Thursday, 30 March 2017

Letters to Health Minister Philpott about statment on CBC Marketplace “The secret inside your cellphone”

Dear Hon. Health Minister Philpott,

On Friday night, CBC Marketplace broadcast a program called, “The secret inside your cellphone” where it was explained the Minister of Health, which would be you, was unavailable to comment on the safety of cell phone use. Instead, Health Canada submitted the most outrageous and irresponsible comment “EVEN IF A SMALL CHILD WERE EXPOSED TO A CELL PHONE… 24 HOURS A DAY, 365 DAYS A YEAR … THERE WOULD BE NO ADVERSE HEALTH EFFECT.”

Your silence by refusing to inform the public of the potential health risks by not enforcing the safety manuals mandated by the federal government and included in all wireless technology makes you accountable for any and all permanent injuries to our children.

In January 1998, The Wingspread Conference held a three-day academic conference where the Precautionary Principle was defined. It involved 35 scientists, lawyers, policy makers and environmentalists from the United States, Canada and Europe.

It was agreed the Precautionary Principle would be implemented when an activity raises threats of harm to human health or the environment, even if some cause and effect relationships are not fully established scientifically. The Precautionary Principle shifts the burden of proof, insisting that those responsible for an activity must vouch for its harmlessness and be held responsible if damage occurs.

Your job and obligation to implement the Precautionary Principle and protect the public on this potential health crisis would have taken 5 minutes of your time to comment on the need to inform the public on the basic safety measures of using a cell phone and protect themselves and their children from the potential health risks from the radiation exposure.

Maybe it’s time to read over the mandated letter from Prime Minister Trudeau and the promises you made to live up to the highest ethical standards so Canadians could look up to their government with pride and trust?

We have committed to an open, honest government that is accountable to Canadians, lives up to the highest ethical standards, and applies the utmost care and prudence in the handling of public funds. I expect you to embody these values in your work and observe the highest ethical standards in everything you do. When dealing with our Cabinet colleagues, Parliament, stakeholders, or the public, it is important that your behaviour and decisions meet Canadians’ well-founded expectations of our government. I want Canadians to look on their own government with pride and trust.

As Minister, you must ensure that you are aware of and fully compliant with the Conflict of Interest Act and Treasury Board policies and guidelines. You will be provided with a copy of Open and Accountable Government to assist you as you undertake your responsibilities. I ask that you carefully read it and ensure that your staff does so as well. I draw your attention in particular to the Ethical Guidelines set out in Annex A of that document, which apply to you and your staff. As noted in the Guidelines, you must uphold the highest standards of honesty and impartiality, and both the performance of your official duties and the arrangement of your private affairs should bear the closest public scrutiny. This is an obligation that is not fully discharged by simply acting within the law. Please also review the areas of Open and Accountable Government that we have expanded or strengthened, including the guidance on non-partisan use of departmental communications resources and the new code of conduct for exempt staff.


This irresponsible statement is unacceptable, proving you have not fulfilled your obligation to the public by protecting them from potential harm.  It should not be up to the public to prove that a product is not safe but up to the industry to prove it is safe.

Janis Hoffmann 
Dane Snowden of the CTIA does not say cell phones are safe

Dear Hon. Health Minister Philpott.

On Friday, March 24, 2017, CBC’s Marketplace broadcast a program called “The secret inside your cellphone” which spoke about how the cell phone industry is misleading its customers.  It exposed how customers are not told about how to use their phones and how Health Canada is failing to protect the public. Due to various constraints, Ms. Mesley couldn’t address all of the issues, but shockingly you did not respond to any of her questions. Marketplace did not have the time to tell people that Health Canada’s guidelines are among the weakest in the world. Even China, Russia and India allow their citizens to be exposed to mere fractions of the levels of RF allowed by Safety Code 6.

But worst of all is the dangerously misleading statement told, blatantly, by Health Canada that is included in this screen shot. “EVEN IF A SMALL CHILD WERE EXPOSED TO A CELL PHONE… 24 HOURS A DAY, 365 DAYS A YEAR … THERE WOULD BE NO ADVERSE HEALTH EFFCT.”

