Saturday, November 28, 2015

Complaint Filed Against Judges in "Smart" Meter Case

Complaint Filed Against Judges in "Smart" Meter Case

Information and Perspective by Warren Woodward
Sedona, Arizona ~ November 28, 2015

          Yesterday I filed a complaint with the Arizona Commission on Judicial Conduct against the judges in my "smart" meter case. 

          It was wrong for Judge McClennen to do the work of the Defendants (the Arizona Corporation Commission and the five ACC commissioners) by asking to me to prove that his Court had jurisdiction. Plus, after McClennen demonstrated bias against me by doing the work of the Defendants, it was wrong for Presiding Judge Warner not to allow me a change judge.

          According to its website, , “The Commission on Judicial Conduct acts on complaints alleging one or more judges have engaged in judicial misconduct in a particular case or circumstance.” The Commission is comprised of six judges, 2 lawyers and three members of the public. The Commission's proceeding will have no effect on McClennen's decision in my case or my current appeal of same, but it could result in some sort of disciplinary action against McClennen and Warner. 

          Because we seem to have two sets of laws in this country -- one for those in power and one for everybody else -- my guess is that at best McClennen and Warner might get a reprimand, but I felt it necessary to call attention to their misconduct anyway.

          Below is my complaint:

At the very start of the case, McClennen showed his bias against me by doing the work of the Defendants by requiring me, the Plaintiff, to file a memo on jurisdiction.

This complaint is also against Judge Randall Warner since he incorrectly supported McClennen by not allowing me to change judges after McClennen had demonstrated his bias against me.

Not only did McClennen do the work of the Defendants, but I was astonished that he did not even understand the statute under which I was appealing. That, and the rest of what I am writing now, will be explained and fleshed out in the court documents I have enclosed. Taken in order, they tell the story.

Additionally, I have looked at the other complaints against McClennen and I don't know why this guy is still a judge.

I was unaware of the Local Rule that nixed my right to a one time change of judge without cause. So I tried again by filing an affidavit under A.R.S. 12-409(B)(5) that did give me the right to a change of judge if I showed cause. As you probably know, grounds for cause had to be “That the party filing the affidavit has cause to believe and does believe that on account of the bias, prejudice, or interest of the judge he cannot obtain a fair and impartial trial.”

That was exactly what I 'had cause to believe and did believe.' So I filed an affidavit to that effect on July 30th.

In the affidavit, I stated that in attempting to dismiss my case as “untimely,” Judge McClennen was doing the work of the Defendants and therefore showing his bias. I also mentioned that his misconstruing the thirty day time period appeared intentional since he is an experienced judge who should know better.

The next day Judge Randall Warner, the Civil Court Presiding Judge to whom I presented my affidavit, ruled against me. According to him, “Bias and prejudice under A.R.S. § 12-409(B)(5) means a “hostile feeling or spirit of ill-will” or an “undue friendship or favoritism” towards a litigant.” He claimed I didn't show that. I was pretty sure I had shown there was a “hostile feeling or spirit of ill-will” towards me even though I hadn't used those exact words in my affidavit. I also think it was obvious McClennen showed favoritism towards the Defendants by doing their work for them.

Warner also stated, “Judicial bias or prejudice ordinarily has to come from an extrajudicial source and not what the judge has done in the case.” The key word there is “ordinarily." Its inclusion means there must also be cases like mine that are not ordinary, but are in fact based on “what the judge has done in the case.” So, it seems clear to me that Warner was using a bogus argument just to support McClennen.

After Warner denied my request, the Rules of Civil Procedure became unclear to me, and I was unsure exactly what my options were. I also wasn't sure I wanted to spend more time pursuing this particular injustice even if I could figure out the rules, so I accepted Judge Warner's ruling. In other words, I felt, and I was, bamboozled. And I was certainly denied my right to a change of judge by showing cause.

I'll add that Warner's (mis)ruling is not supported by State v. Ellison, 213 Ariz. 116 at ¶¶ 38 and 40 (2006).

In ¶40, we find this: "without showing "[]either an extrajudicial source of bias []or any deep-seated favoritism". Obviously, the key word there is "or." There can be an extrajudicial source OR the "deep-seated favoritism" that McClennen demonstrated.

