunk driver. My point was the school called the police on a law abiding citizen exercising her first amendment rights on a public sidewalk. It was done simply to intimidate and to embarrass people that were not in agreement with her forced irradiation classroom model. Jim James you spin it well. You introduce terms like missing persons, 25 cents, sick and tired, community and donut shop.

Jim James, what is your dog in this fight? Is it the health of these school children? Is it your ardent support of free speech?  Is it your concern over the fatally flawed business model of the FSD with their purchasing of all these contraptions that if you add the letters c and e after the letter a to that word, you just might get a glimpse of the permanent version of what the social engineers have in store for the unsuspecting? Do tell. What prompted to you to write this letter?

Subterfuge defined. Plain and simple.

Kids’ health is on the line, you talk about 25 cents worth of gas.

Police from one of the most notorious departments in America are called on an 87 year old grandmother and you talk about being sick and tired.

The First Amendment was being attacked and you talk about a donut shop.

The school district officials ignore this information for almost a year and you talk about someone doing their JOB.

No, not one mention of the kids, the thousands of scientific studies that warn against the wireless classroom experiment, the fact that someone could have gone to jail or even beaten to death for doing nothing, and no mention of one government entity (the school district) throwing its weight around to intimidate the law abiding taxpayers.

No, once again, not one mention of the possible health dangers to our children as a result of this potentially unmitigated public health disaster in the making, just a reference to chump change.

When you are dealing with lackeys in lockstep formation from the fields of education and academia along with those in industries like telecom and defense, and the servile, sold out in the cubicles, what else would you expect? Face this issue head on? It is a nightmare. Try being one of those 14,o00 children in the FSD as the backs of the grown ups are turning on them. Yes, they are going to have microwave transmitters in their laps for the rest of their lives.

With the vampires running the blood bank at The FCC, with the FSD and the FJUHSD boards appearing to be asleep at the switch and with Pletka’s and Giokaris’s feet on the gas, one has to wonder in light of all the science on both sides of this issue, what is this all going to do to the children? Chronic, long term pulse modulated wireless microwave radiation exposure trillions of times the normal background levels in direct proximity to the sensitive developing reproductive areas of children has never been studied. What has been known for decades is that microwaves are dangerous even at what is commonly referred to as  “low power”.  7 years ago the German’s warned us:

http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/green-living/germany-warns-citizens-to-avoid-using-wifi-401845.html

40 years ago the Navy told us:

http://safeschool.ca/uploads/Navy_Radiowave_Brief_1_.pdf

A year ago the experts warned us:

http://wifiinschools.com/lausd-testimony.html

HERE ARE  ONE THOUSAND THREE HUNDRED AND NINETY SIX  Reference Links to Peer-Reviewed Studies re RF Microwave Radiation

Parents for Safe Schools 2013 Collection of Studies, Videos and News Releases

Just like Roman Schulze’s wife Michele Garden was “sick and tired” of the flyers on the windshields over at Acacia ending up in the gutter because she made herself the self appointed street sweeper, another one decides to jump in the” irradiate the children and attack the first amendment” basket.  Jim James is sick and tired alright. Jan Weiner chimed in from over at CSUF a few weeks ago on the wireless issue on the heels of Dr. Roman Schulze’s presentation to the Glendale Unified’s board convincing them to green light  the WiFi party in our northern Agenda 21 neighbors’ classrooms. Just when you thought it couldn’t get any stranger-

Jim James serves it up straight on the rocks and spoon feeds us pure subterfuge. Yes it is all just subterfuge. Jim James has spoken indeed.

We too will continue to speak up for these kids while Jimmy Boy, you can keep the chump change. The largest radiation experiment on children that the world has ever known is well underway. It needs to come to an end. To all of you who know better, please don’t turn your backs on those who already have the deck stacked to the hilt against them. Silence in this case, I believe, is complicity of the worst kind. 

