West Marin Action Alert, Victory! and more….

July 8, 2019 — By Mary Beth Brangan

Action Alert!

On July 9, the Marin County Board of Supervisors plans to consider an urgency ordinance and new policy regarding the installation of fifth-generation cellular wireless technology, commonly called 5G, in locations throughout unincorporated Marin within the public roads.

The Board has set a 1:30 p.m. session in the Marin County Civic Center Board chamber, Suite 330, in San Rafael. Residents will be able to attend, watch the webcast live or archived, or tune in on Channel 27 for Comcast and AT&T U-Verse subscribers. Read more

The draft has some strengths, but needs much work.  Here are comments made by EON suggesting changes and additions.

From: Mary Beth Brangan, Ecological Options Network, EON

Re: Draft Ordinance for “Small Cell” Installation  Many thanks to the sub-committee for this draft ordinance. I appreciate your work to protect your authority as elected officials and your citizens from the FCC overreach.  

Section 704 of the 1996 Telecommunications Act, that prohibits environmental (and claimed health effects, too) from being used to prevent the placement of any RF antenna is unjust and should be repealed.

You are aware of the amassed peer-reviewed science showing adverse health and environmental impacts from RF/EMF.  

I say this because, in a just system, to accommodate willingly the demand by the wireless industry to densify the RF/MMW antennae and therefore the RF/EMF exposure (classified as a 2B carcinogen) would be considered willful endangerment of the public. This assault on our right to health is an outrage.

 Here are a few recommendations for your consideration:

1) First of all, since the FCC order may be overturned in court, we want to remind you about the suggestion from the legal firm, BB&K, who represents many in the case. They recommend that no FCC standards be incorporated into local law per se, in case the FCC order is vacated. So please make anything in the ordinance that would force the county to accommodate the wireless industry’s placing powerful antennae in close proximity to the public, conditional, pending the resolution of the legal challenges.

2) In order to most effectively protect the considerable number of people who have been sickened already by exposure to RF/EMF and whose disability is beyond a mere mobility handicap, such as medical metal, vertigo, cardiac problems and the broader scope of EHS, please add the language:

  • “The ordinance shall comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act.”

 This broadens the legal application to include all the handicaps that ADA is intended to include. The ADA covers all disabilities that keep us from engaging in one or more major life activities. The County of San Diego attorneys recommend this language in order not to discriminate among disabilities. There are specific billing codes used by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services for exposure to RF radiation and other non-ionizing radiation which definitely establish legal recognition of these conditions: https://icd10coded.com/cm/W90/

  • Billable – 0XXA Exposure to radiofrequency, initial encounter
  • Billable – W90.0XXD Exposure to radiofrequency, subsequent encounter
  • Billable – W90.0XXS Exposure to radiofrequency, sequela

This applies to everybody who is covered under Medicare and Medicaid and proves that, despite wireless industry claims, the existence of disability from exposure to RF/EMF is officially recognized. 

3) Because the legal challenges brought by the Cities, Mayors, Counties, etc. appear to be very strong against the FCC overreach, the wireless industry and the FCC have a plan B: the industry is proposing to use OTARD to offer licenses to private landowners to have the ‘small cell’ antennae on private property. Of course this would avoid the few legal rights established for the public: being informed about an application, having a public hearing and from setbacks and zoning requirements, etc.

We are very concerned that this will present incredible problems for those residents who may be damaged both from decreased property values (20% reduction or more) if in close proximity as well as from adverse health and environmental effects.  What legal remedy would be available to a neighbor adversely affected by an OTARD-listed 5G antenna on a nearby property?

4) Stealth design for antenna facilities is also a concern. People need to be able to protect themselves against unwanted exposure – pregnant women, children, the sick and elderly particularly.

  • The County should mandate signage to warn that one is within, for instance, 50 ft. of an antenna. This could help pregnant women, who want to act based on the Kaiser Permanente study that showed women most exposed to RF/EMF had three times greater chance of miscarriage. These ‘small cells’ have already been measured to emit very high 4G radiation, even more dangerous because they are so much closer to people.

5) Please prohibit antennas in residential zones. “Least preferred” will be ignored.

6) Studies show that adverse effects increase dramatically within a 1500 ft radius of an antenna.

  • All sensitive areas should be protected by a 1500 ft. setback: health facilities, parks/recreation areas, eldercare facilities, hospitals, playgrounds/parks — all places where children (and other more vulnerable members of our population) spend many hours to play and sleep.

7) Since the height of the antennae might be on the level of a second or third story window, special provisions must be in place to avoid this. Story poles, street markings, and photos with superimposed proposed antennas should be used to help the public understand exactly where the ‘small cells’ would be installed.

