2022-08-08 Green Party ratifies 2 major proposals

1) Here is Part 3 of the report by Dr. Henry Lai and Blake Levitt addressing what they believe are the most important aspects of EMF that cause biological effects: exposure, length of exposure and modulation. This part addresses modulation. I shared Parts 1 and 2 in earlier updates but links to them are below this item.

Why does wireless radiation affect us and are we adequately protected? Part 3

“The FCC/ICNIRP exposure guidelines only take unmodulated continuous-wave radiation into consideration and have long been criticized for not considering modulation as a separate entity with effects of its own … enough research exists to indicate exposure guidelines that do not take modulation into consideration are insufficient. This could be especially true with 5G on the immediate horizon using signaling characteristics – such as complex phasing, beam steering, and MassiveMimo (multiple-in, multiple-out sourcing) – and frequency ranges (in high millimeter wave ranges) that have never been used before in broad civilian-based communications.’”

https://preview.mailerlite.com/v6e2v9n8v5/2010528850764633599/r5w0/   modulation

https://emraustralia.com.au/blogs/news-1/why-does-wireless-radiation-affect-us-and-are-we-being-protected-part-1   strength of exposure

https://emraustralia.com.au/blogs/news-1/why-does-wireless-radiation-affect-us-and-are-we-being-protected-part-2   duration of exposure

2) Criticisms by independent experts of the Oxford “million women” study published this year that telecoms will use to support their lie that there is no scientific evidence that microwave radiation from cell phones is dangerous.

Journal of the National Cancer Institute Publishes Expert Letter Questioning Report of No Brain Cancer from Cell Phones

“The Journal of the National Cancer Institute has published a letter from distinguished experts disputing the Oxford “million women” study claiming no link between cell phone use and brain cancer. The new letter lays out why the Oxford report was deeply flawed. The authors note that substantial credible research links cell phone radiofrequency radiation to cancer and the experts recommend reducing exposures in alignment with numerous governments.”

Journal of the National Cancer Institute Publishes Expert Letter Questioning Oxford Report of No Brain Cancer from Cell Phones


RE: Cellular Telephone Use and the Risk of Brain Tumors: Update of the UK Million Women Study letter by Dr. Joel Moskowitz

“How can the authors of this article argue that their results apply to “usual conditions” when the amount of cell phone use in their analysis sample was much less than “usual” for the United Kingdom? According to cellular industry estimates, in 2011 the average mobile phone subscriber in the United Kingdom had 126 minutes of call time per month for outgoing calls (29 min/wk or 4.1 min/d)”


Here is the study that was published in March, 2022 that is being criticized above. If you do a search, you will find many are using this to support their stance that there is no evidence of a relationship between cell phone use and brain cancer.

Cellular Telephone Use and the Risk of Brain Tumors: Update of the UK Million Women Study


3) After working on this for a very long time, Lori Curran, a member from Alberta, with help from many others, was able to get 2 important Policy Proposals ratified by the Green Party. I believe this is the first time a Canadian political party’s policy has included proposals regarding these important issues. Hopefully, someone will follow Lori’s amazing lead and work with the other parties. The 2 proposals are highlighted in green.

Advocate for a National Internet Access Strategy that Prioritizes Environmental and Human Health

Update Health Canada’s Guidelines for Microwave Radiation Exposure Proposal


4) Here is some more information about the cell tower Rogers is proposing for a residential area of Gold River, BC. Marcus Schluschen, who has been so involved in fighting cell towers in other municipalities, is now asking for support in fighting one that would be very close to his home. The location of the proposed Rogers Cell Tower is: Intersection of Eagle Crescent and Mallard Way. According to Marcus, the proposed site is currently a forested green belt area within the residential area, but the drawing shows that most trees will be cut down to create the industrial compound enclosure.

(click on photo to enlarge)


Educating each Councillor, one at a time, seems to be needed, and it occurs only when a tower is looming. Every community needs an Antenna Siting Policy which can establish some limits. Until ISED recognizes our right to live in a safe environment, this is a significant protective measure that can be and should be taken by every Council.

Here are addresses of the Councillors and Mayor. I hope you will consider writing and provide links to one or two good studies so that they cannot say they didn’t know these were dangerous. They can only say they didn’t care. Marcus’s email is info@photomarcus.com should you wish to get involved. If you write an email, please bcc Marcus.

On the web, the Mayor and Council are:

Mayor Brad Unger <bunger@goldriver.ca>

Brenda Patrick <bpatrick@goldriver.ca>

Rachel Stratton <rstratton@goldriver.ca>

Kirsty Begon <kbegon@goldriver.ca>

Joe Sinclair <jsinclair@goldriver.ca>

Telephone Gold River: (250-283-2202)
Council meetings: 1st and 3rd Monday at 7:00pm – 499 Muchalat Dr., Gold River, BC
Last meeting was held Aug. 2, next meeting Aug.16


Sharon  Noble, Director, Coalition to Stop Smart Meters

“Progress lies not in enhancing what is, but in advancing toward what will be.”    Khalil Gibran


Smart Meters, Cell Towers, Smart Phones, 5G and all things that radiate RF Radiation