Wireless Radiation Update for Mayor, Councilor xx date your name

1. Wireless RadiationUpdate for Mayor, Councilor xx dateyour name

2. WeUnderstand • Certain conditions do not allow community involvement or notification • Industry Canada is the final arbiter in the process • Industry Canada will not respect any health-oriented policies or concerns However • Local cities, towns and municipalities are viewed as the last stance of protection • Forecasts are for hundreds of towers per year • Recent Nanos Survey: • 68% of Canadians said they were aware of possible health effects of electromagnetic frequencies from wireless technologies • 60% are concerned about possible health effects • Safety Code 6 has not been updated since the 1980’s • China, Russia, Italy and Switzerland have standards 100 times safer than Canada • World Health Organization classified wireless radiation as Class 2B, possibly carcinogenic. Lead and DDT are in this category • Other communities have successfully caused changes re cell towers that are inappropriately placed Status re Authority

3. C4ST: Canadians for Safe Technology Mission Canadians for Safe Technology is a not-for-profit, volunteer-based coalition of parents, citizens and experts whose mission is to educate and inform Canadians and their policy makers about the dangers of exposure to unsafe levels of radiation from technology and to work with all levels of government to create healthier communities for children and families from coast to coast. Goals • Health Canada: improve transparency around Safety Code 6; recognize it is outdated; the review process needs revision • Industry Canada: update CPC-2-0-03 Radiocommunication and Broadcasting Antenna Systems • All levels of Government: recognize electrosensitive citizens and create a plan to provide for their safety and well-being

4. Safety Code 6 summary • SC6 is used to set parameters for : • Provincial governments in the rollout of smart meters (hydro and water) • Provincial governments in the rollout of Wi-Fi in schools • Telecommunications companies in their placement of cell towers and antennae • Manufacturers of baby monitors, game consoles, cell phones, tablets • Safety Code 6 limitations • Created in the 1980’s for the safety of federal workers • Based on 6 minutes of exposure • Does not consider the multi-hour, multi-day exposure that is common today • Does not consider the cumulative effects from multiple devices • No distinction for children, elderly, pregnant women or sensitive individuals • Lags behind China, Russia, Italy and Switzerland with exposure limits 100 times safer than Canada (40% of the world’s population has guidelines less than SC6) • Does not take into account proven biological effects, only tissue heating. • Removed a prior reference to electrosensitive individuals

5. Key Events • April 1, 2014. As expected, the Royal Society report was published re-affirming that SC6 levels are adequate • Many statements acknowledging some harm “but not enough proof” • “Health Canada is urged to investigate the symptoms of IEI-EMF individuals” • HC has committed to public consultation before publishing its SC6 update • Submissions from 7 MD’s and 9 PhD’s from Universities of Toronto, Calgary, Trent, Ottawa Hospital, Columbia, Yale, Harvard, Pittsburgh, Albany NY, Manchester Memorial CT and Sweden were dismissed or ignored • Dr. Bell, RSC President “ Expert Panel reports do not necessarily represent the official position of the Royal Society of Canada, nor of the funding organization.” • Original Expert Panel chair resigned after not disclosing $126,000 contract • 4 of the remaining 8 members have financial ties to the industry • As of 1 March 2014, mobile phones that are specially designed for young children may no longer be introduced or marketed into the Belgian market. • August, 2013 Swedish team completed study that “confirmed previous results of an association between mobile and cordless phone use and malignant brain tumours.”

6. Municipal update in Canada • City of Laval QC • Passed a resolution announcing a series of requests aimed at strengthening safety measures related to smart meters that fall under Safety Code 6. • One stated that the council did not accept Hydro Quebec’s responses to citizens concerns about health issues • Key successes in Toronto, Dec. 18, 2013 • Toronto’s Prudent Avoidance Policy (100 times safer than SC6) was upheld and put in the contract terms accepted by Rogers Communications for antenna on Toronto city property • Motion for free Wi-Fi in city parks and public places was defeated • Council passed a resolution to “encourage Health Canada to actively review health evidence ….. and to revise Safety Code 6 to meet international best practices.” • Vote of non-confidence in Guelph, Dec. 16, 2013 • Passed a motion asking Industry Canada to place a moratorium on the approval of any new radiocommunication facilities until such time as the review of Safety Code 6 has been finalized. • Similar motions passed in Thorold and Oakville, ON • Continued local council resistance to cell tower applications • On December 16, 2013, West Vancouver council voted not to endorse Rogers’ application to install 3 cell towers along Upper Levels highway

