Sunday, 25 September 2016

The Berkeley case “Right to Know” - Conflict of Interest

For Immediate Release:
Contact: Ellen Marks, California Brain Tumor Association

Ninth Circuit Court Judge Friedland's Conflict of Interest
​On September 13 ​the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals and the CTIA- Wireless Association's appeal in their lawsuit against the City of Berkeley's Cell Phone Right to Know ordinance which was implemented in March, 2016. A decision has not yet been rendered.
Video of hearing below. ​ 
The three presiding judges of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals were Judge William Fletcher, Judge Morgan Christen and Judge Michelle Friedland. The potential conflict of interest rests with Judge Michelle Fri​edland.
Friedland's husband's career included design engineering​ in the wireless telecommunication industry with Cisco Systems, a member of the CTIA- wireless association​

This case has high visibility on the basis of constitutionality of the law and because the CTIA is represented by Theodore Olson, past Solicitor General for  George W. Bush. The City of Berkeley is defended pro bono by Harvard Constitutional Law Professor Lawrence Lessig. Lessig is also a past United States presidential candidate.

The outcome of this​ case​ is much anticipated as many cities and states​ are awaiting this critical ​ruling as they plan to enact their own versions of Berkeley's cell phone right to know label.

California Attorney General Harris's office submitted an Amicus Brief in support of Berkeley with concerns that a ruling against Berkeley's ordinance may harm other important disclosures protecting the welfare of California citizens. 

During the hearing Judge Michelle Friedland seemed to have an unfavorable opinion regarding the City of Berkeley's position giving consumers the right to know. This predisposed bias was present in the form of questions and statements ​made by the judge.
The case before the federal Court of Appeals is CTIA-The Wireless Association v. City of Berkeley et al., case number 16-15141.

In past yea​rs Friedland also submitted an amicus brief supporting the work of Theodore Olson in regard to prop 8 (same sex marriage).

What The Telecom Industry Doesn't Tell You, But Does Tell It's Investors...

UPDATE: National Toxicology Program Cell Phone RF Breaks DNA - September 6, 2016
The NTP results provide “strong evidence for the genotoxicity of cell phone radiation,” Ron Melnick told Microwave News. Melnick led the team that designed the NTP study; he is now retired. This “should put to rest the old argument that RF radiation cannot cause DNA damage,” he said.  DNA breaks were also seen in the brains of the RF-exposed mice, though the increases were less pronounced than among the rats. The NTP has not yet released the tumor results for its study in mice.

cell phones

Dr.Karl Maret, MD, with degrees also in electrical engineering and biomedical engineering, talks about Wi-Fi and EHS (electrohypersensitivity) in children.
We are now at 1800 time’s faster speeds than we were back in 1997 with 1st generation Wi-Fi. (The higher the speed the greater the potential for interference within our bodies) Used a German dosimeter to record levels of Wi-Fi radiation exposures on an EHS child at school and correlates symptoms (headaches) to chart of Wi-Fi signals - when the Wi-Fi levels were high, the student developed headaches. Human brain has 5-million magnetite crystals/gram tissue, and these crystals absorb wireless radiation.

What The Telecom Industry Doesn't Tell You, But Does Tell It's Investors...

Wireless radiation impairs the body’s ability to protect itself from toxic chemicals by damaging the blood-brain barrier.
The brain’s protective barrier—called the blood-brain barrier—is composed of tightly knit endothelial cells, which line the walls of the blood vessels in the brain, creating a barrier that blocks the entry of chemicals and toxins. However, replicated research shows that wireless radiation increases the permeability of the blood-brain barrier, allowing more movement of toxic chemicals into vulnerable organs. In other words, the toxic chemicals circulating in our blood from everyday exposures have an easier time reaching our brain. Imagine our brain has a strong fence around it. Wireless pokes holes in the fence.

Damaged Blood-Brain Barrier



The law: When is an employer or school liable for the health effects imposed on others from their wireless technology?

Increasing incidence of thyroid cancer in the Nordic countries with main focus on Swedish data
Radiofrequency radiation in the frequency range 30 kHz–300 GHz was evaluated to be Group 2B, i.e. ‘possibly’ carcinogenic to humans, by the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) at WHO in May 2011. Among the evaluated devices were mobile and cordless phones, since they emit radiofrequency electromagnetic fields (RF-EMF). In addition to the brain, another organ, the thyroid gland, also receives high exposure. The incidence of thyroid cancer is increasing in many countries, especially the papillary type that is the most radiosensitive type.

Thyroid Cancer

Cell Phone Radiation Boosts Cancer Rates in Animals;
$25 Million NTP Study Finds Brain Tumors

U.S. Government Expected To Advise Public of Health Risk

"At least four different epidemiological studies have found an association between the use of cell phones and acoustic neuromas."

Acoustic Neuromas

New report by Dr. Martin Pall on relationship between microwave radiation and neurological and psychiatric conditions.
These have been known for several decades, but the public is still being exposed.
“Two U.S. government reports from the 1970s to 1980s provide evidence for many neuropsychiatric effects of non-thermal microwave EMFs, based on occupational exposure studies. 18 more recent epidemiological studies, provide substantial evidence that microwave EMFs from cell/mobile phone base stations, excessive cell/mobile phone usage and from wireless smart meters can each produce similar patterns of neuropsychiatric effects, with several of these studies showing clear dose–response relationships. Lesser evidence from 6 additional studies suggests that short wave, radio station, occupational and digital TV antenna exposures may produce similar neuropsychiatric effects.”

The law: When is an employer or school liable for the health effects imposed on others from their wireless technology?

The Law