Feature from EMRABC member site Stopsmartmetersbc.com
People are still getting responses to their emails regarding the CBC program about cellphones. One, and a response back, is below in Letters.
Tim Singer is trying to personalize letters to some extent, but he continues to miss the point. A question I asked in response to the same letter that I got a month (or longer) ago remains to be answered. If something is truly safe, how many good, solid studies will show that it isn’t safe? I suggest the number is zero. Yet Health Canada (HC) uses its “risk assessment” or “weight of evidence” to cherry pick the studies it wishes to consider and to disregard the rest. They got away with this for a long time but now we’re on to them. HC is not going to be able to continue to get away with this.
Why is Health Minister Philpott <[email protected]>, who is a doctor, not becoming educated on this very important health topic? Let’s keep pressure on her. She cannot be allowed to believe that she is following the Hippocratic code or doing her job which is to protect us.
The response from X to Mr. Singer’s email was inserted into his email – highlighted below.
From: X
Sent: July 7, 2017 12:51 PM
To: Singer, Tim (HC/SC) <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Episode of CBC’s Marketplace on cellular phones
On Jul 7, 2017, at 12:42 PM, Singer, Tim (HC/SC) <[email protected]> wrote:
Dear X
Thank you for once again for your further correspondence of March 26 and April 3, 2017, addressed to the Honourable Jane Philpott, Minister of Health, concerning the broadcast of an episode of CBC’s Marketplace on cellular phones and the Government of Canada’s response to the House of Commons Standing Committee on Health (HESA) report entitled “Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Radiation and the Health of Canadians”. I have been asked to respond on behalf of the Minister. I apologize for the delay in responding.
I wish to clarify the statement you quoted from the Marketplace broadcast, attributed to the Department. Health Canada’s complete statement provided to the CBC is as follows:
“Safety Code 6 limits for human exposure to radiofrequency (RF) energy are designed to provide protection for all age groups, including children, on a continuous basis (24 hours a day/seven days a week). This means that if someone, including a small child, were to be exposed to RF energy from multiple sources for 24 hours a day, 365 days a year, within the Safety Code 6 limits, there would be no adverse health effects.”
Health Canada’s intention was not to make a statement respecting exposure to a specific device. The original purpose of this statement was to clarify that Safety Code 6
I appreciate your sincere effort to respond but your information is outdated and false. Safety Code 6 is very outdated and exposes children and, indeed, all Canadians, to health hazards. I wish your department would put some effort into analyzing and reading the independent research rather than the corporate lobbyist profit motivated propaganda. Otherwise you are representing corporations at tax payer expense. The fact that you do not know Safety Code 6 is egregiously outdated, even compared to countries such as India, is terrifying and does not speak well for either your dept. or Min. Philpott.
When will you make an effort to update Safety Code 6? I know you have gone through some pro forma exercise recently but the input was biased and perverted by industry lobby groups.
provides protection for all age groups.
If individuals are concerned, the following practical measures can be taken to reduce your RF energy exposure when using a cell phone:
- limiting the length of cell phone calls;
- using “hands-free” devices; and
- replacing cell phone calls with text messages.
Thank you again for taking the time to write about this important issue. I hope my comments are helpful.
Tim Singer
Director General, Environmental and Radiation Health Sciences Directorate
Health Canada / Government of Canada
[email protected] /