Jim, we will never get sick and tired of people like you getting sick and tired because when people like the aforementioned get sick and tired, that just means that we are becoming more effective. We cannot ever afford to get sick and tired of having the backs of  these kids. Not getting sick and tired is gonna make all the difference in the world to them someday whether you are sick and tired or not.

Jan Weiner speaks

– See more at: http://thefullertoninformer.com/jan-weiner-speaks/#sthash.BxtMBzuv.dpuf

THE FULLERTON FIVE PART 2- For the health of our children, can reason prevail?

– See more at: http://thefullertoninformer.com/the-fullerton-five-part-2-for-the-health-of-our-children-can-reason-prevail/#sthash.dvZo8sWq.dpuf

Make no bones about it, the dosage is higher than a kite and it is not what the doctor ordered. Are your kids at risk at school in these wireless classrooms with the schools using commercial or industrial grade routers that broadcast on several frequencies at the same time? You want your kids slouched over an in use wireless radiation emitting cell phone all day? How about at home  or everywhere else with these things right in front of their heads and in their laps all the time? That is exactly what your children are doing at school and at home. These tablet devices are microwave transmitters and emit wireless radiation trillions of times the normal background levels that many of us and our parents were exposed to as children.  

What will it take to get the parents to act. I think that there are many obstacles, not the least of which is them dealing with the fact that they themselves have been irradiating their children since the beginning. So if they acknowledge this as harmful, then they have to deal with their guilt. It is time to deal with reality, swallow the pride and put your children ahead of your fears, the school administrators and your fair weather friends ladies and gentlemen. We are talking about your kids, a trillion dollar industry that doesn’t give a rat’s behind about them, and school administrators that will do whatever they are ordered to do without batting an eye.

 Let us begin.

In this chart, we can see that for those that used a cell phone for over 1640 hours in 1-4 years, meaning about an hour a day, had an OR of 4.8 for developing a meningioma brain tumor and an OR of 3.77 for developing a glioma.

_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Hardell L, Carlberg M, Hansson Mild K. Pooled analysis of two case-control studies on
use of cellular and cordless telephones and the risk for malignant brain tumours
diagnosed in 1997-2003. Int Arch Occup Environ Health 2006

It takes a certain amount of exposure for brain tumors to start to appear.  In this chart by a Swedish team of independent researchers lead by Lennart Hardell, there was only a slight increase in risk from using a cell phone 1-1000 hours. The brain tumor risk really jumped, however, after 1000 hours of usage, and was much higher with prolonged usage.

According to the science, using a cell phone for over 1000 hours leads to an increased risk of brain cancer. According to the manufacturer, iPads emit as much or more radiation than cell phones. According to research, children absorb more radiation than adults.  Given this evidence, what will happen to these children who spend at least 4 hours a day on an iPad at school, followed by another 4 hours at home?  This is at least 2000 hours each and every year, and at least 12,000 hours of exposure in elementary school alone.

Gumral N. et al., 2009. Effects of selenium and L-carnitine on
oxidative stress in blood of rat induced by 2.45-GHz radiation from
wireless devices. Biol Trace Elem Res. 132(1-3): 153-163.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19396408

Havas M. et al., 2010. Provocation study using heart rate variability
shows microwave radiation from 2.4GHz cordless phone affects autonomic
nervous system. European Journal of Oncology Library Vol. 5:
273-300.http://www.icems.eu/papers.htm?f=/c/a/2009/12/15/MNHJ1B49KH.DTL
part 2.

