Michael J. Schwaebe P.E., BBEC 760.753.7752

mjschwaebe@gmail.com

EMF Assessment for El Camino Christian Fellowship, 510 S. El Camino Real, Encinitas, CA. 92024

Purpose: EMF Assessment for El Camino Christian Fellowship and Encinitas Innovations Charter School Scope: An EMF assessment was conducted at the school on November 27th, 2012, between 3-5 pm. Electromagnetic fields (EMF) and electromagnetic radiation (EMR) are synonymous terms and consist of electric fields, magnetic fields and radio frequency (RF) waves. These were measured in the parking lot, playgrounds and in the classrooms. The measurements were recorded in measurement tables in the attachments. Electric fields measured in volt/meter (V/m), emanate from the utility power lines and from the home wiring and power cords. This is because of the energy potential difference with the surroundings, including humans in their homes. Magnetic fields, measured in milligauss (mG) or nanotesla (nT) (1 mG = 100 nT), are caused by the flow of current in the power lines and house circuits and devices. Power lines emanate magnetic fields because the individual lines are separated by several feet up on the pole, and therefore the fields do not cancel out. In the house wiring, the hot wire and the neutral return run in the same cable jacket and the fields are equal and opposite and cancel out. The exception here is when there is a multiple path return, which can be caused by crossing neutrals between circuits, or when the 3-way switch does not have the traveling wire.

1/11

Radio frequency (RF) for this assessment is an EMF wave that emanates from home wireless devices, smart meters, and a host of external systems (radio, TV, mobile phone, etc.). RF waves are used to convey information from one place to another through the air. They are waves that have electrical and magnetic properties traveling at the speed of light, capable of traveling many miles and penetrating concrete depending upon the frequency. For compliance purposes, RF is measured in microwatts/meter squared (սW/m2) or micro watts/centimeter squared (μW/cm2). (10,000 μW/m2 is equivalent to 1 μW/cm2). RF is also measured in volt/meter (V/m) and decibels (dB). EMF is measured outside of the structure to identify external factors that could elevate levels inside, and then inside to characterize the EMF environment. The readings are recorded in tables on data sheets that include Building Biology guidelines for sleeping areas. The guidelines originate from BAU Biologie in Germany, 30+ years of research, practical experience and observations with sensitive people. These guidelines are believed to be appropriate for all of us, and especially children in continuously occupied areas. These are very conservative with respect to government limits, see discussion below. See Appendix A for instruments used. Electromagnetic Radiation (EMR) Exposure Limits: The FCC RF guidelines are defined in FCC OET, and can be found at this link, http://www.fcc.gov/encyclopedia/oet-bulletins-line The FCC limit at mobile phone frequencies is 1,000 μW/cm2. This limit has been set to prevent thermal damage. This limit does not protect from biological effects that have been documented in the research literature at tiny fractions of this level. See appendices. The Bioinitiative Report, Precautionary Guidelines (2007), Dr. Martin Blank - Columbia University, specified 1,000 μW/m2 or 0.1 μW/cm2 as a safe limit. See http://www.bioinitiative.org/ . Note that the FCC limit is 10,000 times greater than this precautionary limit. The Australian Medical Association and “Building Biology Precautionary Guidelines for (SBM - 2008) For Sleeping Areas” define power density in μW/cm2 in four categories: No Concern, < 0.1; Slight Concern, 0.1 - 10; Severe Concern, 10 - 1,000; Extreme Concern, > 1000. The levels for slight concern are 1,000,000 times less than the FCC limits.

2/11

This figure is shown on page 5 of Magda Havas’ San Francisco Wi-Fi Environmental Report and illustrates guidelines for many countries. http://www.powerwatch.org.uk/pdfs/20061232_havas.pdf

Site Description: This is a two story, wood frame construction, stucco sided, multi- purpose building. There is a church sanctuary, some offices, and the building also houses two schools. The church bell tower stands adjacent to the structure and houses an assortment of mobile antennas. There are mobile antennas on light posts in the parking lot. There is a patio area and a playground area to the south side of the building. There is a playground area for the smaller children on the north side of the building. There is a preschool at the Lutheran Church immediately adjacent on the south side, an assisted living facility on the north side, and residences immediately behind the church property. This location is one of the largest single antenna sites in the Encinitas area. See link for description of BRAG rating. Summary of Measurements: 1. The AC electric (potential free) fields within the building were found to vary from .03 to 4 V/m in the classrooms and are of no or very slight concern. 2. The magnetic fields were found to vary from 12 to 60 NT and are in the range of no to slight concern. 3. The RF fields were found to vary from 200 to greater than 20,000 μW/m2 and are in the severe to extreme concern range in most of the classrooms and playground areas according to the guidelines explained above. The RF source was observed to be primarily mobile antenna, with a very small contribution from other sources. A BRAG Report for the Encinitas schools