Based upon the hundreds of studies I’ve read, this statement is a lie. No scientist, even industry scientists, would say that microwave radiation is safe. Minister Philpott, do you support this, and agree that this is the information that should be given to parents who are looking for guidance? 

What is the basis for this statement? Are you willing to put your name to it? If you are not, and if you cannot give me scientific evidence to support this statement then you MUST retract it from the CBC Marketplace program and delete it from all of Health Canada’s references.

With deep concern,
Sharon Noble

Sent: March 26, 2017
Subject: concerned parent over Health Canada's remarks


As a mother of three, I pride myself in doing my best to provide my children with as safe a home as possible. I always err on the side of caution when choosing products for my children that are potentially harmful. For a representative of Health Canada to say on public television that it is safe to expose children to a cell phone for 24 hours a day, 365 days a year is incredibly irresponsible and dangerous. The fact that the World Health Organization has classified electro-magnetic radiation from wireless devices as a Class 2B potential carcinogen, is enough for me to use wireless devices safely. And, I have taught my children the same. It is a shock that Health Canada would disregard the scientific findings that went behind this classification.

The public is weary of Health Canada always siding with industry on questions of public health and preventive measures. But, this blatant disregard for the health of Canadian children has gone too far. 

This statement needs to be withdrawn immediately. 

Yours truly,

Sent: March 26, 2017
Subject: Marketplace reveals Health Canada is Injuring Canadians' Health & Endangering the Lives of Children

Minister Philpott,


There is no scientific evidence  to substantiate that statement.  Indeed there is increasing scientific evidence it is blatantly false. 

Is this the same government that promised evidence-based policies?

Where, Ms. Philpott, is your evidence? 

If you have no evidence and you do not, because there is no evidence that would justify that statement, I respectfully request that you order Health Canada to retract their statement and issue a correction.  I further request that the Health Canada statement, AS A MINIMUM, urge cell phone users to review the data on how cell phones should be used and carried.

Please respond.  I do not want a form letter.  I want to know someone in your office actually is reading taxpayers' communications to your office.


Sent: March 26, 2017
Subject: Health Canada, out of touch with science

Dear Hon. Health Minister Philpott,

The recent CBC - Marketplace program on cellphones, informed the viewers of your unfortunate decision not to speak to Ms. Mesley, the investigative reporter of this program.  This left a rather poor impression on the Liberal government, as your party campaigned on "science-based decision making".

The most disturbing information of this program was Health Canada's outrageous, unscientific claim:  "Even if a small child were exposed to a cell phone . . . 24 hours a day, 365 days a year . . . there would be no adverse Health effect." 

I have written to you before regarding this outlandish safety claim that, to this day, is present on Health Canada's website.  Unfortunately, your staff decided to pass my previous email to Health Canada, and I am quite certain that you did not have a chance to glance at the medical science information I provided.   
Instead, I received the usual form letter from Health Canada, stunningly denouncing peer reviewed research by hundreds of respected scientists and specialists of electromagnetic, 'non-ionizing' radiation research, and all fields of medicine! 
Such unprecedented, grotesque level of arrogance, and unbridled hubris, has no place in a caring and educated modern society!  

Every parent wishes the best health information for their children, but what value does it hold when the information they receive from Health Canada is outdated, and not based on current scientific literature?  

Ms. Philpott, are you aware of the warning posters the Austrian Medical Association has prominently displayed in medical clinics, regarding cell phones and wireless devices?  

Medical Rules For Cell Phone use: 
No. 1 -  Use a cell phone as little and as short as possible, children and teenagers under the age of 16 should not use a cell phone at all!

Why does Health Canada irresponsibly encourage 24/7 microwave radiation exposure for children, while other countries around the world warn of negative biological consequences?    