Havas M. and Marrongelle J. 2013. Replication of heart rate
variability provocation study with 2.45GHz cordless phone confirms
original findings. Electromagn Biol Med 32(2):
253-266.https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23675629

Maganioti A. E. et al., 2010. Wi-Fi electromagnetic fields exert
gender related alterations on EEG. 6th International Workshop on
Biological Effects of Electromagnetic
fields.http://www.istanbul.edu.tr/6internatwshopbioeffemf/cd/pdf/poster/WI-FI%20ELECTROMAGNETIC%20FIELDS%20EXERT%20GENDER.pdf

Margaritis L.H. et al., 2013. Drosophila oogenesis as a bio-marker
responding to EMF sources. Electromagn Biol Med., Epub ahead of
print.http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23915130

Naziroğlu M. and Gumral 2009. Modulator effects of L-carnitine and
selenium on wireless devices (2.45 GHz)-induced oxidative stress and
electroencephalography records in brain of rat. Int J Radiat Biol.
85(8): 680-689. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19637079

Nazıroğlu M. et al., 2012. 2.45-Gz wireless devices induce oxidative
stress and proliferation through cytosolic Ca2+ influx in human
leukemia cancer cells. International Journal of Radiation Biology
88(6): 449–456.http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22489926

Nazıroğlu M. et al., 2012b. Melatonin modulates wireless (2.45
GHz)-induced oxidative injury through TRPM2 and voltage gated Ca(2+)
channels in brain and dorsal root ganglion in rat. Physiol Behav.
105(3): 683-92.http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22019785

Oksay T. et al., 2012. Protective effects of melatonin against
oxidative injury in rat testis induced by wireless (2.45 GHz) devices.
Andrologia doi: 10.1111/and.12044, Epub ahead of
print.http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23145464

Papageorgiou C. C. et al., 2011. Effects of Wi-Fi signals on the p300
component of event-related potentials during an auditory hayling task.
Journal of Integrative Neuroscience 10(2): 189-202.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21714138

(Wi-Fi alters brain activity in young
adults:http://wifiinschools.org.uk/resources/wifi+brain+July+2011.pdf)

Shahin S. et al., 2013. 2.45 GHz Microwave Irradiation-Induced
Oxidative Stress Affects Implantation or Pregnancy in Mice, Mus
musculus. Appl Biochem Biotechnol 169: 1727–1751.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23334843

Türker Y. et al., 2011. Selenium and L-carnitine reduce oxidative
stress in the heart of rat induced by 2.45-GHz radiation from wireless
devices. Biol Trace Elem Res. 143(3): 1640-1650.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21360060

A few more studies of similar microwave frequencies at low exposures
(6V/m or below):
(Not comprehensive)
Balmori A. 2010. Mobile phone mast effects on common frog (Rana
temporaria) tadpoles: the city turned into a laboratory. Electromagn.
Biol. Med. 29(1-2):31-35. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20560769

Erdinc O. O. et al., 2003. Electromagnetic waves of 900MHz in acute
pentylenetetrazole model in ontogenesis in mice. Neurol. Sci.
24:111-116.http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14600821
Fesenko E. E. et al., 1999. Stimulation of murine natural killer cells
by weak electromagnetic waves in the centimeter range. Biofizika
44:737–741.http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10544828
Fesenko E. E. et al., 1999. Microwaves and cellular immunity. I.
Effect of whole body microwave irradiation on tumor necrosis factor
production in mouse cells, Bioelectrochem. Bioenerg.
49:29–35.http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10619445

Havas M. et al., 2010. Provocation study using heart rate variability
shows microwave radiation from 2.4GHz cordless phone affects autonomic
nervous system. European Journal of Oncology Library Vol. 5:
273-300.http://www.icems.eu/papers.htm?f=/c/a/2009/12/15/MNHJ1B49KH.DTL
part 2.