3/11

showed that this location was rated in the black across the board with a BRAG rating of 22%, and the worst of six schools rated. This report is shown in Attachment 2. The general RF levels observed in the playground areas and in the classrooms are equivalent to being within arm’s length from typical personal devices that are continuously operating, e.g., a Wi-Fi router, laptop or PC set up for Wi-Fi, bluetooth keyboard, mouse and printers, cordless phone handset and/ or base station, baby monitor, microwave oven, cell phone, wireless video game controls. See this link for more information on emission from personal devices. http://s158336089.onlinehome.us/TelusDocs/19%20Sep%202010%20Testing%20Results.pdf Recommendations: 1. Implement changes to the antenna system in a way that reduces exposure in the classroom and playground areas to less than 200 μW/m2. This could be accomplished by reducing the antenna power levels and / or by re-orienting the antennas away from the building classrooms and the playgrounds. Install shielding materials on the building and windows that will reflect and / or ground the RF waves from the antennas. 2. Alternately, re-locate the school to a site that has low RF radiation. 3. All the children here need to have a low EMF home environment, especially during sleep time so that their bodies can recover from having been in this radiation environment. Appendices Appendix A Equipment Used Appendix B Review of the Bushberg Report dated November 1, 2012. Subject: RF Power Density associated with the AT&T Wireless Facility at the El Camino Community Church. Appendix C Possible Health Effects, Electromagnetic Hypersensitivity and Electrical Sensitivity Appendix D References Attachments Attachment 1 Electromagnetic Radiation Measurements for El Camino Christian Fellowship Attachment 2 BRAG Antenna Ranking Report for Encinitas, CA Attachment 3 Bio for Michael Schaebe, PE, BBEC Attachment 4 Preface of the International Journal of Pathophysiology, 2009 Special EMF Issue Attachment 5 Governments and Organizations that Ban or Warn Against Wireless Technology

4/11

Appendix A Equipment Used RF Meter: Broadband RF Analyzer - Gigahertz Solutions eHFE59B - Displays power density values as the sum of all the RFR sources in the band of the antenna. Antenna: UBB27 Broadband Isotropic 27 MHz - 3.3 GHz See this link for more information on this equipment: http://www.slt.co/Products/RFMeters/ Electric and Magnetic Field Meter: Gigahertz Solutions NFA1000 Displays the level of magnetic and electric fields in single or 3 axis mode. See this link for more information about this meter: http://www.slt.co/Products/EMFMeters/

5/11

Appendix B Review of the Bushberg Report dated November 1, 2012. Subject: RF Power Density associated with the AT&T Wireless Facility at the El Camino Community Church. 1. A Narda Meter Probe Set was used to measure RF in the frequency range of 300 KHz - 3 GHz. The dynamic range of the instrument is between 0.6% and 600% of the maximum permissible exposure (MPE) standard. The readings obtained were below the instrument’s sensitivity of 0.6% MPE (6 μW/cm2). In the EMF assessment documented in the report, the RF levels were found to be on the order of 20,000 μW/m2, 2 μW/cm2, which is consistent with the observation in this report. 2. There is a statement that the radiation levels in the schools are safe, along with considerable discussion regarding the derivation of the MPE safety limit. The FCC safety limit is based upon thermal heating of tissue in a rat. It does not address biological effects. The American Academy of Environmental Medicine issued a report earlier this year (2012) that states that the FCC limits do not protect us from the biological effects. In its report “Electromagnetic and Radiofrequency Fields Effect on Human Health,” found at this link http://aaemonline.org/emf_rf_position.html, AAEM is calling for:

An immediate caution on Smart Meter installation due to potentially harmful RF exposure.

Accommodation for health considerations regarding EMF and RF exposure, including exposure to wireless Smart Meter technology.

Independent studies to further understand the health effects from EMF and RF exposure.

Recognition that electromagnetic hypersensitivity is a growing problem worldwide. Understanding and control of this electrical environmental bombardment for the protection of

society. Consideration and independent research regarding the quantum effects of EMF and RF on

human health.

Use of safer technology, including for Smart Meters, such as hard-wiring, fiber optics or other non-harmful methods of data transmission.

The Bioinitiative Report, issued in 2007 and updated in 2011, is a mega analysis of hundreds and hundreds of EMF research studies. Clearly, if one looks at these studies from the perspective of rat epidemiology, it follows easily that EMF, in all the frequencies, is detrimental to life. See this link for the full report: http://www.bioinitiative.org The report “Biological effects from exposure to electromagnetic radiation emitted by cell tower base stations and other antenna arrays”, B. Blake Levitt and Henry Lai, is a mega review of current research that lists references and power density along with biological effects that provides compelling evidence that RF radiation, at levels measured at the school, has health

6/11

effects. http://www.magdahavas.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/Blake_Levit- Henry_Lai.pdf 3. The establishment of public policy that protects us from environmental hazards often lags the science and the medicine that shows that there are health effects. Case in point, it was roughly 100 years after the health effects were clearly observed for asbestos, lead and tobacco smoke that our government initiated regulations to protect the general public. There are ample anecdotal data, animal research and epidemiology studies that show that there are significant biological effects at RF power densities well below the FCC MPE based on thermal heating. It is common knowledge that the Telecomm industry is manipulating research, public opinion and public policy in order to protect their business interests.