In ¶38, we find this: "[O]pinions formed by the judge on the basis of facts introduced or events occurring in the course of the current proceedings, or of prior proceedings, do not constitute a basis for a bias or partiality motion unless they display a deep-seated favoritism or antagonism that would make fair judgment impossible." The key word there is "unless." As such, that statement totally contradicts what Warner wrote about "ordinarily."

I am a college drop-out, untrained in law and whose pro se court experience consists of contesting a few traffic tickets, yet how is it I know more about this issue than the so-called experienced professionals? It's very disheartening for me to be denied justice by people like McClennen and Warner who are both schooled in law and experienced and so should know better. I am concerned not only for myself but also for the hapless others who come before them looking for and expecting justice.

There are only two explanations for the judges' behavior. 1) Despite their schooling and experience they are inept and doing sloppy work. 2) Their actions were neither inept nor sloppy but intentional. Either way, it does not look good, and they should not be judges.

Personally I suspect that what McClennen and Warner did was intentional since I would bet that, had I an attorney representing me, McClennen and Warner would not have dared attempt their pro-defendant actions. Unfortunately and despite quite a search, due to the specialized nature of my case and other factors, I could not find an attorney to represent me either for a fee or pro bono. Nevertheless, justice should be available to all, not just those who have an attorney. Pro se people should not be bamboozled by the likes of McClennen and Warner. Shame on them!

Friday, November 27, 2015

Metabolic and Genetic Screening of Electromagnetic Hypersensitive Subjects as a Feasible Tool for Diagnostics and Intervention

Mediators Inflamm. 2014; 2014: 924184.
Published online 2014 Apr 9. doi:  10.1155/2014/924184
PMCID: PMC4000647

Metabolic and Genetic Screening of Electromagnetic Hypersensitive Subjects as a Feasible Tool for Diagnostics and Intervention


Growing numbers of “electromagnetic hypersensitive” (EHS) people worldwide self-report severely disabling, multiorgan, non-specific symptoms when exposed to low-dose electromagnetic radiations, often associated with symptoms of multiple chemical sensitivity (MCS) and/or other environmental “sensitivity-related illnesses” (SRI). This cluster of chronic inflammatory disorders still lacks validated pathogenetic mechanism, diagnostic biomarkers, and management guidelines. We hypothesized that SRI, not being merely psychogenic, may share organic determinants of impaired detoxification of common physic-chemical stressors. Based on our previous MCS studies, we tested a panel of 12 metabolic blood redox-related parameters and of selected drug-metabolizing-enzyme gene polymorphisms, on 153 EHS, 147 MCS, and 132 control Italians, confirming MCS altered (P < 0.05–0.0001) glutathione-(GSH), GSH-peroxidase/S-transferase, and catalase erythrocyte activities. We first described comparable—though milder—metabolic pro-oxidant/proinflammatory alterations in EHS with distinctively increased plasma coenzyme-Q10 oxidation ratio. Severe depletion of erythrocyte membrane polyunsaturated fatty acids with increased ω6/ω3 ratio was confirmed in MCS, but not in EHS. We also identified significantly (P = 0.003) altered distribution-versus-control of the CYP2C19∗1/∗2 SNP variants in EHS, and a 9.7-fold increased risk (OR: 95% C.I. = 1.3–74.5) of developing EHS for the haplotype (null)GSTT1 + (null)GSTM1 variants. Altogether, results on MCS and EHS strengthen our proposal to adopt this blood metabolic/genetic biomarkers' panel as suitable diagnostic tool for SRI.

The Alarming Ways EMFs Are Changing Your Brain


The Alarming Ways EMFs Are Changing Your Brain


by Deane Alban

ON OCTOBER 20, 2015

Currently there are 7.3 billion people on the planet and 6. 9 billion mobile phone subscriptions — almost one phone for every person! Few of us can even imagine living without our electronic devices like smartphones and computers. But what is living in a sea of electronics doing to our brains? There’s evidence that our electronic devices may be hazardous to both our physical and mental health.
The most obvious concern is whether mobile phones might cause brain cancer. But this isn’t the only way our electronic gadgets might be affecting us. Let’s examine what the latest science says about the safety of our electronic devices and their effects on our brains.

