{"id":1151,"date":"2010-09-08T11:08:41","date_gmt":"2010-09-08T18:08:41","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/emrabc.ca\/?p=1151"},"modified":"2011-03-29T14:14:32","modified_gmt":"2011-03-29T21:14:32","slug":"proof-of-health-canadas-deception","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/emrabc.ca\/?p=1151","title":{"rendered":"Proof of Health Canada’s Deception"},"content":{"rendered":"

Dear HESA members,<\/p>\n

Recent debate concerning WiFi in schools with concerned parents
\nresulted in Health Canada releasing a press release on Aug. 31, 2010 at
\nthe following link.
\nhttp:\/\/www.hc-sc.gc.ca\/ahc-asc\/media\/ftr-ati\/_2010\/2010_142-eng.php<\/a> The
\nmajor point of the release was to reiterate their consistent response
\nto concerns: “Based on scientific evidence, Health Canada has
\ndetermined that exposure to low-level radiofrequency energy, such as
\nthat from Wi-Fi equipment, is not dangerous to the public.”<\/p>\n

I am writing to give you evidence that this is not true; in fact, I
\nwould go so far as to call it a deception that has been perpetrated on
\nthe trusting Canadian public for more than a decade. To substantiate
\nthis strong statement, I will quote from the Royal Society of Canada
\nReport of March 1999, “A Review of the Potential Health Risks of
\nRadiofrequency Fields from Wireless Telecommunication Devices” prepared
\nin response to a request from Health
\nCanada.(http:\/\/www.rsc.ca\/files\/publications\/expert_panels\/RF\/RFreport-en<\/a>
\n.pdf) At that time Safety Code 6 was essentially the same as it is
\ntoday.<\/p>\n

1. Page 2 – “Safety Code 6 was explicitly designed to protect workers
\nand the public from thermal exposures.”<\/strong> This means that wireless
\ndevices such as WiFi, cellphones, cell and radio transmitters, and DECT
\nphones are not in the category protected by Safety Code 6 because they
\nfall in the lower, non-thermal end of the electric spectrum. Health
\nCanada has continued to state that Safety Code 6 applies to the entire
\nspectrum. Clearly this is not true.<\/p>\n

2. Page 2 – “There is a growing body of scientific evidence which
\nsuggests that exposure to RF fields at intensities far less than levels
\nrequired to produce measurable heating can cause effects in cells and
\ntissues.”<\/strong> The Panel determined that studies show that somehow, at even
\nvery low levels which are significantly below what Safety Code 6
\nallows, the radiation emitted by wireless devices causes physical or
\nbiochemical changes not related to heat.<\/p>\n

There are many “biological effects” that are addressed in this
\nreport , and two of them are blood-brain barrier leakage<\/strong> and cancer
\npromotion.<\/strong><\/p>\n

The blood-brain barrier is a critical structure in the brain that
\nseparates the flow of blood through the brain from the brain matter
\nitself. Leakage can lead to brain damage such as dementia. In the
\nReport, pages 44-45 are devoted to studies showing such leakage occurs
\nas a result of exposure to RF field at levels below Safety Code 6.<\/p>\n

ODC stands for Ornithine Decarboxylase which is an enzyme found in
\ncells. Increased activity in ODC has been found to promote aggressive
\nand invasive tumours, which are often cancerous. Studies which
\ndemonstrate the relationship between RF radiation below Safety Code
\n6 and the increased activity of ODC can be found on pages 36-42..<\/p>\n

I have provided only a couple of quotes and references from only the
\nfirst few pages of an 150 page document, but I could have provided many
\nmore which are equally alarming. Even with this report in hand, Health
\nCanada and even some members of the Royal Panel that wrote this report,
\nsuch as Dr. Daniel Krewski, continue to declare that there is no
\nevidence of harm below the level of Safety Code 6. As a result, the
\nexposure to wireless devices has increased dramatically. The Royal
\nPanel stated that as of 1998 close to 3.5 million people used cell
\nphones and estimated increases of 30-40% annually. Teenagers are
\nsleeping with cell phones under their pillows. Cell transmitters are
\nbeing erected on top of buildings and apartments, near homes and
\nschools. WiFi is being installed in elementary schools. Health Canada
\nis allowing proliferation of this radiation exposure at levels they
\nknow to be dangerous, especially to our most vulnerable: children.<\/p>\n

A new Health Canada guideline is required, one based on biological
\neffects. Of course, industry in Canada will complain. It will insist
\nthat it cannot possibly adapt to a more responsible approach. But that
\nsame industry already has in other parts of the world. Hopefully when
\nit does adapt, it will be more rigourous in its testing so that the
\nmistakes of the past will not be repeated.<\/p>\n

Respectfully,<\/p>\n

Sharon Noble<\/p>\n

Victoria, British Columbia<\/p>\n

Member of EMRHA<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Dear HESA members, Recent debate concerning WiFi in schools with concerned parents resulted in Health Canada releasing a press release on Aug. 31, 2010 at the following link. http:\/\/www.hc-sc.gc.ca\/ahc-asc\/media\/ftr-ati\/_2010\/2010_142-eng.php The major point of the release was to reiterate their consistent response to concerns: “Based on scientific evidence, Health Canada has determined that exposure to low-level […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[10,17,26,3,14,27,19,64,7,12],"tags":[608,38,37],"class_list":["post-1151","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-tumour","category-bc","category-canadian-parliament-committee-on-wireless","category-health_and_safety","category-health-canada","category-hesa","category-ontario","category-safety-code-6","category-wifi","category-wimax","tag-health-canada","tag-school-2","tag-wifi-2"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/emrabc.ca\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1151","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/emrabc.ca\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/emrabc.ca\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/emrabc.ca\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/emrabc.ca\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=1151"}],"version-history":[{"count":7,"href":"https:\/\/emrabc.ca\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1151\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":2345,"href":"https:\/\/emrabc.ca\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1151\/revisions\/2345"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/emrabc.ca\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=1151"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/emrabc.ca\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=1151"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/emrabc.ca\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=1151"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}