7/11

Appendix C Possible Health Effects, Electromagnetic Hypersensitivity and Electrical Sensitivity Technology is changing at a staggering pace. We are now exposed to forces and energies that did not exist decades ago. Many new diseases and sicknesses have developed since our parent’s generation including Electromagnetic Hypersensitivity “EHS” and radio-frequency waves “RF”. EMF is a man made pollutant that consists of AC Electric Fields and AC Magnetic Fields. It is produced from electrical wiring, electric appliances and electronic devices. RF waves are produced by all wireless communication products. Symptoms of EHS Neurological: headaches, dizziness, nausea, difficulty concentrating, memory loss, irritability, depression, anxiety, insomnia, fatigue, weakness, tremors, muscle spasms, numbness, tingling, altered reflexes, muscle and joint pain, leg/foot pain, “Flu-like” symptoms, fever. More severe reactions can include seizures, paralysis, psychosis and stroke. Cardiac: palpitations, arrhythmias, pain or pressure in the chest, low or high blood pressure, slow or fast heart rate, shortness of breath. Respiratory: sinusitis, bronchitis, pneumonia, asthma. Dermatology: skin rash, itching, burning, facial flushing. Opthalmologic: pain or burning in the eyes, pressure in/behind the eyes, deteriorating vision, floaters, cataracts. Others: digestive problems, abdominal pain, enlarged thyroid, testicular/ovarian pain, dryness of lips, tongue, mouth, eyes, great thirst, dehydration, nosebleeds, internal bleeding, altered sugar metabolism, immune abnormalities, redistribution of metals within the body, hair loss, pain in the teeth, deteriorating fillings, impaired sense of smell, tinnitus and ringing in the ears, sensitivity to sounds and light, and infertility.

8/11

Frequency of Electromagnetic Hypersensitivity Symptoms Based on Distance to Cell Phone Base Station (Santini et al, 2002). Long Term Health Effects Adult cancer, tumours, childhood leukemia, breast cancer, DNA strand breakage, abnormal cell division, nerve damage, MS, ALS, Alzheimer and Parkinson disease, brain damage, melatonin reduction, miscarriages, and inflammatory conditions. Prognosis The severity of the symptom usually indicates the degree or stage of EHS. The stages vary from slight discomfort to debilitating long term effects. Once diagnosed, the complete elimination of electromagnetic radiation is necessary for relief. Recovery is possible but requires fortification of the immune system. This has proven to be a multi-step process unique to each individual and assistance from medical professional (Naturopathic or Environmental Doctor) is suggested.

9/11

Appendix D References http://www.magdahavas.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/Blake_Levit- Henry_Lai.pdf “Biological effects from exposure to electromagnetic radiation emitted by cell tower base stations and other antenna arrays”, B. Blake Levitt and Henry Lai, a mega review of current research that lists the research references and includes a table of RF frequency, power density and biological effects. This reference is found on many websites. http://ci.encinitas.ca.us/modules/showdocument.aspx?documentid=352 Wireless communication facility requirements for the city of Encinitas, CA. The code requires that all antennas be aesthetic in their appearance, though most antennas in this city are aesthetic, which means they are not obvious visually. Typical examples are like the antenna structure at the church and many churches here in Encinitas, the facade at La Paloma Theater, fat flag poles and fat light poles, and rooftops mountings behind facade.

http://microondes.files.wordpress.com/2010/03/robert_c_kane_cellular_telephone_russian_roulette.pdf Download the complete e-book Cellular Telephone Russian Roulette by Robert C. Kane. This book, written by a telecommunications scientist, documents the early research on microwave communication and illustrates that this form of radiation has been known to have biological effects from the very beginning.

http://www.iarc.fr/en/media-centre/pr/2011/pdfs/pr208_E.pdf The World Health Organization classifies radiofrequency electromagnetic fields as a class 2B possible carcinogen.

http://electromagnetichealth.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/04/BRAG_Schools.pdf The “BRAG Antenna Ranking of Schools Report” by Dr. Magda Havas.

http://antennasearch.com This site is a database of mobile antennas. Enter any address and follow the instructions for a map and list of towers and antennas within 4 miles of that location. Please note that the antenna site at the church is not listed in this database.

http://wildmonkeysects.com/data/20050207_israel.pdf Wolf et al (2004) found that within 350 meters of cell phone antennas there was a 300% increased incidence of cancer among men and women and a 900% cancer increase among women alone.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16621850 Hutter et al (2006) found symptoms such as headaches, cold hands or feet, difficulty concentrating, tremors, loss of appetite and feelings of exhaustion experienced from exposure to cell phone base station emissions

http://www.gezondheidsraad.nl/sites/default/files/GSMenUMTSengels.pdf TNO Study (2003) found significant effects on well being, such as headaches, muscle fatigue/pain, and dizziness from exposure to cell phone base station emissions.

http://www.tetrawatch.net/papers/naila.pdf H. Eger at al. (2004) found that the proportion of newly developing cancer cases is significantly higher among patients who live within 400 meters of a cell phone transmitter. The relative risk of getting cancer in the study increased by 200% after 5 years operation of the transmitter.

10/11

Websites with extensive information on this subject: The epidemiologist Dr. Magda Havas, http://www.magdahavas.com , has a wealth of current news, links to research and reports and health effects, BRAG antenna report for schools. http://electromagnetichealth.org Interviews with doctors and scientists, news, links to research, EMF safety tips. http://www.bioinitiative.org The Bioinitiative Report is a mega analysis of hundreds and hundreds of EMF studies worldwide. http://www.powerwatch.org.uk Compelling EMF news and research in the UK. http://www.icems.eu A non-profit, international institution with information on news and resolutions of different organizations for RF safety. http://hbelc.org/about/objectives.html Current news and research citations.