When researching the hazards of cell phones or other electronics, you’ll come across the term electromagnetic fields (EMFs). Obvious sources of EMFs include power lines, mobile phones, and WiFi. But electromagnetic fields are created any time an electric current flows through a wire, meaning you are exposed to EMFs from seemingly innocuous appliances like your hairdryer, dimmer switches, and coffee makers.
One thing that sets our computers, iPads, mobile phones, and fitness trackers apart is that we use them so much of the time in close proximity to our brains and bodies. More than two-thirds of adults sleep with their mobile phone next to their head and alarmingly, this figure rises to 90 percent in the 18 to 29 year old age bracket.
Via: nenetus | Shutterstock
Via: nenetus | Shutterstock
How EMFs Affect Your Brain
Unsurprisingly, the number one fear of mobile phone usage  is brain cancer. TheWorld Health Organization (WHO) classifies electromagnetic fields as a Group 2B carcinogen and recommends that consumers find ways to reduce their EMF exposure. By definition, a Group 2B carcinogen means it’s suspected of causing cancer. While that might not sound too serious, keep in mind that this carcinogenic group also includes lead, engine exhaust, DDT, and chloroform.
In a meta-analysis published in the International Journal of Oncology, Swedish researchers found significant associations between long-term cell phone use and brain tumor risk. Cell phone use is linked to both malignant and benign brain tumors after ten years of cell phone use.
But brain cancer isn’t the only concern. Other reported side effects of EMFsinclude headaches, dizziness, sleep disorders, benign tumors, dementia, and Alzheimer’s. Here are some of the known mechanisms by which EMFs affect the brain.
The blood-brain barrier is a group of specialized cells that acts as a filter to keep the brain safe from toxins, heavy metals, pathogens, drugs, and other foreign substances. Many neurological diseases are linked to a compromised blood-brain barrier, including meningitis, Alzheimer’s and multiple sclerosis. EMFs increase permeability of the brain-blood barrier, making it leaky and allowing things like mercury, aluminum, and viruses to more readily enter the brain.
Long-term EMF exposure leads to a chronically increased level of free radicals. Free radicals are unattached oxygen molecules that attack cells much in the same way that they cause metal to rust. The brain is highly susceptible to free radical damage because it’s a heavy oxygen user — using 20 percent of the body’s total. Free radicals cause brain cell damage and aging down to the level of your DNA.
Brain cells communicate with each other via chemicals known as neurotransmitters. Neurotransmitters regulate mood, sleep, motivation, ability to learn, addictions, and more. Long-term exposure to EMFs alters the expression of 143 proteins in the brain. EMFs cause significant disruption in levels of serotonin, dopamine, and norepinephrine causing adverse effects on mood, memory, learning, and stress.
The increase in accidents among cell phone users may be caused by the flood of calcium ions into brain cells. Via: SpeedKingz | Shutterstock.
The increase in accidents among cell phone users may be caused by the flood of calcium ions into brain cells. Via: SpeedKingz | Shutterstock.
Another way EMFs disrupt brain cell communication is by rupturing brain cell membranes. This causes them to leak calcium ions needed for communication between brain cells. Dr. Andrew Goldsworthy of the Imperial College of London believes that an increase in accidents among cell phone users has less to do with distraction than with delayed reactions caused by the flood of calcium ions into brain cells.
The Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) found that 50 minutes spent on a cell phone disrupts brain glucose metabolism. This is important since your brain uses glucose as its main source of energy. Some experts believe that Alzheimer’s disease may occur when areas of the brain can no longer utilize glucose to feed brain cells. These parts of the brain have become insulin resistant, leading some experts to consider Alzheimer’s type 3 diabetes. Living within 150 feet of high voltage power increases the risk of dementia by 24 percent.
Sleep is a critical pillar of good brain health. It’s during sleep that your brain consolidates memories, repairs itself, and clears itself of metabolic debris. Dozens of studies show that low-level EMF exposure disrupts your natural production of melatonin. Melatonin is most commonly known as a natural sleep hormone that regulates circadian rhythm, but it does more than that. It’s also a potent antioxidant, which has been found to aid in the prevention of Alzheimer’s, depression, cardiovascular diseases, insomnia, mood disorders, tinnitus, and various cancers.
