The FCC wants to set new rules for allowable human exposures to the higher electromagnetic frequencies that will be used for 5G. The FCC has released a written document with all the technical details and opened up Docket 19-226– an online database that shows all the documents sent to the FCC on their proposed new rules.
FCC’s new proposal will extend the regulations to higher frequencies all the way up to 3 THz. In addition, the FCC wants to include lower frequencies down to 3 KHz. In summary, the FCC wants to extend permissible human exposures to a much wider range of electromagnetic frequencies.
You can go to the FCC Docket 19-226 HERE.
EHT is compiling some of the recent submissions to the FCC proposal.
Environmental Health Trust
Excerpts from Environmental Health Trust FCC Submission 19-226
“It is our professional opinion that the agency should not move forward with the above proposal and needs to develop safety standards that protect against long-term health and environmental effects.”
“We recommend a halt to the roll-out of the fifth generation, 5G, for telecommunication and for the expansion of wireless networks until hazards for human health and the environment of these new frequencies and the densification of networks have been fully investigated by scientists independent from industry. 5G paired with densification of 4G antennas will substantially increase environmental exposure to radiofrequency electromagnetic fields. We also recommend federally developed safety limits based on empirical scientific studies that have thoroughly investigated long term effects to humans, animals, insects, trees and the environment. Federal safety limits should be based on adequate data from animal and human research, not based on assumptions.”
Read Environmental Health Trust FCC Submission 19-226 Proposed FCC changes to Measuring and Evaluating Human Exposure to Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Fields and Wireless Power Transfer Devices are Flawed: need for biologically-based standards ( ET Docket No. 19–226; FCC 19–126; FRS 16618)By Paul Ben Ishai, Mikko Ahonen, Hugo Gonçalves Silva, and Devra Davis
EHT’s additional extensive submissions of science and policy can be found here.
Ronald Melnick PhD
- “I find it shocking that the FCC document lacks any discussion on how health effects of RF radiation, other than tissue heating, impacted the proposed rule. Surely, the FCC is aware of the numerous health effects studies at frequencies and modulations that have been used for wireless communication and that there are no adequate long-term health effects studies at frequencies above 6 GHz, which are included in the proposed rule.”
Tom Butler PhD
Albert Manville PhD
Dr. Albert M. Manville “I strongly recommend FCC open up the process to public review and move to conduct the necessary studies to answer these the many troubling questions about the safety impacts of 5G. Let sound science be the primary driver in this effort. Respectfully submitted, Albert M. Manville, Ph.D., and Certified Wildlife Biologist”
Dr. Cindy Russell
Dr. Cindy Russell of Physicians for Safe Technology has submitted extensive testimony with references on non thermal effects from wireless radiation.
Dr. Marc Arazi
Dr. Marc Arazi for Phonegate Alert submitted a Table of cell phones withdrawn or updated in France due to excessive cell hone radiation levels.
Numerous Scientific Publications Submitted by Kevin Mottus
Kevin Mottus has submitted numerous published research studies that show non thermal effects of wireless frequencies. See these filings HERE.
- For example, according to the US Air Force in 1994 “In 1956, the Department of Defense (DOD) directed the Armed Forces to investigate the biological effects of exposure to radiofrequency/microwave (RF/MW) radiation. The Army, Navy, and Air Force Departments commissioned a Tri-Service Program under the supervision of the Air Force to meet the DOD directive (14), [15]. The Rome Air Development Center and the Air Research and Development Headquarters were ultimately given responsibility to manage the program. On July 15-16, 1957 the first of four TriService Conferences was held to discuss the effects of RF/MW radiation. These conferences were the first major effort put forth by the scientific community to explore the biological effects of exposure to RF/MW radiation. Read more in the FCC Submission.
Timothy Schoechle, Ph.D.
“The 19-126 inquiry and the FCC exposure guidelines are largely based on assumptions and theoretical models rather than on experimental evidence or testing. Exposure limits should be based on empirical science (i.e., verifiable by observation or experience rather than theory or pure logic). “Increased emphasis on long‐term exposures may require refining the concept of dose to more flexibly combine exposure time and field intensity or energy absorbed.” (Barnes and Greenebaum, 2020, p. 4). “What is missing in the current guidelines or regulations are guidelines for long-term exposure to weak EMF” (p. 5).”
Timothy Schoechle, Ph.D. Submission , attachments
Setting Guidelines for Electromagnetic Exposures and Research Needs.pdf
Substantial Additional Documentation
Alliance of Nurses for Healthy Environments
Alliance of Nurses for Healthy Environments
Oceania Radiofrequency Scientific Advisory Association Inc. (ORSAA)
PDF: Serious Safety Concerns about 5G Wireless Deployment in Australia and New Zealand
Additional Submissions by ORSAA
Over 400 Medical Professionals- organized by Americans for Responsible Technology
Over 400 Medical Professionals Letter
“Americans are entitled to know the full extent of any potential health risks associated with exposure to RF microwave radiation, particularly at this time when wireless companies are busy installing hundreds of thousands of new wireless antennas in close proximity to homes and apartments. The determination of risk can best be evaluated from properly conducted, independent studies. The alternative of waiting for decades to learn whether or not these exposures increase disease rates in human populations and in the natural world is a dangerous and irresponsible strategy.”
Adejoke Obajuluwa PhD
Research studies by Adejoke Obajuluwa PhD
The Balance Group
Critical information is missing. The missing information includes and is not limited to matters of: national security; environmental impacts; proof that device manufacturers and carriers have guaranteed that suitable insurance and indemnification exists against a number of material and readily-identifiable systemic and catastrophic harms; evidence that written assessments, and permissions were secured from other federal agencies that have subject matter jurisdiction of potential or actual RF exposure harms caused to people, property and other life forms (including and not limited to livestock, crops, trees, and other food production sources).
The Balance Group FCC Submission
City of Boston, Massachusetts
“Boston believes that the concerns of the public are real and that the Commission has done a disservice to itself, local government, consumers, and even the wireless industry8 in failing to understand and respond to the broadly shared mistrust of the safety of RF emissions.”
“The City, and many of its constituents, do not believe the cursory way in which the Commission simply reaffirmed its decades old standards in 2019 was based on a robust review of the record and an updating of the science. And until the Commission appreciates the educational component of its role as the nation’s RF monitor, local governments, like Boston, will continue to be stuck in the middle as residents oppose wireless deployments for fear of the emissions, while the FCC and Congress have preempted local government review of RF standards.”
City of Boston, Massachusetts Submission
Consumers for Safe Cell Phones
“The FCC consumer website MUST provide factual and complete information to the public, and until the separation distance “warning” is included on the website in a prominent location, the website is incomplete and misleading as it allows consumers to believe that it is safe and compliant to carry and use a cell phone directly against the body.”