11/11

El Camino Christian Fellowship (Encinitas Charter School) 510 El Camino Real Electromagnetic Radiation Measurements Location Patio Blacktop

west Southwest corner

Northwest corner

Sandbox

AC Electric (Potential Free) V/M

0.9 0.1 – 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.1

Body Voltage mV

Magnetic nt

5 2 3 5 7

RF µW/m2

5,000 – 10,000

13,000 7,000 220 400 - 800

Building Biology Guidelines for Sleeping Areas Field Type

Units

No Concern

Slight Concern

Severe Concern

Extreme Concern

AC Electric (Potential Free) V/M <1 1-5 5-50 >50 Body Voltage mV <10 10-100 100-1000 >1000 AC Magnetic mG <0.2 0.2-1 1 – 5 >5 RF (wireless radio freq) µW/m2 <0.1 0.1-10 10-1000 >1000

Magnetic Field Conversion 100nT = 1mG Radiofrequency Conversion 10,000 μW/m2 = 1 μW/cm2

1/4

El Camino Christian Fellowship (Encinitas Charter School) 510 El Camino Real Electromagnetic Radiation Measurements Location Southside

of the belfry

Southwest corner

Middle of parking lot

AC Electric (Potential Free) V/M

0.2 30 0.1

Body Voltage mV

Magnetic nT

7 170 5

RF µW/m2

200 – 1,200

500 – 1,000 5,000 – 20,000

Building Biology Guidelines for Sleeping Areas Field Type

Units

No Concern

Slight Concern

Severe Concern

Extreme Concern

AC Electric (Potential Free) V/M <1 1-5 5-50 >50 Body Voltage mV <10 10-100 100-1000 >1000 AC Magnetic mG <0.2 0.2-1 1 – 5 >5 RF (wireless radio freq) µW/m2 <0.1 0.1-10 10-1000 >1000

Magnetic Field Conversion 100nT = 1mG Radiofrequency Conversion 10,000 μW/m2 = 1 μW/cm2

2/4

El Camino Christian Fellowship (Encinitas Charter School) 510 El Camino Real Electromagnetic Radiation Measurements Location Northeast

corner Kindergarden 2nd grade

classroom 1st grade classroom

Create room (second floor)

AC Electric (Potential Free) V/M

3.2 2-4 1 0.3 0.4

Body Voltage mV

Magnetic nT

12 32 27 26 32

RF µW/m2

>20,000 50 - 100 Pulsing to 300

500 - 1,000 100 - 500 5,000 - 7,000

Building Biology Guidelines for Sleeping Areas Field Type

Units

No Concern

Slight Concern

Severe Concern

Extreme Concern

AC Electric (Potential Free) V/M <1 1-5 5-50 >50 Body Voltage mV <10 10-100 100-1000 >1000 AC Magnetic mG <0.2 0.2-1 1 – 5 >5 RF (wireless radio freq) µW/m2 <0.1 0.1-10 10-1000 >1000

Magnetic Field Conversion 100nT = 1mG Radiofrequency Conversion 10,000 μW/m2 = 1 μW/cm2

3/4

El Camino Christian Fellowship (Encinitas Charter School) 510 El Camino Real Electromagnetic Radiation Measurements Location Second Floor

3rd grade classroom

5th and 6th grade classrooms

Special Ed room

4th grade classroom

2nd grade classroom

AC Electric (Potential Free) V/M

3.4 1.3 1.2 - 1.5 1.1 2.9

Body Voltage mV

Magnetic nT

46 - 50 26 60 45 12

RF µW/m2

1,000 – 3,000

3,000 – 15,000

10,000 – 20,000

15,000 – 20, 000

2,000 – 5,000

Building Biology Guidelines for Sleeping Areas Field Type

Units

No Concern

Slight Concern

Severe Concern

Extreme Concern

AC Electric (Potential Free) V/M <1 1-5 5-50 >50 Body Voltage mV <10 10-100 100-1000 >1000 AC Magnetic mG <0.2 0.2-1 1 – 5 >5 RF (wireless radio freq) µW/m2 <0.1 0.1-10 10-1000 >1000

Magnetic Field Conversion 100nT = 1mG Radiofrequency Conversion 10,000 μW/m2 = 1 μW/cm2

4/4

The BRAG™ Antenna Ranking of Schools Report The BRAG™ Antenna Ranking of Schools report is the result of a multi-year study of school children’s potential exposure to cell phone antennas and base stations in U.S. state capitols prepared by Professor Magda Havas, PhD, and students of Trent University, Canada. Exposure metrics for approximately 6,000 public and private schools were assessed. A composite grade was generated for each school based on how close the nearest antenna was to the school, how many antennas were located within 0.25 miles (the distance within which scientific research documents mental, emotional and physical symptoms in adults), and within 0.6 miles from the school. Each school evaluated is categorized with a Color Code: Black (for the most antennas near the school and the highest potential microwave exposure, i.e. BAD), Red, Amber and Green (‘BRAG’). A composite grade reflecting antenna density near schools in each is calculated using a weighted average of schools in the area ranked Black, Red, Amber and Green, giving a grade range of 0-100%. Professor Havas, PhD, says, “Symptoms people experience near cell phone antennas, within a 0.25 mile radius include: fatigue, headaches, difficulty concentrating, memory loss, irritability, dizziness, depression, visual disruptions, hearing disruptions and much more. Since we know children are more vulnerable to microwave radiation than adults, putting cellular antennas near schools, or on school premises, is a mistake. If we want children to do their best academically, emotionally, physically and socially, schools should be microwave-free—free from ambient radiation from neighborhood antennas, as well as free from wireless internet.” A BRAG Report was created comparing 6 Encinitas, CA grade schools and is attached.