EMF exposure affects the structure and function of the thyroid. EMFs elevate levels of thyroid stimulating hormone (TSH). High levels of TSH are directly linked to hypothyroidism. Common symptoms of hypothyroidism include memory loss, depression, brain fog, fatigue, sensitivity to cold, dry skin, constipation, weight gain, and muscle aches.
One of the most unexpected findings has been that seamstresses have a four-fold increased risk of developing Alzheimer’s. According to research done at the University of Southern California, “Seamstresses seem to be among the individuals with the highest occupational EMF exposure. They sit near motors of sewing machines for hours, and most industrial sewing machines are always on, and always produce magnetic fields.” This illustrates that it’s not only high-tech devices that emit substantial amounts of EMFs.
The Dangers Of Mobile Phones On Young Brains
In the United States, 46 percent of children between ages 8 and 12 use a mobile phone, and this is bad news for their developing brains. Dr. Ronald B. Herberman was the director of the University of Pittsburgh Cancer Institute. Before that he was a senior investigator at the National Cancer Institute. He testified in a Congressional hearing on Tumors and Cell Phone Use that EMF absorption rates are higher in a child’s brain than in an adult’s since their brain tissues are more absorbent, their skulls are thinner, and their relative size is smaller. A child’s brain may absorb twice as many EMFs as an adult brain. Electromagnetic radiation penetrates almost straight through the entire brain of a 5-year-old child.
Some common sense steps for reducing children’s exposure to EMFs include making their bedrooms electronic-free zones and not allowing kids to have their own mobile phone or wireless devices. If this sounds too difficult, keep in mind that Steve Jobs did not let his children have iPads! If he chose to limit his kids’ use of electronic devices, it’s something you may want to consider too.
Protect Yourself From EMFs
Mobile phone manufacturers will tell you their products are safe and, in fact, they must meet government guidelines set by the Federal Communications Commission in the United States. But not every one is convinced that enough is being done to protect consumers. In May 2015, a letter signed by 195 scientists from around the world called on the United Nations, the World Health Organization, and governments to develop stricter controls on devices that create EMFs. Collectively these scientists have published more than 2,000 peer-reviewed papers on the hazards of EMFs.
This letter, which can be found on, states that, “Numerous recent scientific publications have shown that EMF affects living organisms at levels well below most international and national guidelines. Effects include increased cancer risk, cellular stress, increase in harmful free radicals, genetic damages, structural and functional changes of the reproductive system, learning and memory deficits, neurological disorders, and negative impacts on general well-being in humans. Damage goes well beyond the human race, as there is growing evidence of harmful effects to both plant and animal life.” This letter goes on to accuse WHO of failing to impose sufficient guidelines to protect the general public, particularly children who are at greater risk.
You can’t trust the manufacturers of electronic devices or the government to keep you safe from EMFs. And, unfortunately, a lot of information on how to avoid EMF exposure is dispensed by people trying to sell you something that creates electromagnetic fields — and some of it is hype.
Via: Antonio Guillem
Use a headset or speaker when talking on your cell phone. Via: Antonio Guillem.
The Environmental Working Group, a non-profit organization, shares these common sense tips for using your cell phone safely: talk less and text more, use a headset or speaker when you do talk, and don’t carry your phone close to your body. Of course, don’t sleep with your phone next to you. Better yet, make your bedroom an electronics-free zone. Use your phone when your signal is strong — EMF exposure increases dramatically when signals are weak.
To find more ways to reduce EMF exposure, I highly recommend Ann Louise Gittleman’s book Zapped: Why Your Cell Phone Shouldn’t Be Your Alarm Clock And 1,268 Ways To Outsmart The Hazards Of Electronic Pollution. You’ll find plenty of common sense actionable steps to minimize EMFs throughout your home, without giving up the electronic devices you’ve come to rely on.
Deane AlbanThis article was brought to you by Deane Alban, a health information researcher, writer and teacher for over 25 years. For more helpful articles about improving your cognitive and mental health, visit BeBrainFit.comtoday.