8) Yearly measurement to establish emission levels must be demanded. A 2013 study found a large percentage of cell towers were emitting more radiation than even the FCC has in its guidelines. The FCC said back in 2013 that it didn’t have the manpower to do checks on the hundreds of thousands of antenna under its jurisdiction. Imagine now with the exponential increase in numbers of antenna how unlikely any monitoring of radiation levels is by the FCC. The County must mandate monitoring.

  • An independent expert chosen by the County should do the radio-frequency monitoring/measurements and
  • It should be paid for by the applicant.
  • Unannounced measurements should be done at peak use times to avoid carriers powering down and claiming averaged emissions

9) Please establish a Website so that:

The public can have as much advance notice as possible of applications and

  • The public can track permit applications and subsequent action. Marin Maps could be used.
  • The public can have a sign-up for an automatic email alert when an application is submitted.
  • Public can notice should be provided at the expense of the applicant and the public notification process made clear in the text of the ordinance itself.

10) The public should have the right to appeal any permit approval. A public hearing and community meeting about applications should be included (San Anselmo’s proposed ordinance has this.)



Another Terrible Proposal from the FCC:

Using the OTARD rule for 5G Wireless Radiation

EON’s Comments to the FCC Proposed Rule 19-71 regarding the proposal to use the OTARD (over-the-air reception devices) license (intended for ham radio, satellite dishes, etc.) to put 5G infrastructure on private property to avoid any legal oversight.

EON strongly opposes the proposed amendments to the OTARD rule. It should not be changed to allow wireless companies to put their 5G antennas on private homes in an attempt to avoid legal oversight.

Threats to security, safety and privacy already abound from exponentially increasing use of wireless technologies. What legal remedy would be available to a neighbor adversely affected by a 5G antenna on a nearby property? What legal protections would a property owner have against property devaluation? What responsibility does the FCC have to inform a prospective property owner considering placing a 5G antenna on their property about potential liability for harming neighbors? What responsibility does a property owner have to inform neighbors about the presence of a 5G antenna on their property?

The FCC should not be using taxpayer dollars for the benefit of wireless companies, pushing a new technology that has never been proven safe. In fact, wireless transmission of 2G, 3G and 4G have been shown in peer -reviewed studies to be unsafe. Already there are growing numbers of severely RF injured people who have no where to go to avoid these ubiquitous and increasing frequencies and whose lives are hell from painful reactions they can’t escape. The ADA law should protect them but is infrequently honored.

We know the “5G” installations will be using the prior generations of frequencies as well as millimeter wave technology. We also know that millimeter wave technology has been used as a ‘pain ray’ for crowd control by the military – not a reassuring fact.

The FCC’s wireless radiation exposure guidelines are based on research from the 1980’s, which was biased even then against admitting scientifically established harm and mandated only considering thermal effects, not the non-thermal biological effects documented in copious recent and older studies. And certainly, though there is inadequate study of the health effects from uses of millimeter wave tech, there is high concern from those scientists who have done preliminary studies that show the helical shape of the sweat ducts provide a perfect antenna for penetration of the Millimeter Waves (MW). There is concern that MWs will penetrate into the body much farther than expected. 

At this time studies indicate that people are already experiencing adverse reproductive, health and mental effects from the additive effects of increasing exposure to RF/EMF from existing wireless devices and transmissions. Studies show 54% of young people born after 1989 suffer from chronic illness, defined as an illness with no cure within western medicine.

It is totally irresponsible to ignore the FCC’s own initiated but not concluded open dockets on reassessing the current exposure guidelines, particularly for children, the ill and elderly.

Allowing even more close proximity radiation from what the World Health Organization’s International Agency for Research on Cancer currently classifies as a Class 2B carcinogen, will result in massive public opposition and major legal challenges

Many elected public officials across the country are responding to constituents’ concerns and demanding proof of safety before allowing more of this complex, powerful radiation to pervade the environment and public areas. Attempts by the FCC to continue your overreach will result in rising enmity among the public against all wireless companies; why destroy your customer base?

The FCC proceeding mentions the “potential to bring enormous benefits” but there is no FCC analysis of the costs or cost effectiveness. And to truly determine the costs, the FCC will have to factor in major debilitation of the entire population of all living creatures (people, birds, insects, microbes, animals, plants) by intense, man-made radiation that our electrical-biological systems did not evolve within. The profit from wireless technologies is clearly not worth damaging the integrity of biological systems, which are all electrically based on unique frequencies that can be disrupted by the stronger man-made frequencies.