Michael Schwaebe Professional Background 1) Education Graduated from Oregon State University in 1969 with a Bachelor of Science degree in Mechanical Engineering (BSME). I was privileged to have a Navy scholarship for my schooling and upon graduation I was commissioned directly into the US Navy as an Ensign. 2) US Navy ('69-'74) The first year in the Navy was nuclear engineering and nuclear propulsion prototype training. Then submarine school, with specialty classes for the submarine assignment. I qualified in nuclear power and in submarines (gold dolphins) aboard the Casimir Pulaski (SSBN633). This assignment included a major overhaul, two shake down cruises and two FBM patrols in the north Atlantic and Arctic oceans. The next assignment was to the Tunny (SSN682), which was in new construction. This assignment included initial sea trials and extensive shake down cruises in the Caribbean and Atlantic oceans. The context of the work is the supervision of the ship’s crew and the operation and maintenance of the ship’s systems, including the nuclear propulsion plant. 3) Solar Gas Turbine Corp. ('75-'77) Program administrator for a nationwide emergency gas turbine preventive maintenance project. 4) Planning Research Corp (PRC) ('78-'80) Director of pre-overhaul test, inspection and planning US Navy non-combatant surface ships. 5) Southern California Edison, San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station (SONGS) ('81-'09) Systems engineer for many secondary systems and systems important to the safe shutdown of the nuclear reactor. Thermal performance engineer, with the literal objective to find lost megawatts and get them back in the grid. The context for the work here was engineering support for the operations and maintenance staff at the station that included initial plant startup, system design / redesign, maintenance practices, operations procedures, root cause evaluations, engineering paramedic, all with the intended purpose of operating within the design basis of the plant. I completed my certification as a Professional Engineer at SONGS in the mid 80’s. Applicable Experience Base Building Biology Environmental Consultant: In 1993 I had a God knock at the power plant, a head injury where forward motion, as I had known it, stopped. A physical and mental condition arouse of sensitivity to chemical, electrical, sound and subtle energies. In circa 2000, I undertook the study of Biogeometry, a tool set that empowered me to remediate the powers of nature around me so that I could be more comfortable. About 2006 remediation of the energy qualities associated with electrical was no longer enough for me to be comfortable in my skin. And it was at this time that I embarked in the Building Biology training. I did the three basic courses that year, purchased instruments, was mentored by Larry Gust, now chairman of the board of directors for the Building Biology Institute and Martine Davis, an indoor air quality specialist. I started the work in my home, in my work place and in the homes of friends. In 2011, I reviewed the basic classes and completed a special project (I had actually completed the project in 2008, however the certification requirements had been changed so it didn't get submitted until 2011). All along, from the start of my training, I have sought out my personal sensitivities and their causes and to measure / quantify these. As a Building Biology Environmental Consultant, I bring to the task my personal instrument, honed through years of self awareness, insight and augmented by a host of instruments. I, for the most part, feel what my clients feel. I can assess the living or work space and know when I enter what is amiss, where it acts in the body for me and for the client, determine it's source and the remediation. I was awarded a certificate as a Building Biology Environmental Consultant in mid 2011.

Pathophysiology 16 (2009) 67–69

Preface

There is an old joke with a well-known punch line abouta man who has just fallen from the 86th floor of the EmpireState Building in New York. As he passes the 30th floor, heis heard saying to himself ‘so far, so good’. . .

Most of us laugh because we know where the man isheaded, and that he must know too. But, our laughter usu-ally has a guilty edge. We know that many of us are guiltyof occasionally displaying a ‘so far, so good’ attitude in ourown lives. We think of the smoker who says that about thepossibility of getting lung cancer or heart disease and whocounts on beating the odds because he feels healthy at themoment. That smoker will not find out if he won the bet untilmany years later, and by then it is often too late. The ‘so far,so good’ attitude to health is so common that people evenkid themselves about it. One smoker told me that smokingwould only cut a few years off his life, and that he did notmind losing the last few years because they are usually notmuch fun anyway.

Unlike the optimist in the joke, whose end is virtuallycertain, many of us live like the smoker, playing the oddsand reassuring ourselves ‘so far, so good’. Diseases likecancer usually take many years to develop, and we try not tothink how some of the things we do casually can affect thelong-term odds by compromising the natural processes thatprotect us. We rely on our bodies to be strong and resilientall the time. Yet, we know there are limits to the body’snatural ability to reverse damage to cells. We also know thatthere may be gaps in the ability of our genetic endowmentto cope with damage. At some level, we all know it is justcommon sense to try to minimize damage to our bodies andmaximize the ability to repair.

These opening paragraphs provide a quick introductionto the theme of this issue of Pathophysiology and a summaryof the point of view of its authors. The public is currentlyinterested in possible hazards from radio frequency (RF) dueto cellphones, towers, WiFi, etc. The concern is certainlywarranted, but we are surrounded by electromagnetic fields(EMFs) of many frequencies, and there are also significantbiological effects and known risks from low frequency

Abbreviations: EMF, electromagnetic fields; Hz, hertz (cycles/s theunit of frequency); ELF, extremely low frequency (3–3 × 103 Hz) powerfrequency is 50–60 Hz; RF, radio frequency (band width 3 × 103 to3 × 1011 Hz); UHF, ultrahigh frequency band the RF sub-division used forcell phones (3 × 108 to 3 × 109 Hz).

EMF. The scientific problem is to determine the natureof EMF interaction with biological systems and developways of coping with harmful effects in all frequencyranges, as well as their cumulative effects. The practicalproblem is to minimize the harmful biological effects of allEMF.