Thursday, November 26, 2015

Lecture by Pr Olle Johansson -Adverse health effects of modern EMF from wireless telecom ,23/10/2015

Lecture by Pr Olle Johansson -Adverse health effects of modern EMF from wireless telecom ,23/10/2015



Is there a connection between mold toxins that flourish in a water damaged indoor environment and electromagnetic radiation?
Connection between electromagnetic radiation and toxic mold
Electric and magnetic fields (EMFs) are invisible areas of energy, often referred to as radiation, characterized by wavelength or frequency. These fields are categorized as follows:
1. Non-ionizing
Low-level radiation which is generally perceived as harmless to humans, but increasingly shown to be otherwise. (See my previous post From Wireless to Wired – My Family’s Journey and The BabySafe Project.)
2. Ionizing
High-level radiation which is known to cause cellular and DNA damage.
Image courtesy of National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences
The focus of this article is on our everyday exposures to non-ionizing radiation through electric appliances, home wiring systems, and wireless internet services. (As pictured above.)
Is there a connection between non-ionizing radiation and bio-contaminants such as those found in indoor mold and Lyme Disease?
The research is fascinating on this topic. At the forefront is Dr. Dietrich Klinghardt, MD., PhD., noted for his successful treatment of neurological illness and chronic pain. In the 5 minute video below, Dr. Klinghardt talks about a mold plate experiment which compared a mold plate shielded from electromagnetic fields to an unprotected mold plate exposed to ambient electromagnetic fields.
The unprotected mold plate showed a dramatic increase in the number of biotoxins produced – more than 600 times! Dr. Klinghardt concludes that indoor mold contaminants as well as other biotoxins (such as those found in Lyme Disease), are highly sensitive to electromagnetic fields. EMFs therefore easily step up neurotoxin production and have a major impact on the immune system.
Note that Dr. Klinghardt points out cell phone radiation in one cubic inch of air is millions of times higher than it was ten years ago.
(While the caption is in German, the content is in English.)
Dr. Thomas Rau, medical director of the Paracelsus Clinic in Switzerland, shares his assessment of the microbial connection with EMFs in an interview featured on the website Electromagnetic Health. Not only do the artificially produced electromagnetic waves cause toxic mold to grow faster, they suppress the production of beneficial microbes.
We have more organisms than cells in our bodies. Cultures of normal human endogenous bacterial cultures grow much less when exposed to EMR. They grow less when they are around a mobile phone, a tower or cordless phone.
Growing less good bacteria in your body means you will have an overgrowth of bad bacteria that can result in things like Lyme’s disease. Especially from the east coast of the USA, we have many patients with Lymes. Antibiotics only make it worse. We look how the good flora responds and how they grow, recolonise. We have to reimplant the good bacteria. Within six weeks the Lyme’s patients get well or much better.
Toxic mould in homes grows much faster under the load of high electromagnetic loads. They grow much faster in a disturbed milieuMercury / heavy metals can also exacerbate the growth.
(The transcript of this interview appears at EMR Stop.)
There are other studies that highlight the connection between electromagnetic radiation and microbial multiplication.


What does this mean when it comes to electromagnetic fields and microbial growth? Since the government is soft on both EMR and toxic mold, unfortunately it is up to us to take charge of our environment.
1. Eliminate mold from the home
Most homes today are built with drywall, which consists of cellulose. Cellulose is the ideal “food” for mold, causing the spores to multiply rapidly. Therefore, it is imperative to eliminate water damage from the home. If flooding or a water leak occurs, quick action is required. If the water intrusion is extensive, radical action is sometimes necessary. If mold is an issue in your home, learn more in the article A Beginner’s Guide to Toxic Mold.
2. Reduce electromagnetic field exposure
While this is a complex issue, thankfully there are numerous ways to reduce our exposure. Dr. Kinghardt as well as those in the field of Building Biology advise everyone, whether immune compromised or not, to create a sleep sanctuary. This involves sleeping away from devices and appliances, shutting off power to the bedroom, and turning off the Wi Fi at night. For more specifics and a complete explanation, see the International Institute for Building Biology and Ecology’s free downloadable article Creating a Sleep Sanctuary – Reducing Electrosmog, as well as my post Sleep, Melatonin, and Electronic Devices.
As a certified Building Biology Practitioner I have been working diligently to reduce our EMF exposure in our home. Learn more about our effort in the previous post From Wireless to Wired – Our Family’s Journey.
I believe the wireless revolution is wreaking havoc with our immune systems. Thankfully knowledge is power when it comes to our health. Understanding the connection between microbial growth and electromagnetic radiation is a critical part of a complex puzzle.

