Experts in Law, Policy, and Science Discuss Need for Protective Regulations in re Wireless Radiation on Wildlife and Environment (Webinar)

By B.N. Frank

Decades of research have already proven that Electromagnetic Fields (EMF) – including wireless “Wi-Fi” radiation and 5G – is biologically and environmentally harmful. In fact, a federal court ruled in favor of petitioners who sued the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) for NOT updating wireless radiation guidelines since 1996 despite scientific evidence of harm. Despite the 2021 court order, the agency has still not addressed this. Adding insult to injury, cell towers, antennas, Wi-Fi “hotspots”, utility “smart” meters and grids, and other wireless radiation emitting sources continue to be deployed throughout the U.S. and in space (see 1, 2, 3, 4, 5).

Thanks to Environmental Health Trust for sharing a webinar that features experts discussing the impacts of exposure on wildlife and the environment.

Wireless Impacts To Wildlife and the Environment: An Expert Webinar on Science, Policy and Law

Wireless, Wildlife and the Environment

Environmental Health Trust, a scientific non profit presents:

A Science, Policy and Law Webinar on the Impacts to Flora and Fauna from Cell Towers, Wireless Networks and Non-ionizing Electromagnetic Radiation

The rapid proliferation of wireless antennas (including those on cell towers, 5G/4G small cells and rooftops) into national parks, wilderness, urban and suburban ecosystems is increasing the environmental levels of non-ionizing radiofrequency (RF) electromagnetic radiation. Scientific evidence indicates that wireless RF and other non-ionizing electromagnetic fields are an environmental pollutant presenting critical exposure risks to wildlife and the natural environment.

This webinar features experts in science, law and policy discussing the need for protective regulations.

The first half of the webinar features co-authors of a landmark three-part review, “Effects of non-ionizing electromagnetic fields on flora and fauna” documenting 1,200 studies indicating a myriad of harmful effects to wildlife even at very “vanishingly low” exposure levels.

Albert M. Manville II PhD., is a former Senior Wildlife Biologist at the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and Senior Lecturer and Adjunct Professor at Johns Hopkins University. Watch

B. Blake Levitt is an award-winning medical/science journalist, author and editor who has researched the biological effects of nonionizing radiation since the late 1970s. She has participated in congressional briefings and published numerous peer-reviewed articles in the field. Watch

Note: Henry C. Lai PhD, University of Washington professor emeritus and former Electromagnetic Biology and Medicine editor-in-chief, was also co-author to the wildlife and EMF review papers.

Erica Rosenberg, retired Assistant Chief of the Competition and Infrastructure Policy Division at the Federal Communications Commission, shared highlights of her article “Environmental Procedures at the FCC: A Case Study in Corporate Capture.”. See also her post “How the FCC Fails to Follow Environmental Laws and Fails the Public.” Watch

Daniel Favre PhD, biologist, presented his published research, “Mobile phone-induced honeybee worker piping.” Watch

Dr. Cornelia Waldmann-Selsam presented a field study “Radiofrequency radiation injures trees around mobile phone base stations” she co-authored on the impact of radiofrequency radiation to trees. She also shared new findings from her latest report “Tree Damage Caused by Radiofrequency Radiation.” Watch

Devra Davis PhD, MPH, President of Environmental Health Trust, presented studies on plants and zebra fish along with an update on the landmark legal case against the FCC, EHT et al. v, the FCC, in which the U.S. Court of Appeals found that the FCC had “completely failed” to address the “substantive evidence of potential environmental harms” on the record. Watch

Theodora Scarato, Executive Director of Environmental Health Trust, highlighted the increased energy use of 5G networks and the next steps for protective policy. EHT has submitted hundreds of documents, including both scientific studies and policy papers/letters, to the FCC record regarding the urgent need to update regulations. Watch

Links and Resources

ProPublica: How the FCC Shields Cell Phone Companies From Safety Concerns by Peter Elkind
Society of Environmental Journalists Journal: Is Wireless Technology an Environmental Health Risk? by Katie Alvord
Santa Fe New Mexican: Report says wireless radiation may harm wildlife by Scott Wyland
Santa Clara Medical Association Magazine: Wireless Silent Spring by Dr. Cindy Russell
Washington Spectator: Federal Court Instructs FCC to Review Electromagnetic Radiation Standards by Barbara Koeppel (PDF)
Environment: Science and Policy for Sustainable Development: Environmental Procedures at the FCC: A Case Study in Corporate Capture by former FCC attorney Erica Rosenberg

Stay updated by signing up for EHT’s newsletter here.

Environmental Health Trust Action Resources

Take Action : Send a Letter Now to U.S. Congress

Downloadable Factsheets

Scientific Research

Levitt B. B., Lai, H. C. & Manville, A. M. (2022). Low-level EMF effects on wildlife and plants: What research tells us about an ecosystem approach. Frontiers in Public Health, 10:1000840. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2022.1000840

Levitt, B. B., Lai, H. C., & Manville, A. M. (2021). Effects of non-ionizing electromagnetic fields on flora and fauna, Part 3. Exposure standards, public policy, laws, and future directions. Reviews on Environmental Health, 37(4), 531–558.

Levitt, B. B., Lai, H. C., & Manville, A. M. (2022a). Effects of non-ionizing electromagnetic fields on flora and fauna, part 1. Rising ambient EMF levels in the environment. Reviews on Environmental Health, 37(1), 81–122.

Levitt, B. B., Lai, H. C., & Manville, A. M. (2022b). Effects of non-ionizing electromagnetic fields on flora and fauna, Part 2 impacts: How species interact with natural and man-made EMF. Reviews on Environmental Health, 37(3), 327–406.

Balmori, A. (2021). Electromagnetic radiation as an emerging driver factor for the decline of insects. Science of the Total Environment, 767: 144913.

Favre, D. (2011). Mobile phone-induced honeybee worker piping. Apidologie, 42(3), 270–279.

Thielens, A., Bell, D., Mortimore, D. B., Greco, M. K., Martens, L., & Joseph, W. (2018). Exposure of Insects to Radio-Frequency Electromagnetic Fields from 2 to 120 GHz. Scientific Reports, 8(1), 3924.

Thielens, A., Greco, M. K., Verloock, L., Martens, L., Joseph, W. (2020). Radio-Frequency Electromagnetic Field Exposure of Western Honey Bees. Scientific Reports, 10, 461.

Halgamuge, M. N. (2017). Review: Weak radiofrequency radiation exposure from mobile phone radiation on plants. Electromagnetic Biology and Medicine, 36(2), 213–235.

Waldmann-Selsam, C., Balmori-de la Puente, A., Breunig, H., & Balmori, A. (2016). Radiofrequency radiation injures trees around mobile phone base stations. Science of The Total Environment, 572, 554–569.

More scientific research on wildlife and wireless

Activist Post reports regularly about wireless and other unsafe technologies. For more information, visit our archives and the following websites:

Become a Patron!
Or support us at SubscribeStar
Donate cryptocurrency HERE

Subscribe to Activist Post for truth, peace, and freedom news. Follow us on SoMee, Telegram, HIVE, Flote, Minds, MeWe, Twitter, Gab, and What Really Happened.