The technical papers in this issue are devoted to an exam-ination and an evaluation of evidence gathered by scientistsregarding the effects of EMF, especially RF radiation, onliving cells and on the health of human populations. Thelaboratory studies point to significant interactions of bothpower frequency and RF with cellular components, espe-cially DNA. The epidemiological studies point to increasedrisk of developing certain cancers associated with long-termexposure to RF. Overall, the scientific evidence shows thatthe risk to health is significant, and that to deny it is likebeing in free-fall and thinking ‘so far, so good’. We must rec-ognize that there is a potential health problem, and that wemust begin to deal with it responsibly as individuals and as asociety.

Table of contentsPathoPhysiology papers Dates

ReceivedEMF Effects on DNA

Blank, Goodman 9/30Phillips, Singh, Lai 10/14

Rudiger 12/22

EMF Effects on the BrainNittby, Brun, Eberhardt, Malmgren, Persson, Salford 12/17Hardell, Carlberg, Mild 10/16Kundi, Hutter 9/1Morgan 11/21

EMF in the EnvironmentDavanipour, Sobel 11/1Johansson 8/23Pourlis 8/24Balmori 7/21Hutunnen, Hänninen, Myllylä 1/4Blackman 11/13

Science as a Guide to Public PolicyGee 12/17Sage, Carpenter 11/13

EMF effects on DNAM. Blank and R. Goodman (USA): Electromagnetic Fields

Stress Living Cells

0928-4680/$ – see front matter © 2009 Published by Elsevier Ireland Ltd.doi:10.1016/j.pathophys.2009.02.002

68 Preface / Pathophysiology 16 (2009) 67–69

J.L. Phillips, N.P. Singh and H. Lai (USA): Electromag-netic Fields and DNA damage

H.W. Rudiger (Austria): Genotoxic effects of electromag-netic exposure in vitro

EMF effects on the brainH. Nittby, A. Brun, J. Eberhardt, L. Malmgren, B.R.R.

Persson and L.G. Salford (Sweden): Increased blood–brainbarrier permeability in mammalian brain seven days afterexposure to the radiation from a GSM-900 mobile phone

L. Hardell, M. Carlberg and K Hansson Mild (Sweden):Epidemiological evidence for an association between use ofwireless phones and tumor diseases

M. Kundi and H-P. Hutter (Austria): Mobile phone basestations – effects on wellbeing and health

L.L. Morgan: Estimating the risk of brain tumors fromcellphone use: published case–control studies

EMF in the environmentZ. Davanipour and E. Sobel: Long-term exposure to elec-

tromagnetic fields and the Risks of Alzheimer’s disease andbreast cancer: Further biological research

O. Johansson: Disturbance of the immune system by elec-tromagnetic fields: A potentially underlying cause for cellulardamage and tissue repair reduction which could lead to dis-ease and impairment disturbance

A.F. Pourlis: Reproductive and developmental effects ofEMF in vertebrate animal models

A. Balmori: Electromagnetic pollution from phone masts:Effects on wildlife

P. Huttunen, O. Hänninen and R.Myllylä: FM-radio andTV tower signals can cause spontaneous hand movementsnear moving RF reflector

C. Blackman: Cell Phone Radiation: Evidence from ELFand RF studies supporting more inclusive risk identificationand assessment

Science as a guide to public policyD. Gee: Late Lessons from early warnings: Towards real-

ism and precaution with EMF?C. Sage and D.O. Carpenter: Public Health Implications

of Wireless Technologies

Special Issue on EMFBioelectromagnetics, the study of biological effects of

electromagnetic fields (EMF), is an interdisciplinary sciencewith a technical literature that is not easily accessible tothe non-specialist. To increase access of the public to thetechnical literature and to the health implications of the sci-entific findings, the Bioinitiative Report was organized byan international group of scientists and published online atwww.bioinitiative.org on August 31, 2007. The report hasbeen widely read, and was cited in September 2008 by theEuropean Parliament when it voted overwhelmingly that thecurrent EMF safety standards were obsolete and needed tobe reviewed.

This special issue of Pathophysiology includes scientificpapers on the EMF issue by contributors to the BioiniativeReport, as well as others, and is prepared for scientists who arenot specialists in bioelectromagnetics. Each paper is indepen-dent and self-contained. To help the reader appreciate howthe different subjects contribute to an understanding of theEMF issue, the papers are arranged in groups that emphasizekey areas, and the role of science in analyzing the prob-lem and evaluating possible solutions. The subject headingsare:

• DNA to show biological effects at the sub-cellular level thatoccur at very low EMF thresholds and across frequencyranges of the EM spectrum. Interactions with DNA mayaccount for many of the effects of EMF, and they raise thepossibility that genetic damage due to EMF can lead tocancer.

• The Brain is exposed to radiation from mobile phone anten-nas, and laboratory studies show that the radiation causesleakage of the protective blood–brain barrier, as well as thedeath of neurons in the brain. Radiation emitted from basestations can affect all who are in the vicinity. Epidemio-logical studies have shown a relation between exposureto mobile phones, base-stations and the development ofbrain tumors. Some epidemiological studies have signifi-cant flaws in design, and the risk of brain cancer may begreater than reported in the published results.

• In addition to the risk of brain cancer, EMF in the environ-ment may contribute to diseases like Alzheimer’s dementiaand breast cancer in humans, as well as reproductiveand developmental effects in animals in the wild. EMFaffect the biochemical pathways and immunological mech-anisms that link the different organ systems in our bodiesand those of animals. The human body can act as anantenna for RF signals, and a small percentage of the pop-ulation appears to be so sensitive to EMF that it interfereswith their daily lives. In addition to the growing presenceof EMF signals in the environment, the complexity of thesignals may be important in altering biological responses.These are among the many factors that must be consideredin approaching EMF safety issues.