Kesari K. K. and Behari J., 2009. Microwave exposure affecting
reproductive system in male rats. Appl. Biochem. Biotechnol.
162(2):416-428.http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19768389
Kesari K. K. and Behari J., 2009. Fifty-gigahertz microwave exposure
effect of radiations on rat brain. Appl. Biochem. Biotechnol.
158:126-139.http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19089649
Khurana V. G. et al., 2010. Epidemiological Evidence for a Health Risk
from Mobile Phone Base Stations. Int. J. Occup. Environ. Health
16:263–267.http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20662418

Maier R. et al., 2004. Effects of pulsed electromagnetic fields on
cognitive processes – a pilot study on pulsed field interference
with cognitive regeneration. Acta Neurologica Scandinavica 110:
46-52.http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15180806
Nittby H. et al., 2008. Cognitive impairment in rats after long-term
exposure to GSM-900 mobile phone radiation. Bioelectromagnetics 29:
219-232.http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18044737
Novoselova E. G. et al., 1998. Stimulation of production of tumor
necrosis factor by murine macrophages when exposed in vivo and in
vitro to weak electromagnetic waves in the centimeter range Bofizika
43:1132–1333.

Novoselova E. G. et al., 1999. Microwaves and cellular immunity. II.
Immunostimulating effects of microwaves and naturally occurring
antioxidant nutrients. Bioelectrochem. Bioenerg.
49:37–41.http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10619446
Otitoloju A. A. et al., 2010. Preliminary study on the induction of
sperm head abnormalities in mice, Mus musculus, exposed to
radiofrequency radiations from Global System for Mobile Communication
Base Stations. Bull. Environ. Contam. Toxicol. 84(1):51-4.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19816647

Panagopoulos D. J.et al., 2010. Bioeffects of mobile telephony
radiation in relation to its intensity or distance from the antenna.
Int. J. Radiat. Biol. Vol 86(5):345-357.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20397839

Persson B. R. R. et al., 1997. Blood-brain barrier permeability in
rats exposed to electromagnetic fields used in wireless communication.
Wireless Networks 3: 455-461.
Pyrpasopoulou A. et al., 2004. Bone morphogenic protein expression in
newborn kidneys after prenatal exposure to radiofrequency radiation.
Bioelectromagnetics
25:216-27.http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15042631

Salford L. G. et al., 2010. Effects of microwave radiation upon the
mammalian blood-brain barrier. European Journal of Oncology Library
Vol.
5:333-355.http://www.icems.eu/papers.htm?f=/c/a/2009/12/15/MNHJ1B49KH.DTL
part 2.
Salford L. G., et al., 2003. Nerve cell damage in mammalian brain
after exposure to microwaves from GSM mobile phones. Environ. Health
Perspect. 111:881-883. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12782486

http://wifiinschools.org.uk/30.html”

“Two new papers are published in Pathophysiology this fall that may be
of interest to you.

These papers are the same content as the 2012 BioInitiative Report
Chapter 20
by Martha Herbert and Cindy Sage
http://www.bioinitiative.org/report/wp-content/uploads/pdfs/sec20_2012_Findings_in_Autism.pdf
.
This counters the usual criticism that ‘it isn’t good science’ unless
it is peer-review published.

The US annual cost for autism is reported to be $137 billion.
That compares to the EU annual cost for cancer (105 billion
euros/$147 billion USD)
and to heart disease ((165 billion euros/$227 billion USD).

Staggering costs, and the prevalence of autism now in the US is one
child in 88
(one child in 50 by 2012 estimates that include the 8 yr and younger
cohort).
In 1975, it was one child in 5000. This is a 100-fold increase.

It parallels the explosive rise in wireless technologies and their
pulsed RFR. It should be
considered another possible risk factor for autism, autism spectrum
conditions and ADHD.
http://thefullertoninformer.com/carbonyl-iron-and-orange-county-the-autism-capital-of-the-state/

The public sidewalk, free speech, our children’s health

– See more at: http://thefullertoninformer.com/the-public-sidewalk-free-speech-our-childrens-health/#sthash.ayJ3yd4p.dpuf

JUNK SCIENCE: 70/30 with some wireless industry dough gets you 50/50 and your kids the shaft in the wireless classrooms.

The following is an excellent article from : http://www.seattlemag.com/article/nerd-report/nerd-report

This is must read!