The National Toxicology Program (NTP) under the National Institutes of Health has completed the largest-ever animal study on cell phone radiation and cancer. The relationship between radiofrequency radiation and cancer is clearly established. Dr. John Bucher, Associate Director of the NTP and the lead researcher on this study confirms that the exposure of 1.5 W/Kg is lower than currently allowed for the public, including children, under FCC public safety limits. Testing on rats is standard in predicting human cancers.

The NTP results confirm that cell phone radiation exposure levels within the currently allowed safety limits are the “likely cause” of brain and heart cancers in these animals. Italy’s Ramazinni Institute’s study of rats showed an increase in the incidence of very rare highly malignant tumors—schwannomas of the heart— observed in male rats and reached statistical significance at the highest dose. These are the same types of rare and malignant tumors found to be increased in the US National Toxicology Program (NTP) $25 million animal study of cell phone radiation that used far higher RFR exposure levels. The tumors are also the same histotype as found to be increased in long term cell phone users.

Dr. Anthony Miller, Professor Emeritus with the University of Toronto, and adviser to the International Agency for Research on Cancer says, “Many scientists worldwide now believe that radiofrequency radiation should be elevated to a Class One human carcinogen, on the same list as Cigarettes, X-Rays, and Asbestos.”

Cancer is not the only health effect. Adverse health effects are seen particularly in children whose rates of autism, ADD, depression, anxiety, childhood obesity and asthma are skyrocketing. Kaiser Permanente studies showed clear relationship between in utero exposure to non-ionizing radiation with 3 times greater risk of miscarriage as well as increased risk of childhood obesity and asthma.

There is also a growing body of science showing the interaction between chemical pollution, excess heavy metals in the body and RF/EMF synergize to produce effects greater than each would have individually. See Dr. Ron Kostoff”s


Scientific sources include the most recent BioInitiative Report, the International EMF Scientist Appeal, the Europa EM EMF Guideline from 2016, the 5G Appeal, recommendations from the American Academy of Pediatrics, the International Association of Firefighters in 2004, the California Medical Association resolution on December 7, 2014, Kaiser Permanente studies re higher miscarriage rates, asthma and childhood obesity and many, many others.



Letter to the FCC from Dr. Yael Stein MD in Opposition to 5G Spectrum Frontiers

“Clear Evidence of Cancer” Concludes U.S. National Toxicology Program Expert Panel on Cell Phone Radiation 

Ramazzini Institute Study: Animal Study on Base Station/Cell Tower Radiofrequency Radiation




Scientists and Doctors Warn of Potential Serious Health Effects of 5G



The human skin as a sub-THz receiver – Does 5G pose a danger to it or not?

The Modeling of the Absorbance of Sub-THz Radiation by Human Skin

The California Medical Association Wireless Resolution

New Kaiser Permanente Study Provides Evidence of Health Risks …


In-Utero Exposure to Magnetic Fields Associated with Increased Risk of Obesity in Childhood

Here are a few studies focused on neurological effects:

Kim, Ju Hwan, et al. “Long-term exposure to 835 MHz RF-EMF induces hyperactivity, autophagy and demyelination in the cortical neurons of mice.” Scientific Reports, vol. 7, no. 41129, 2017.   Study found that RF-EMF exposure led to myelin sheath damage and hyperactivity-like behaviour in mice exposed to 835 MHz RF-EMF at a specific absorption rate (SAR) of 4.0 W/kg for 5 hours/day during 12 weeks.  Demyelination was induced in cortical neurons following prolonged RF-EMF exposure and suggests a potential cause of neurological or neurobehavioural disorders. 
Full Text:  https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5247706/pdf/srep41129.pdf


Redmayne M, Johansson O. Could myelin damage from radiofrequency electromagnetic field exposure help explain the functional impairment electrohypersensitivity? A review of the evidence. Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health, vol. 17, no. 5, 2014, pp. 247-58.  

Review of the evidence for an association between myelin integrity and exposure to low-intensity radiofrequency electromagnetic fields (RF-EMFs) 

“Overall, evidence from in vivo and in vitro and epidemiological studies suggests an association between RF-EMF exposure and either myelin deterioration or a direct impact on neuronal conduction, which may account for many electrohypersensitivity symptoms. The most vulnerable are likely to be those in utero through to at least mid-teen years, as well as ill and elderly individuals.”

Full text: http://www.avaate.org/IMG/pdf/redmayne_johansson_2014.pdf


Sage, C. and Burgio, E. (2017), Electromagnetic Fields, Pulsed Radiofrequency Radiation, and Epigenetics: How Wireless Technologies May Affect Childhood Development. Child Dev. doi:10.1111/cdev.12824

“New epigenetic studies are profiled in this review to account for some neurodevelopmental and neurobehavioral changes due to exposure to wireless technologies. Symptoms of retarded memory, learning, cognition, attention, and behavioral problems have been reported in numerous studies and are similarly manifested in autism and attention deficit hyperactivity disorders, as a result of EMF and RFR exposures where both epigenetic drivers and genetic (DNA) damage are likely contributors. Technology benefits can be realized by adopting wired devices for education to avoid health risk and promote academic achievement.”