• Science as a guide to public policy

Four centuries ago, when Francis Bacon envisioned acourse for modern science, he expressed the idea that knowl-edge is power that should be applied for the benefit ofmankind. It is in keeping with that ethical standard that thefinal papers in this issue show how knowledge gained fromscientific research can help solve problems arising from EMFin our environment. The first of these papers discusses thePrecautionary Principle, its growing acceptance as a rationalapproach to environmental issues, and how past experiencecan help us deal with the EMF issue. The second paper, bythe editors of the original BioInitiative Report, is an updateon how best to deal with the challenge of EMF in the environ-ment and, specifically, the problems accompanying wirelesstechnologies. The last paper describes the most recent in a

Preface / Pathophysiology 16 (2009) 67–69 69

series of petitions by scientists demanding that society useour knowledge to deal effectively with the EMF issue.

We trust that the reviews and original research papers willincrease awareness of the growing impact of EMF in theenvironment, and the need for modern society to deal expe-ditiously with the potential health problems brought to lightby EMF research.

Guest EditorMartin Blank

Physiology and Cellular Biophysics,Columbia University, New York, USA

E-mail address: mb32@columbia.edu

22 January 2009

GOVERNMENTS AND ORGANIZATIONS THAT

BAN OR WARN AGAINST WIRELESS

TECHNOLOGY

1993: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA): The FCC’s exposure standards

are “seriously flawed.”

Official comments to the FCC on guidelines for evaluation of electromagnetic effects

of radio frequency radiation, FCC Docket ET 93-62, November 9, 1993.

1993: Food and Drug Administration (FDA): “FCC rules do not address the issue

of long-term, chronic exposure to RF fields.” Comments of the FDA to the FCC,

November 10, 1993.

1993: National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH):The

FCC’s standard is inadequate because it “is based on only one dominant

mechanism—adverse health effects caused by body heating.”

Comments of NIOSH to the FCC, January 11, 1994.

1994: Amateur Radio Relay League Bio-Effects Committee: “The FCC’s

standard does not protect against non-thermal effects.” Comments of the ARRL Bio-

Effects Committee to the FCC, January 7, 1994.

2000: UK Department of Education: Children under 16 should not use cell phones

except in an emergency. http://www.cellular.co.za/news_2000/news-

08052000_uk_schools_warned_over_radiation.htm

2002: Interdisciplinary Society for Environmental Medicine (3000 physicians

in Germany) recommends banning cell phone use by children and banning cell

phones and cordless phones in preschools, schools, hospitals, nursing homes, events

halls, public buildings and

vehicles.http://www.powerwatch.org.uk/pdfs/20021019_englisch.pdf

2003: American Bird Conservancy and Forest Conservation Council:Brought a

lawsuit against the FCC because millions of migratory birds were being disoriented

by microwave radiation and crashing into cell

towers.http://www.ewire.com/display.cfm/Wire_ID/1498

2004: International Association of Fire Fighters opposes communication

antennas on fire stations. http://www.iaff.org/HS/Facts/CellTowerFinal.asp

2005: Salzburg, Austria’s Public Health Department bans WLAN and DECT

phones in public schools. http://www.safeinschool.org/2011/01/wi-fi-is-removed-

from-schools-and.html

August 2005: Austrian Medical Association: Warns against Wi-Fi, cordless

phones, and cell phone use by

children.http://www.thepeoplesinitiative.org/Wifi_and_Schools.html

August 2005: Vienna Medical Association warns against Wi-Fi, and cell phone

use by children up to age

16. http://www.mastsanity.org/index.php?option=com_docman&task=doc_download

&gid=2&Itemid=64

2006: Frankfurt, Germany’s government states it will not install WiFi in its

schools until it has been shown to be

harmless.http://www.icems.eu/docs/deutscher_bundestag.pdf

2006: UK schools remove their wireless networks: Prebandal Preparatory School,

Chichester, West Sussex; Ysgol Pantycelyn School in Carmarthenshirem, Wales; and

Stowe School, in Buckinghamshire, England. London Times, November 20,

2006.http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/education/article642575.ece

2007: Ballinderry Primary School, Ireland: Removed Wi-Fi to protect young

children. http://www.safeinschool.org/2011/01/wi-fi-is-removed-from-schools-

and.html

2007 Bavaria, Germany’s Parliament recommends against Wi-Fi in

schools.http://www.icems.eu/docs/deutscher_bundestag.pdf

2007 Australian Democrats: The “explosion in wireless communications

technology” is causing widespread

illness.http://www.democrats.org.au/docs/2007/Joining_the_Dots_ExecSummary.pd

f

2007: European Environmental Agency, Europe’s top environmental watchdog,

calls for immediate action to reduce exposure to radiation from Wi-Fi, mobile phones

and their

masts.http://www.nzherald.co.nz/world/news/article.cfm?c_id=2&objectid=1046387

0

2008: International Commission on Electromagnetic Safety (comprised of

scientists from 16 nations): Recommends limiting cell phone use by children,

teenagers, pregnant women and the elderly.http://www.icems.eu/resolution.htm

return to top of page

2007: Therold, Ontario closes down its citywide Wi-Fi pilot

scheme.http://www.glastonburynaturalhealth.co.uk/WhyWi-Fi.html

2008: Lakehead University, Ontario bans Wi-Fi on

campus.http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/story/2010/08/15/ontario-wifi.html