Complaint to the European Ombudsman

Complaint to the European Ombudsman

Dear friends and members of IEMFA,
Following the reply from the EU Commission regarding our complaint on the severe bias and malfunction of the SCENIHR expert group and their 2015 opinion on possible health effects from EMF, we propose those organizations who signed the complaint to the Commission re SCENIHR in August 2015 to also support our complaint to the EU Ombudsman regarding the mismanagement in the Commission of the expert evaluation of health risks from EMF.
Moyens de la Plainte
Please confirm as soon as possible, on Sunday November 29th at the latest,, your support to this complaint.
If someone is willing to translate the French documents into English versions, please

Kind regards
Mona Nilsson
Swedish Radiation Protection Foundation

Wednesday, November 25, 2015

Indira Gandhi Memorial Award in Social Awareness to Mrs Juhi Chawla Mehta

Indira Gandhi Memorial Award in Social Awareness to Mrs Juhi Chawla Mehta

Parents of schoolgirl Jenny Fry are campaigning to have WiFi restricted in schools following her death

Parents of schoolgirl Jenny Fry are campaigning to have WiFi restricted in schools following her death

3:32pm Wednesday 25th November 2015
By Vivien Mason
THE parents of a 15-year-old schoolgirl who hanged herself in woods near her home in June this year say her school could have done more to listen to her cries for help.
Jenny Fry, a pupil at Chipping Norton School, was found by her mother, Debra Fry, hanging from a tree at Brooke Woods at 4.20pm on June 11.
The inquest at Oxfordshire Coroners' Court on November 19 heard how Jenny, who was described as intelligent, non-judgemental and organised, had not been seen since leaving home to go to school on the morning of Thursday, June 11, although she did not get on her bus to school.
A police statement said at 9.36am and 10.05am she sent a text to a friend about her intentions and stating where she was. Her friend did not have her phone with her that day.
Now Mrs Fry and Jenny's father, Charles Newman, say they will continue their campaign to have the dangers of WiFi in schools addressed.
During the inquest, Mrs Fry said Jenny had first started showing symptoms of electro-hypersensitivity (EHS) around November 2012, including tiredness, nausea, headaches and bladder problems. It was the time Jenny's parents briefly had WiFi connected to their home and, said Mrs Fry, that Chipping Norton School had WiFi installed.
"Jenny was getting ill and so was I. I did some research and found how dangerous WiFi could be so I had it taken out of the house. Both Jenny and I were fine at home but Jenny continued to be ill at school in certain areas. She was receiving lots of detentions, not for being disruptive in class or misbehaving, but often because she used to take herself out of the classroom to find another where she was able to work. She took her schoolwork seriously.
"I took lots of information into school to show the headteacher, Simon Duffy, but he said there was equally the same information available claiming WiFi was safe. I also had a heated exchange with teachers telling them Jenny was allergic to WiFi and that it made no sense making her take detentions in rooms that were making her ill. The least they could do was allow her to take them in rooms where she felt able to concentrate, but they wouldn't listen," she said.
"I intend to carry on my campaign to highlight the dangers of WiFi. I am not against a bit of technology but I do feel schools should be aware that some children are going to be sensitive to it and reduce its use.
"I think some technology is very useful. I am glad I had a mobile phone with me when I found Jenny so I was able to ring for help." Mrs Fry said a lot of countries are taking note of its dangers now. France and Germany have acted to remove WiFi in nursery schools and reduce its use elsewhere. A campaign to offset and reduce radiation exposure in schools has been endorsed by many professionals including Professor Jacqueline McGlade, executive director of the European Environment Agency and Dr Erica Mallery-Blythe, medical advisor for Electrosensitivity UK.
"I fully believe Jenny did not intend to take her own life. I think she was frustrated with school. She would not see a doctor but was seeing a counsellor at school who was helping her. She had not made any suggestions she was thinking of suicide and I believe it was a cry for help."
Oxfordshire coroner Darren Salter said he was unable to rule out it was a possible cry for help because of the texts she sent to a friend.
He said there was not enough proof to suggest Jenny intended to take her own life and recorded a narrative verdict: "It can't be demonstrated to the required standard of proof that it is certain she intended to take her own life."
He also did not include the factors relating to EHS as he said there were no medical notes to prove Jenny did suffer from it.
Share article
EHS continues not be to recognised as a medical diagnosis in the UK.
She said the problem she is facing is getting UK GPs to recognise EHS. She is also directing people to websites dedicated to radiation sensitivity. They include (Safe Schools Information Technology Alliance) where there is a section in 'videos' by Dr Mallery-Blythe. There is also and
Simon Duffy, headmaster of Chipping Norton School said: "The safety of our students whilst they are in school is paramount and Jenny’s safety at school was just as important as anyone else’s. We insist on high standards at Chipping Norton School and our students know that there are sanctions for such things as not completing homework or having incorrect uniform. As with some other students, Jenny occasionally failed to meet these expectations, but was always offered the support of her teachers.
Just like many other public spaces, Chipping Norton School does have WiFi installed to enable us to operate effectively. The Governors are content that the installed equipment complies with the relevant regulations and will ensure this continues to be the case. Public Health England states “There is no consistent evidence of health effects from RF (radio frequency) exposure below guideline levels and no reason why schools and others should not use WiFi equipment.”