7. Changes by proponents • August, 2013. Oakville, ON. DH Westview Properties puts cell tower on hold and states “we hope the Canadian Government will enforce lower RF Field guidelines and follow the example of some other countries.” • December, 2012. Caledon, ON. Bell meeting cancelled due to citizens input. New location being considered • November, 2012. St. Thomas, ON – tower moved from 100 meters to 500 meters away from residential dwellings • November, 2012. Barrie, ON – tower cancelled in a residential area • September 5, 2012. Mississauga, ON – Bell presents solution in a densely populated area that is “10,000 times less radiation than Safety Code 6” • 2009, New Denver, BC. – Telus agrees to limit radiation levels to the Bioinitiave Report recommendations (equal to Bell above) Community impact

8. Request of Council • Consider implementing a Prudent Avoidance Policy similar to Toronto • Sets limit at 100 times safer than SC6 on a volunteer basis for non municipal owned properties • Include Prudent Avoidance in all contract terms for antenna on municipal property • Include PA for co-location on hydro poles • Consider a similar motion to that recently passed in Toronto • “City Council encourage Health Canada to actively review health evidence, including the most recent scientific research and studies, related to human exposure to radiofrequencies and to revise Safety Code 6 to meet international best practices, in consultation with the public and appropriate experts.” • Similar motions passed in Guelph, Thorold and Oakville, ON • Become a member of CRINS, The Canadian Radiocommunications Information and Notification Service • Update the city policy on communication towers to include towers of all heights • Join C4ST in calling for recognition of Electrosensitive individuals and a plan to provide for their safety and well-being • Health Canada has committed to public consultation before updating SC6 • Ask Minister Ambrose to follow international best practices in its review of the evidence • Full transparency around all studies included and excluded • Full disclosure of all conflicts of panel members

9. How You Can Help Your family • Keep cell phones away from your head (use the speaker or earplugs) and out of your pocket, bras, etc. Don’t sleep with the cell phone near you. • Remove all cordless phones. If you must have them, keep them away from high traffic areas and put them on a timer or turn them off every night. • If practical, remove the Wi-Fi in your home. If not, make sure it is not where someone is exposed all day, such as a bedroom or study. Put it on a timer or turn it off every night. • Never place the baby monitor by your child’s bed. Use a wired monitor. • If possible, opt out of any smart meters. If not, make sure it is not near a bedroom or other high traffic area.

10. Appendix

11. Ionizing vs. Non-Ionizing Radiation • Dr. Martin Blank, PhD, Columbia University, Oct. 28, 2013 • “Health Canada and other regulatory agencies have been assured by physicists that only ionizing radiation can cause chemical changes. • What the physicists say is true – but completely irrelevant in Biology. • HC should be speaking to biologists who have published thousands of peer-reviewed studies, documenting adverse effects • Better yet, speak to the cells themselves • Our research at Columbia has published clear evidence that cells react to EMR as harmful – at far below thermal levels of RF! • Current Canadian safety standards do not adequately protect the health and welfare of the public, especially its most vulnerable, children”

12. CHILDREN ARE NOT “LITTLE ADULTS” Health Canada’s Safety Code 6 does not differentiate safe levels of radiation for children Radiation from cell phones and other sources penetrates deeper into the head of children1 Certain tissues of a child’s head, e.g., the bone marrow and the eye, absorb significantly more energy than those in an adult head2 Starting to use cell phone before the age of 20 results in a 5 fold increase in glioma and acoustic neuroma3 Many of today’s children start getting exposed from birth: baby monitors, cell phones, Wi-Fi, cordless phones and smart metres 1. Wiart, J., Hadjem, A., Wong, M.F., and Bloch, I. 2008. Analysis of RF exposures in the head tissues of children and adults. Phys. Med. Biol. 2. Christ, A., Gosselin, M.C., Christopoulou, M., Kuhn, S., and Kuster N. 2010. Age-dependent tissue-specific exposure of cell phone users. Phys. Med. Biol. 3. Dr. Lennart Hardell, MD, PhD and Professor at University Hospital in Orebro, Sweden Figure 2. Gandhi, O.P. et al., Exposure Limits: The Underestimation of Absorbed Cell Phone Radiation, Especially in Children, Electromagnetic Biology and Medicine, Early Online, 1-18 (2011).