UW Scientist Henry Lai Makes Waves in the Cell Phone Industry

UW scientist Dr. Henry Lai never set out to link cell phones to cancer, but his work—and efforts…

By: Naomi Ishisaka |   January 2011   |  FROM THE PRINT EDITION

A greeting card on bioengineering professor Henry Lai’s office wall at the University of Washington contains this quotation from Ralph Waldo Emerson: “Do not go where the path may lead; go instead where there is no path and leave a trail.”

This philosophy could well sum up Lai’s work on the effects of low-level radiation on DNA, as well as what he believes should be the guiding principle of science: independent investigation and research leading to discovery for the public good. Yet the soft-spoken scientist’s steadfast belief in that principle has placed his research at the center of a persistent global controversy and created powerful enemies that tried to get him fired and essentially succeeded in drying up the source of funding for the type of research he was doing.

Lai admits that he was naive. He came to the UW in 1972 and earned a doctorate in psychology. Two decades later, as a bioengineering researcher, he studied esoteric scientific topics in relative obscurity. He and a fellow researcher, Narendra “N.P.” Singh, were looking at the effects of nonionizing microwave radiation—the same type of radiation emitted by cell phones—on the DNA of rats. They used a level of radiation considered safe by government standards and found that the DNA in the brain cells of the rats was damaged—or broken—by exposure to the radiation. Ironically, cell phones weren’t even on Lai’s mind when he performed the initial studies. Funded initially by the Office of Naval Research, Lai was investigating how radar, which emits radio-frequency radiation, affects the health of operators. “We did not really pay attention to the importance of this thing,” he recalls. But during his research, cell phone giant Motorola Inc. indicated that someone had told the company about Lai’s unpublished results. Motorola asked to meet with him in his lab and at a meeting in Copenhagen.

After Lai and Singh’s research finding an effect on DNA was published in 1995, Lai learned of a full-scale effort to discredit his work. In an internal company memo leaked to Microwave News, a publication that examines health and environmental effects of electromagnetic radiation, Motorola described its plan to “war-game” and undermine Lai’s research. After initially accepting industry funding for continued research from the Wireless Technology Research (WTR) program (created to manage $25 million in research funds), Lai and Singh wrote an open letter to Microwave News questioning restrictions placed on their research by the funders. After that, the head of WTR sent a memo asking then-UW president Richard McCormick to fire Lai and Singh. McCormick refused, but the dustup sent a clear message to Lai and his colleagues.

“This shocked me,” Lai says, “the letter trying to discredit me, the ‘war games’ memo. As a scientist doing research, I was not expecting to be involved in a political situation. It opened my eyes on how games are played in the world of business.”

Thus was launched an epic battle over research and truth. If Lai and Singh were correct about the potential impact on brain cells from radio-frequency radiation, there could be billions of dollars on the line for the cell phone industry in potential liability, leading to significant design changes and lost market expansion.

To the layperson, the science behind Lai’s work, which was largely funded by the National Institutes of Health, and  industry-funded research to contradict it is mind-numbingly complex. Virtually every assertion of risk has a counterassertion of no risk. For every independent study showing damage to DNA and memory, there is a study showing the opposite.

Lai, 61, says this phenomenon could be a direct result of the way science is now funded around the world. “[The U.S. was on] the cutting edge of this whole area for the last 30 years. [But] right now, we’re the Third World country. We’re not doing research at all,” Lai says. With government funding all but nonexistent, the bulk of scientific research is funded by private industry. “The mechanism is funding,” Lai says. “You don’t bite the hand that feeds you. The pressure is very impressive.”
The massive Interphone study, coordinated by the International Agency for Research on Cancer and released in May 2010, exemplifies these challenges.