2008: Madhya Pradesh, India: Bans cell phones in schools by both students and

teachers. http://www.indiaedunews.net/Madhya_Pradesh/Teachers,

students_unhappy_with_mobile_phone_ban_in_schools_5241/

2008: National Library of France: Removes Wi-Fi because of health concerns and

limits installation to cable connections. http://www.next-

up.org/pdf/FranceNationalLibraryGivesUpWiFi07042008.pdf

2008: Paris, France removes Wi-Fi from four public libraries because of health

concerns. http://www.accessmylibrary.com/coms2/summary_0286-35451555_ITM

2008 Sainte-Geneviève University, Paris: Removes Wi-Fi from its library because

of health concerns. http://www.next-

up.org/pdf/AnalysisWiFiHotSpotsDeactivationSainteGenevieveLibraryParis24052008.

pdf

2008: Progressive Librarians Guild recommends against wireless technology in

libraries. http://libr.org/plg/wifiresolution.php

2008: Russian National Committee for Non-Ionizing Radiation

Protectionwarns that cell phones are unsafe even for short conversations. Children

under 16, pregnant women, epileptics, and people with memory loss, sleep disorders

and neurological diseases should never use cell

phones.http://www.radiationresearch.org/pdfs/rncnirp_children.pdf

2008 Sebastopol, California: Reneges on its contract to install citywide Wi-

Fi. http://www.boingboing.net/2008/03/24/town-of-sebastopol-c.html

2008: University of Pittsburgh Cancer Institute: Children should never use a

cell phone except in an emergency. http://www.post-

gazette.com/pg/08205/898803-114.stm

2008: Voice (UK Teachers Union) calls for a ban on Wi-Fi in

schools.http://www.voicetheunion.org.uk/index.cfm/page/_sections.content.cfm/cid/

1326/navid/434/parentid/330

2009: Hérouville Saint-Clair, France: Bans Wi-Fi in public

schools.http://www.wifiinschools.org.uk/4.html

2009: Irish Doctors Environmental Association: Warns that current safety

guidelines are “not appropriate.” http://www.ideaireland.org/

2009: Karnataka State, India: Bans cell phones in all schools and pre-university

colleges.http://www.hindu.com/2009/09/14/stories/2009091454460500.htm

May 2009: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service urges Congress to focus on the

potential connection between electromagnetic fields and “Bee Colony

Collapse”. http://electromagnetichealth.org/electromagnetic-health-blog/emf-and-

warnke-report-on-bees-birds-and-mankind/

December, 2010: French Parliament passes a law prohibiting advertising cell

phones to children under 14; prohibits children up to age 14 from using cell phones

in pre-schools and public schools; requires cell phones to be labeled with SAR values

and a recommendation to use headsets.http://www.enviroblog.org/2010/12/french-

cell-phone-radiation-disclosure-at-point-of-sale.html

May 27, 2011: Council of Europe passes a resolution recommending wired

Internet connections in schools, and the creation of radiation-free zones to protect

electrosensitive

people.http://assembly.coe.int/Documents/AdoptedText/ta11/eRES1815.htm.

August 30, 2011: The Israeli Ministry of Education publishes guidelines strictly

limiting the use of mobile phones on all school grounds, citing children’s and youths’

increased risk of malignant tumors and the “passive exposure” experienced by

children who do not use phones.

http://norad4u.blogspot.com/2011/09/israeli-ministry-of-education-is-going.html

September 8, 2011: Pretty River Academy in Collingwood, Ontarioremoves

WiFi from campus as a precaution, joining Roots and Wings Montessori school in

Surrey, British

Columbia.http://www.safeschool.ca/uploads/CTV_School_cuts_WiFi.pdf;http://www.

safeschool.ca/School_Bans_WiFi.html

DOCTORS AND SCIENTISTS CALLING FOR STRICTER

REGULATION AND/OR A MORATORIUM ON WIRELESS

TECHNOLOGY

http://international-emf-alliance.org/index.php/appeals, http://www.ralf-

woelfle.de/elektrosmog/redir.htm?http://www.ralf-

woelfle.de/elektrosmog/allgemein/appelle.htm,http://www.avaate.org/IMG/doc/Alcal

aci.doc

Vienna Resolution 1998

Salzburg Resolution 2000

Declaration of Alcalá 2002

Catania Resolution 2002

Freiburger Appeal 2002

Bamberger Appeal 2004

Maintaler Appeal 2004

Coburger Appeal 2005

Oberammergauer Appeal 2005

Haibacher Appeal 2005

Pfarrkirchener Appeal 2005

Freienbacher Appeal 2005

Lichtenfelser Appeal 2005

Hofer Appeal 2005

Helsinki Appeal 2005

Parish Kirchner Appeal 2005

Saarlander Appeal 2005

Stockacher Appeal 2005

Benevento Resolution 2006

Allgäuer Appeal 2006

WiMax Appeal 2006

Schlüchterner appeal

Brussels Appeal 2007

Venice Resolution 2008

Berlin Appeal 2008

Paris Appeal 2009

London Resolution 2009

Porto Alegre Resolution 2009

European Parliament

EMF Resolution 2009

Dutch Appeal 2009

Int’l Appeal of Würzburg 2010

Copenhagen Resolution 2010

Seletun Consensus Statement 2010