13. Expert submissions to the RSC Expert Panel reviewing Safety Code 6 1. Dr. Martin Blank Ph.D. PhDs in physical chemistry, Columbia University and in colloid science, University of Cambridge; retired Associate Professor, Columbia University: Department of Physiology and Cellular Physics. 2. Dr. Riina Bray BASc, MSc, MD, FCFP, MHSc Medical Director, Environmental Health Clinic, Women’s College Hospital Assistant Professor, Department of Family and Community Medicine, University of Toronto. 3. Dr. David Carpenter M.D. Director, Institute for Health and the Environment; Professor, School of Public Health, University at Albany, State University of New York 4. Dr. Kerry Crofton Ph.D. Co-founder and Executive Director, Doctors for Safer Schools, an international non-profit Advisory Board 5. Dr. Devra Davis Ph.D., M.P.H. Environmental Trust Fund; former Professor, Department of Epidemiology and founding Director, Center for Environmental Oncology, University of Pittsburgh, Cancer Institute 6. Dr.Stephen Genuis M.D..F.R.C.S.C., D.A.B.O.G., D.A.B.E.M., F.A.A.E.M. Canadian Physician and Researcher: Board-certified in Environmental Medicine and both Obstetrics and Gynecology. 7. Dr. Lennart Hardell M.D., Ph.D. Professor of Oncology, University Hospital, Orebro, Sweden 8. Dr. Magda Havas Ph.D. Associate Professor, Environmental & Resource Studies, Trent University

14. Expert submissions to the RSC Expert Panel reviewing Safety Code 6 9. Dr. Martha Herbert Ph.D., M.D. Pediatric neurologist and neuroscientist, Faculty of Harvard Medical School and on staff at the Massachusetts General Hospital. 10. Dr. Olle Johansson Ph.D. Associate Professor, Experimental Dermatology Unit, Department of Neuroscience, Karolinska Institute, Stockholm, Sweden 11. Mr. Michael Meszaros, M.Eng., P.Eng. 12. Dr. Andrew Michrowski Ph.D. President, Planetary Association for Clean Energy Inc. (PACE); between 1993 and 1996, headed the study team analyzing electromagnetic fields in Canadian houses for Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation 13. Dr. Anthony Miller M.D., F.R.C.P. Professor Emeritus, Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto 14. Dr. Meg Sears Ph.D. Adjunct Investigator, Children's Hospital of Eastern Ontario, Research Institute and Senior Clinical Research Associate, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute 15. Dr. Hugh Scully, B.A., M.D., M. Sc., F.R.C.S[C]., F.A.C.S.Professor of Surgery and Health Policy, University of Toronto; Past-President: Ontario Medical Association, Canadian Medical Association, Canadian Cardiovascular Society; Member, Health Policy Advisory Council, American College of Surgeons 16. Dr. Stephen Sinatra M.D., F.A.C.C., F.A.C.N., C.N.S. Board certified cardiologist; Fellow of the American College of Cardiology and former Chief of Cardiology, Director of Cardiac Rehabilitation, Manchester Memorial Hospital, Connecticut

15. Conclusion • This study confirmed previous results of an association between mobile and cordless phone use and malignant brain tumours. • These findings provide support for the hypothesis that RF-EMFs play a role both in the initiation and promotion stages of carcinogenesis.

16. C4ST Conclusion Samples exposed to RF-EMW showed a significant decrease in sperm motility and viability. We speculate that keeping the cell phone in a trouser pocket in talk mode may negatively affect spermatozoa and impair male fertility.

18. Summary • Mice exposed in-utero were hyperactive and had impaired memory. • . . . these behavioral changes were due to altered neuronal developmental programming. • We present the first experimental evidence of neuropathology due to in-utero cellular telephone radiation. Fetal Radiofrequency Radiation Exposure From 800-1900 Mhz-Rated Cellular Telephones Affects Neurodevelopment and Behavior in Mice Tamir S. Aldad1,2, Geliang Gan2, Xiao-Bing Gao2,3 & Hugh S. Taylor1,2,4 1 Department of Molecular, Cellular, and Developmental Biology, Yale University, 2 Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Reproductive Sciences, Yale University School of Medicine, 3 Section of Comparative Medicine, Yale University School of Medicine 4 Environment and Human Health, New Haven, CT.