Purported to be the definitive word on cell phone radiation and brain tumors, Interphone involved 13 countries (all outside the U.S.), $25 million, and thousands of tumor patients and controls. Conducted over 10 years, the widely anticipated study was supposed to at last provide clarity on the risks of cell phone use. Yet, once again, the science was divided. The day after the study’s release, headlines read, “No answer, just fuzz, from cell phone study,” and, “One conclusion emerges from Interphone study: Controversy will continue.”

Why, after so much money and time, were the data so mixed? Louis Slesin, editor of Microwave News, says there were a number of problems with Interphone. “When we started interviewing the protagonists,” he says, “we realized there was a lot of conflict going on. It was a bitter struggle. It tells you the interpretation of the data is not clear cut in any way.”

For the purposes of the Interphone study, a person who used a cell phone 30 minutes a day for more than 10 years was considered to be subjected to heavy exposure. Today, that level of cell phone use (900 minutes a month) is average. The people defined as the most heavily exposed in the Interphone study now represent the average user.

To illustrate that point, Elisabeth Cardis, head of the Interphone study, was quoted as saying, “In my personal opinion, I think we have a number of elements that suggest a possible increased risk among the heaviest users, and because the heaviest users in our study are considered the low users today, I think that’s something of concern. Until stronger conclusions can be drawn one way or another, it may be reasonable to reduce one’s exposure.”

Lai’s frustration with the increasing body of contradictory research led him to do an analysis in 2006 of the available studies on cell phone radiation between 1990 and 2006, and where their funding came from. What he found was that 50 percent of the 326 studies showed a biological effect from radio-frequency radiation and 50 percent did not. But when he filtered the studies into two stacks—those funded by the wireless industry and those funded independently—Lai discovered industry-funded studies were 30 percent likely to find an effect, as opposed to 70 percent of the independent studies.

Lai says that, while his findings highlight the crucial role industry funding plays in scientific research, the 50-50 split alone should be cause for concern. “Even if you accept all the industry studies, you still end up with 50-50,” he says. “How could 50 percent all be garbage? People always start with the statement ‘Hundreds of studies have been done on this topic, and no effect has been found,’ but this is a very misleading statement. [The statements] come out from the cell phone industry, and people just use it, like the American Cancer Society. People haven’t even gone in to look at the real studies and look at the effects that people have reported. This really worries me, because people come out and say things without the facts.”

Slesin agrees and says Lai’s work is important for the research that does show effects from radiation. “[Lai] is one of the most widely cited scientists in this field,” Slesin says.

The American Cancer Society did not reply to requests for an interview. Its official position on the risks of cell phone use states: “Radio frequency (RF) waves given off by cell phones don’t have enough energy to damage DNA directly. Because of this, many scientists believe that cell phones aren’t able to cause cancer. Most studies done in the lab have supported this theory, finding that RF waves do not cause DNA damage.”

CTIA-The Wireless Association, the cell phone industry trade organization, also declined to comment for this story, but its website states: “To date, global health organizations believe that the available scientific evidence does not show that any health problems are associated with using wireless phones. Many studies of low-level RF exposure, such as that which occurs with wireless devices, have not discovered any negative biological effects.”

Dr. Beth Mueller, an epidemiologist at the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center in Seattle, acknowledges that there is not strong evidence linking cell phones to brain tumors. But Mueller warns that the research is difficult and that much more study is needed. “I think [cell phone radiation] would be important to study. There are no studies I know of on the possible impact on children and I think it’s something that many people–including some people here at the Hutch–want to see evaluated. I’m concerned because children are using [cell phones] a lot. It’s something that should be looked at, definitely.”

Katy Rock would agree. The Kirkland resident is an athletic 31-year-old who began having headaches in her late teens. “Headaches became an unwelcome fact of life for me in college,” she says, “at first always after running around on the soccer or lacrosse field. So I assumed for years that it was due to dehydration/nutrition problems or just being out of shape. Eventually, they got worse. I started having them with no explainable cause.”

