If the FCC’s Mike O’Rielly is justified in his enthusiasm for Wi-Fi and other wireless transmissions, then 225 scientists are wrong.
They signed the International EMF Scientist Appeal. Their peer-reviewed papers would also be wrong. The link opens to 105 groups worldwide that want abuses in wireless transmissions to be curbed.
O’Rielly earlier this week, commenting on the inaugural “Wi-Fi World Day” June 20, said the sudden, nearly worldwide deployment of Wi-Fi is “an engineering and technical marvel of staggering proportions.”
His enthusiasm, if not downright evangelism, appears to be genuine. He is obviously on a mission to open new Wi-Fi frequencies, improve the speed that data can be communicated, and ensure the ubiquitous penetration of the technology.
According to O’Rielly, we must all have instant access to lightning-fast Wi-Fi wherever we should find ourselves, at whatever time we want. It's our right, as citizens in a dynamic, competitive, free world to have fast and cheap Wi-Fi.
If this was a technological issue alone, the mass acceptance of Wi-Fi truly would be something to celebrate, and the champagne corks would rightly be popping in recognition of "World Wi-Fi Day.”
More than Technology Involved
However, Wi-Fi and other technologies using pulsed microwave radiation to communicate, such as "smart wireless utility meters", cell towers, smartphones, cordless phones, and even wireless baby monitors, come with a hidden cost that the FCC and other business-friendly organizations and even governments, would prefer that we didn't know.
In May 2015, 190 international experts on the biological effects of exposure to this radiation, warned the UN, all UN member states, and the World Health Organization of the risks, calling on them to "...address the emerging public health crisis related to cell phones, wireless devices, wireless utility meters and wireless infrastructure in neighborhoods."
They noted 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."
Also, in a recent paper ("Wi-Fi as a Very Substantial Threat to Human Health"), Dr. Martin Pall, Professor Emeritus of Biochemistry and Basic Medical Sciences at Washington State University, said:
"Neither Wi-Fi nor other devices putting out such EMFs are ever tested biologically for safety, not even one of them, not even once, before they are put out to irradiate the unsuspecting public. Such biological safety testing is the only way to say anything about their biological impacts.”
Industry View Based on Old Data
"All assurances of safety that you will see in industry propaganda are based on the belief that radiation that does not raise body temperatures is harmless. That theory has been shown to be false and should have discarded, in my opinion, over 40 years ago."
Professor Trevor Marshall, a Director of the Autoimmunity Research Foundation said this in a recent paper entitled "Electrosmog and autoimmune disease":
"...it seems likely that signals a million times lower than those currently being used in research may be sufficient to elicit a tangible change in human biology.”
There are many other scientific experts who are concerned about the health effects of exposure to Wi-Fi radiation, and especially to children, who are often exposed to industrial grade Wi-Fi routers all day long while at school.
O'Rielly and others like him ignore the biological effects of the radiation in their zealous quest to ensure the domination of this technology. We can question what motivates these people, but one thing is absolutely clear.
For him to be right, the 225 scientists who signed the International EMF Scientist Appeal would have to be wrong and so would their scientific papers.
Also in error would be the World Health Organization's own body, the International Agency for Research on Cancer, which in 2011 classified the radiation emitted by Wi-Fi and other wireless technologies as a possible carcinogen.
Does anybody really believe this to be the case...?
Dave Ashton was an IT consultant in the UK and Europe until 2010, when he was forced to retire due to electromagnetic hypersensitivity (EHS). He now spends his time advocating for safe technology, and the formal recognition of electrosensitivity as a bona-fide pathophysiological condition which, despite industry claims, is directly caused by the harmful electrosmog in our environment.