1) In the 1990s, after the EPA began to question the safety of wireless devices, funding was cut. Now that the NTP program has identified cell phone radiation as a carcinogen, it’s being cut. This is an indication of the telecom’s continual influence on government. As a result, unsafe consumer products will be sold to and used by an unsuspecting public.
National Toxicology Program
The U.S. National Toxicology Program announced this month through an updated fact sheet that it no longer plans to study the effects of cell phone or radio frequency radiation (RFR) due to technical challenges and lack of resources.
The NTP, the only Federal agency in the US to study the effects of RFR since the 1990s (when the Congress cut off the EPA’s funding for this research), updated its cell phone radiation fact sheet this month to announce that it lacks the resources to continue to study the effects of radio frequency radiation.
Head and neck tumors associated with cell phone use have increased in the U.S. since 2000
Since the year 2000, the U.S. has experienced significant increases in the age-adjusted incidence rates of four head and neck tumors associated with cell phone use, including the most serious malignant brain tumor (glioblastoma), a non-malignant tumor on the outer covering of the brain (meningioma) and cancers of the salivary and thyroid glands. Among youth less than 20 years of age, nonmalignant meningioma and thyroid cancer significantly increased.
The increase in age-adjusted incidence rates for these four tumors is likely attributable to the chronic effects of mobile phone use in addition to other factors including improvements in screening.
For this breaking news story, go to:
https://www.saferemr.com/2024/01/breaking-news.html
Joel M. Moskowitz, Ph.D., Director
Center for Family and Community Health
School of Public Health
University of California, Berkeley
The January 2024 fact sheet mentioned in Dr. Moskowitz’s article is at:
https://www.niehs.nih.gov/sites/default/files/NTP_cell_phone_factsheet_jan_2024_508_0.pdf
and says that no more RFR studies are planned.
2) According to ISED guidelines and, I believe, FCC as well, applications for cell towers cannot be denied on the basis of either health considerations or property values. Those of us who live near cell towers know well that residential property that is near one is devalued significantly. As more people become educated on the topic, the situation will, no doubt, worsen. Here is an article from 2022:
Raise the Roof
“Cellphone towers bring extra tax revenue and better reception to a section of the city, but many are skeptical because of the potential health risks and the impact on property values. Increasing numbers of people don’t want to live near cell towers. In some areas with new towers, property values have decreased by up to 20%.”
https://www.nationalbusinesspost.com/cell-towers-impact-home-values/
3) In Idaho, a second application for a cell tower has been denied even though all standards were met. Hopefully, as more communities want to know if the technology is safe before approval is given, it will become apparent that there is no evidence of safety.
(click on photo to enlarge)
County Commissioners Deny Request AGAIN for Cell Tower; “We don’t know if the technology that exists today is more harmful, less harmful”
“The two commissioners who voted against the tower, Bruce Mattare and Leslie Duncan, said that they were skeptical there’s a coverage gap. “We don’t know if the technology that exists today is more harmful, less harmful,” stated Duncan, pointing to the second reason she and Mattare gave for denying the cell tower request. Duncan also added that constituents were concerned about lightning strikes, property values, and cell tower aesthetics.”
Sharon Noble, Director, Citizens for Safer Tech
“Taking on corporate greed is an environmental concern.” Rashida Tlaib
Sent from my wired laptop with no wireless components. PLEASE Practice Safe Tech.