It wasn’t until a she had a seizure in 2007 that Rock discovered something was terribly wrong. The next day, she underwent an emergency double craniotomy to remove a tumor the size of a small lemon from her right frontal lobe and two tumors the size of large grapes from her right temporal lobe. A biopsy showed the cancerous tumors had been growing for about 10 years. A year of chemotherapy followed.

Rock was an early adopter of cell phones. Given a phone as a gift during college in 1997, she recalls using it about two to three hours a week (about 630 minutes a month). Her usage increased in later years with a job that required her to be on call. She is right-handed, and her tumors were on the right side.

Rock, who recently completed her first 5K run in support of Seattle Children’s Hospital’s Pediatric Brain Tumor Research Guild, would not be surprised to find a link between cell phones and brain tumors. “When I was in college, I used to charge my cell phone at night, and the charger cord ran over a leaf of my philodendron plant,” she says. “Over time, the strip on the leaf where the cord touched turned brown. The small amount of power running through the cord was enough to kill some cells of the otherwise healthy plant.”

While Rock’s tale is merely metaphorical, its suggestive import is not lost on Devra Davis, Ph.D., a huge admirer of Lai’s work to raise awareness about the potential hazards of cell phone radiation. Davis is a longtime toxicologist, public health expert and founder of the Wyoming-based Environmental Health Trust, a group that provides basic research and training on environmental health hazards. Davis’ most recent book, released last October, is Disconnect: The Truth About Cell Phone Radiation. Davis calls Lai a “hero” for his groundbreaking work. “[Lai] has made a tremendous impact on the field in many aspects. Not just on the field of DNA, but on the brain, on receptors. In a fair and just world he would be a serious candidate for the Nobel Prize, because he did foundational research on the way the body responds to electromagnetic and radiofrequency radiation and because he persisted in the face of many challenges. He’s been outstanding and indomitable in the face of opposition that would have overwhelmed most people.”
In her book, Davis describes a disconnect between the general public’s largely unquestioning acceptance of cell phone radiation and the large body of evidence suggesting cause for concern. With Lai’s work as her foundation, Davis demonstrates a pattern of the cell phone industry’s scientific manipulation spanning decades. Davis is particularly concerned because the rate of cell phone use by children is skyrocketing—with three out of four 12-year-olds and half of 10-years-olds in the U.S. now possessing a cell phone. Even more troubling: Lennart Hardell, Ph.D., a researcher in Sweden, found that those who began using cell phones in their teens (such as Rock) had four to five times the number of malignant tumors by their late 20s as those who did not use cell hones as teenagers.

While Davis would argue that there is a proven, causal link between cell phones and tumors, Lai does not. What he does say is that there is enough reason for concern, and that a “precautionary principle” should be embraced, as France has done in warning against cell phone use by children, and as San Francisco has done in mandating information on “specific absorption rates” of radiation on cell phone packaging.

“European countries generally believe you need some kind of precautionary approach,” says Lai, who does not own—or use—a cell phone. “What else can we do? Obviously, we don’t know the answer at all. But, then, there is a cause for concern. We need to take some kind of precautionary action.” For now, however, Lai will continue to do research on the drug artemisinin—long used by Chinese herbalists—for applications in cancer treatment, because there is no longer any independent funding available for his research on the effects of nonionizing radiation.

Meanwhile, Davis, who uses a cell phone but only with a headset or as a speakerphone (she never keeps it close to her body), hopes that by the time the public realizes the importance of the path Lai has been on, it won’t be too late. In Disconnect, she wonders how our grandchildren will answer these questions: “Did we do the right thing and act to protect them? Or did we harm them needlessly, irresponsibly and permanently, blinded by the addictive delights of our technological age?”

_______________________________________________

LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, IPADS EMIT MORE RADIATION THAN A CELL PHONE. YOUR CHILDREN ARE USING IPADS FOR MORE THAN 900 MINUTES A MONTH. THEY USE THEM FOR AT LEAST 900 MINUTES A WEEK AT SCHOOL. WHAT ABOUT AT HOME?