Appin Hall Children’s Foundation End-of-Year Newsletter 2015

Appin Hall Children’s Foundation End-of-Year Newsletter 2015

NOTE: This posting is a follow-up from my posting of August 26 2015
From Ronnie Burns, founder of Appin Hall.


In July this year, Appin Hall received notice regarding an application to Kentish Council that the NBNCo (+ Ericsson Australia) were proposing to erect a 60met high telecommunications facility within 20met of our northern neighbouring property. In response to this development application, we submitted a Letter of Objection to Kentish Council based on the fact that many of our clients (children suffering serious illness) are already compromised due to illness, treatment + chemotherapy. After months of begging the powers that be: Local Council, the Tasmanian Government and the then Communications Minister, Malcolm Turnbull (and others) the outcome was that no response was forthcoming…


Read the post here.

Tuesday, November 24, 2015

Dr. Devra Davis on the TODAY Nine Network TV program

Dr. Devra Davis on the TODAY Nine Network TV program

Well worth seeing is the TODAY TV program featuring Dr. Devra Davis on mobile phone and Wi-FI dangers (link below). Dr. Davis has been lecturing in Australia on this issue much to the chagrin of the folks at ACEBR who consistently take the line that its all just a nocebo effect and all we need to do is to stop worrying.


Read the post here.

Fighting the Roll-out of Wi-Fi in the Montgomery County, Maryland Public School System

Fighting the Roll-out of Wi-Fi in the Montgomery County, Maryland Public School System

Theodora Scarato and other parents have been fighting the roll-out of Wi-Fi in their public school system in Montgomery County, Maryland.

They are requesting letters from experts to counter the claims of the school administration and a technical analysis prepared by a contractor. Your help would be appreciated.
I have some Wi-Fi resources on my EMR Safety web site at and

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: <>
Date: Fri, Nov 20, 2015 at 7:27 PM
Subject: Please share this - thank you

Help Needed from EMF experts

I am a mom working for years on the wifi in school issue and I need your help and expertise to help move the RF issue in my town. I believe we will make serious news when we respond in full to this-- but we need official letters from experts. 

Our school district of Montgomery County (MCPS) in Maryland has taken radiation measurements from the wifi LAN. We are one of the Unites States biggest most affluent school districts in the  Washington D.C. area.Parents in Montgomery County are lawyers, doctors and elected officials' children, and they need a credentialed response. 

I am one of many parents advocating on this issue here in the D.C. area. We have gotten substantial TV attention. See a recent news piece here. and here

I am writing to ask that you personally respond to the misinformation in the recent radiation report that MCPS just issued. They took measurements. Please note the raw data is at the end of the report on the last 5 pages. 

Here is what we are asking of experts:

Could you please send a short signed letter on letterhead to Theodora Scarato at theodorams@aol.comaddressing the following:

1. Your concerns about possible health effects from wireless LAN in schools
2. Your recommendations for schools.
3. Comment on one or more misleading comments in the report (you will find a lot and I doubt you have to review all of them so if you just pick one or two things to comment on it would mean a lot to us to show how misleading this report is.) 
4. Comment on the raw data if you can.
It is critically important that we have letters from experts speaking to the problems in this report.  For example, you could respond to the report's claims:
  •  "FCC standards are not outdated"
  • "precautions are not needed" at this time
  •  "the “Precautionary Principle” is already implemented in the Wi-Fi guidelines and exposure limits set by WHO, FCC, Health Canada, Public Health England, and other public-health bodies.
Please do not write MCPS but send your comments to my email because we are going to share all the comments at once at the best time. 

I cannot thank you enough for all of your work. I am glad to send you specific details of statements that are made that you could focus on.

Thank you so very much, 
Theodora Scarato LCSWC

I attached both the Report and the misleading  Q and A they have posted on their website . You can access it at the link below but I thought it would helpful for you to have the PDF attached.


Joel M. Moskowitz, Ph.D., Director
Center for Family and Community Health
School of Public Health
University of California, Berkeley

Electromagnetic Radiation Safety

News Releases:
Twitter:               @berkeleyprc