Full text:    https://eliant.eu/fileadmin/user_upload/de/pdf/Sage_Burgio_Childhood_2017_Epigenetics.pdf


Download above document (including references) in PDF format



Court rules Berkeley may require warnings
that cell phone use risks radiation exposure  

San Francisco Chronicle, 7-2- 2019

Congratulations and immense thanks to all who worked tirelessly for this national precedent-setting ruling, including Prof. Lawrence Lessig, Ellie Marks, Joel Moscowitz, Lloyd Morgan, the Berkeley City Council and many others!

From Environmental Health Trust: “A landmark Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the City of Berkeley’s cell phone right to know ordinance rejecting industries argument that the ordinance violates the first amendment. This ordinance requires retailers to inform consumers that cell phones emit radiation and that “if you carry or use your phone in a pants or shirt pocket or tucked into a bra when the phone is ON and connected to a wireless network, you may exceed the federal guidelines for exposure to RF radiation.” Read more


Exposing the FCC’s illegal scheme to replace wired networks

with wireless and make us pay for it!

The Irregulators Legal Case against the FCC offers us an unparalleled chance of stopping 5G in its tracks.

They need your support!

The Background

  1.  Verizon, AT&T and other companies have been using the construction budgets of the copper wireline- based state telecommunications utilities to build out their wireless networks.
  2. Local phone customers have been charged inflated rates that have paid to help telecom companies build their networks – so that rate payers have been unknowingly subsidizing wireless services at the detriment of wired networks.
  3. If these “cross subsidies” were removed – or repaid – then 5G would not be profitable.
  4. This shell game has given wireless companies enormous profits and has shown artificial losses for wired services. This has allowed telecoms to classify wired networks as unprofitable, to justify eliminating the superior copper-wired service and to force us into entirely wireless service.
  5. The telecoms have already charged rate payers (at thousands of dollars/line over two decades), to develop a fiber optic service, but didn’t deliver it to us as promised. Now they are attempting to charge us again for it but only giving us wireless service.
  6. Almost all these inaccurate and misleading financial practices were enabled by the FCC accounting rules.
  7. Exposing these “cross subsidies” and requiring the FCC to demand that telecom carriers fix them to accurately reflect the actual costs associated with each respective technology, could be a game changer.
  8. To add insult to injury, the companies have dumped billions per state of their ‘corporate operations expenses’ that should never have been charged. This is the executive pay, lobbyists, lawyers, golf tournaments and the corporate jets — and worse, these are the lawyers, lobbyists that are working to force 5G on us– we’re paying them extra to harm us!

The Irregulators: An independent consortium of highly regarded senior telecom experts, analysts, forensic auditors, and lawyers was formed to make the public aware of these manipulative accounting practices and take the FCC to task for allowing them at our expense. The group’s goal is to stop the practice of these subsidies and make wireless companies pay for the true cost of wireless, including the WIRED fiber optic networks which they rely on and have already been charging customers for, for two decades. On June 3rd, 2019, the IRREGULATORS had a major victory when the FCC had the opportunity to but did not challenge their right to take this case and present it in the DC court, starting July 22nd, 2019. With this huge “win” behind them, now the group urgently needs financial support to take the case to trial and hold the FCC accountable for oversight of the telecom industry in an unbiased manner and secure our rights as rate payers.

PLEASE DONATE at this link to help continue their fight on our behalf.  It may help to prevent, or at least, slow the roll out of 5G. For more information, visit https://irregulators.net/

FREE SUMMER READING:  Click here for a free PDF of “The Book of Broken Promises: $400 Billion Broadband Scandal & Free the Net”, the 3rd in a trilogy that started in 1998. The second book (and author) was featured on Emmy nominated Bill Moyer’s  PBS special, “The Net at Risk”, in 2006 the first national broadcast program on Net Neutrality. The author and book were also featured in Pulitzer Prize winner, David Cay Johnston’s “The Fine Print”, in 2012.


Could A New Cell Tower Hurt You Financially? CBS13 Investigates


Published on Jun 26, 2019

The coming 5G networks – what they are and why they might cause problems. Charlie Siler is joined by Vicki Sievers, Marin Outreach Coordinator, EMF Safety Network; Mary Beth Brangan, co-founder, Ecological Options Network; and Rachel Gaunt, executive coach and 5G activist