WHERE ARE THE IPADS KEPT WHILE IN USE? WHERE IS THE WIFI ANTENNA LOCATED IN THE IPAD?

DO YOU WANT YOUR KIDS TO HAVE KIDS? EXTRAPOLATE FROM THERE and KEEP DENYING BECAUSE YOU CANT FOR VERY MUCH LONGER. 

DID ROMAN SCHULZE EVER GET BACK TO THE THE G.U.S.D. BOARD OF TRUSTEES ON WHY EUROPEANS ARE BANNING WIFI IN SCHOOLS? MAYBE HE NEEDS TO GET BACK IN TOUCH WITH HIS ROOTS ACROSS THE ATLANTIC.

————————————

The French assembly DID IT- NEW LAW PENDING ON EMF/RF

I am really excited this morning.

I will look for the news in English, and pass it on. I will check The Guardian, The Independent, and the Huffington Post to see if they will cover it in the coming days. Nextup.org will, but it may take some time. We can expect there will be the regular mainstream media black out here, because the industry really does not like that new development and will do everything to stop coverage.

Such a law raises the awareness of the French people on the health impacts of EMR, The green party and the Socialist party members did many compromises to make sure the law passes. But it is a huge step; they got their foot in the door. It will also have repercussions in other countries.

The new law is now sent to the Senate to be ratified and I just called my cousin in France to get his take on what it means and will keep you posted.

A few points off my head:

Acting and education based on the precautionary principle

Transparency & Coordination with local authorities with mayors and departments given back powers to legislate

Ban of WiFi in kindergartens & PRESCHOOLS (for 3 years old and less)

Study of impacts in schools and favor wired connections

Advertising prohibited to all children under 14

Study mandated on Electro Hyper Sensitivity and the creation of low RF radiation zones particularly in cities with results due in one year

Checking transmission levels to make sure that levels do not go over the average determined to be in France at 6V/m or around 100,000 uW/m2, the level of protection most eastern Europe, Italy, Russia, China have set.

(Although France has set the protection standards at 10,000,000uW/m2 like here, the average measured in 16 communes by COPIC is under .7V/m (about 1,200uW/m2) and up to 10 V/m (+300,000uW/m2) in 10% of the cases. The industry will have a set deadline time to adjust those higher levels. Here in the US , according to the Institute of Building biology, although base stations antennas are supposed to transmit with signal strength of no more than 100 Watts or 100,000,000uW/m2 (?) I have to confirm those numbers), but the point is they often go much higher than this and we have no COPIC here to monitor the levels.)

This has wide implications for us-some of them I suggest here:

1- We can use this law as an argument to the Health Committees  –

If France does it, it means there has to be something real about the health dangers of microwave technology. We will not get legislation happen in Fullerton until more representatives are becoming aware of the problem.

2- We can use this for another press release to all media, but this time with follow up calls to make sure they just do not discard it, but that it is their responsibility to publish it as journalists.

3- I was planning to write to all private preschools and kindergarten schools principals and teachers, and union representatives.

Maybe we should do it to all schools, private and public, quoting the New French Law as a proof that something needs be done to protect our children.

For those who can read French or can manage with Google translate:

http://www.lemonde.fr/planete/article/2014/01/22/ondes-une-loi-pour-limiter-l-exposition-de-la-population_4351967_3244.html

And (much longer-a full analysis-fornt page of Le Monde to-day)

http://www.lemonde.fr/planete/article/2014/01/24/tout-comprendre-sur-la-loi-sur-les-ondes-electromagnetiques_4353906_3244.html

– See more at: http://thefullertoninformer.com/junk-science-7030-with-some-wireless-industry-dough-gets-you-5050-and-our-kids-the-shaft-in-the-wireless-classrooms/#sthash.akUiTcV3.dpuf