19. Summary • Many scientists now recognize that hypersensitivity to EMR can be a debilitating medical condition that is affecting increasing numbers of people throughout the world. • While EHS patients can initiate steps to reduce exposure to EMR, more clinicians familiar with EHS are needed to diagnose, assist and treat the burgeoning number of suffering individuals who are at a total loss to explain their various symptoms.

20. The Medical Community • Dr. Hugh Scully, BA, MD, MSc, FRCS[C], FACSProfessor of Surgery and Health Policy, University of Toronto,Past-President, OMA, CMA, CCSMember, Health Policy Advisory Council, American College of surgeons • Approximately 20% of people have detrimental cardiac rhythm sensitivity to EMR. • “Concerned about the increasing evidence internationally that EMR is creating increasing health problems as it's use increases exponentially.” • This issue is under active consideration by the following or their committees • Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada • Canadian Medical Association • Council of Family Physicians of Canada • Canadian Pediatric Society • Canadian Cardiovascular Society.

21. ELECTROMAGNETIC SPECTRUM • FREQUENCY IN HERTZ No proof of harm ≠SAFE

22. Electrosensitivity • Electrosensitive individuals react when exposed to wireless radiation. • Symptoms include increasing headaches, insomnia, pain, rashes, memory lapses and dizziness. • Some individuals recover in a few hours, others are debilitated for days or even months. • ES affects where they live, their ability to travel, work and support their families. • ES is not an allergy; it is an illness that builds up over increased time and radiation exposures. • Just as we cannot yet explain why some individuals are fatally affected by second-hand smoke and others can smoke 2 packs of cigarettes a day and not get sick, similarly we cannot explain why some individuals react so acutely to exposure to wireless radiation. • Estimates of prevalence range from 3% (for severe ES) to 20% (with minor ES) of the population

23. Electrosensitive Studies/Experts • The BioInitiative 2012 Report • 1800 studies, 5 years, 29 highly respected health professionals from 10 countries. • Concludes; “a growing number of people worldwide have serious and debilitating symptoms related to various types of wireless exposure.” • Dr. Stephen Genuis, MD, University of Alberta • Hypersensitivity to EMR can now be recognized as a debilitating medical condition that is affecting increasing numbers of people worldwide. • Dr. Olle Johansson, Karolinska Institute, has authored or co-authored several studies on electrosensitivity concerning • Well-known symptoms • Sources • Economic and social problems • And advocating a Precautionary approach 

24. American Academy of Environmental Medicine Letter to Toronto City Council, Nov. 14, 2013, AAEM Board of Directors • For forty years the Academy has trained Physicians to treat the most difficult, complex patients who are often left behind by our medical system, because their illness, rather than stemming from traditionally understood factors, is related to underlying environmental causes, including (bio)chemical or radiation exposures. • AAEM physicians, and physicians world-wide, are treating patients who report adverse, debilitating health effects associated with exposure to radiofrequency energy (RF). • The AAEM strongly supports the use of wired Internet connections, thereby encouraging prudent minimization of exposure to RF …Toronto’s Prudent Avoidance Policy represents good leadership. • The peer reviewed, scientific literature demonstrates the correlation between RF exposure and neurological, cardiac, and pulmonary disease as well as reproductive and developmental disorders, immune dysfunction, cancer and other health conditions. The evidence is irrefutable. • While the debate ensues about the dangers of RF, it is the doctors who must deal with the after effects. Until we can determine why some get sick and others do not, and some are debilitated for indeterminate amounts of time, we implore you to not take the risk, particularly with the health of so many children with whose safety you have been entrusted. • Prudent Avoidance is a wonderful policy. It should be reflected by minimizing RF exposures in public spaces.

25. Bioinitiative Report 2012Summary of Key Findings • Evidence that Children are More Vulnerable • Evidence For Damage to Sperm and Reproduction • Evidence for Effects on the Blood Brain Barrier • Evidence for Effects on Brain Tumours • Evidence for Effects on Genes (Genotoxicity) • Evidence for Effects on the Nervous System (Neurotoxicity) • Evidence for Effects on Cancer (Childhood) • Effects on Melatonin, Breast Cancer and Alzheimer’s Disease • Effects on Stress Proteins, DNA and Neural Activity • Risk to health from wireless technology has increased substantially since 2007 • Cell phone users, parents-to-be, children and pregnant women are at particular risk • In France, it is now a law that any infrastructure for the purpose of public education should install wired technology, rather than Wi-Fi, in order to protect children from electromagnetic radiation.