“A disservice has been done in inaccurately depicting the body of science, which actually indicates that there are biological effects from the radiation emitted by wireless devices, including damage to DNA, and evidence for increased risk of cancer and other substantial health consequences…The public the world over has been misled by this reporting.”
- Dr. ​Ronald B. Herberman, - Founding Director of the University of Pittsburgh Cancer Institute, Vice Chancellor of Cancer Research at University of Pittsburgh and the first head of an NCI funded cancer center to ​speak out ​on the risks from cell phones.

"Because the World Health Organization considers wireless radiation a possible human carcinogen, wireless radiation does not belong in schools with young children ­
- Anthony B. Miller MD PHD - expert advisor to the WHO, Professor Emeritus University of Toronto - in the C4ST Women's College Hospital Symposium 9/12/14.

 "​As a research scientist and physician who studies how microwave radiation affects the outcomes of pregnancy, I am deeply concerned about growing exposures to cell phone and other wireless radiation​." ­
- Prof.Hugh Taylor, MD, PhD, - Chief of Obstetrics/Gynecology - at Yale University Medical School, 2013.    

“Radiation at extremely low levels (0.0001, the level, much lower than emitted by the average digital cellular telephone) caused heart attacks and the deaths of some chicken embryos...independent, third-party peer reviewed studies need to be conducted in the U.S. to begin examining the effects from radiation on migratory birds and other trust species.“ ­
- Willie Taylor - US Department of the Interior - in his ​February 2014 letter​ to Mr. Eli Veenendaal of the National Telecommunications and Information Administration, U.S. Dept. of Commerce.

"Scientific data on the biological effects of radiofrequency (RF) indicate the need to pursue a precautionary approach to protect the exposed population. It is clear that RF radiation can cause single and double strand DNA breaks at exposure levels that are currently considered safe under FCC guidelines". ­
Dr. Martin Blank - of Columbia University in his ​letter​ to the LAUSD​.

“Where there are threats of serious or irreversible damage, lack of full scientific certainty shall not be used as a reason for postponing cost-effective measures to prevent environmental degradation.”
- The United Nation’s ​Rio Declaration​ on the Environment and Development, 1992 - 
Canada is a signee of this document.

“The IARC 2B classification implies an assurance of safety that cannot be offered—a particular concern, given the prospect that most of the world’s population will have lifelong exposure to radiofrequency electromagnetic fields.” ­ 
- Dr. Jonathan Samet - physician and epidemiologist, Chair of the World Health Organization’s EMF Working Group who made the Class 2 B classification, in a 2014 Commentary.

“All reasonable measures to be taken to reduce exposures to electromagnetic fields, especially radiofrequencies from mobile phones and particularly the exposures to children and young adults. Current exposure limits to be reconsidered.”
- European Environment Agency -​

Here you will find these quotes, plus so much more information on this subject:

Health Canada is clearly is not acting in the interest of Canadians!  Therefore, as grandparents, we are deeply concerned about the future health of our two little grandchildren, as their environment has become saturated with unnatural, man-made electrosmog pollution, with no end in sight!

Health Canada has become a liability for all Canadians, as staff refuses to accept the mountains of scientific evidence of harm that was made available to them from many associations and groups, including myself. 
Health Canada refuses to adopt the 'Precautionary Principle' of science; instead, they irresponsibly encourage the use of wireless devices for children on their website ! 
This deliberate negligence of duty leaves the distinct impression that they have become a lobby group for the wireless industry!  Either they lack the medical credentials, or they simply succumbed to what is now termed as: 'wireless dementia'!   

Ms. Philpott, we and thousands of others urge you to bring this travesty by Health Canada to light! 
Please think of the children and their future, and let current 'independent' science be your guide.

Kind Regards,
Marcus (Citizens for Safe Technology)  

P.S.  Your response would be appreciated, but please be so kind and spare us the indignity of Health Canada's rhetoric. 

Sent: March 27, 2017
Subject: Irresponsible Cell Phone Safety Statement

Hon. Minister Philpott,

I am contacting you after viewing the excellent CBC Marketplace segment "The Secret Inside Your Phone" by Wendy Mesley.

This is a subject that I have been following for many years now, unfortunately, due to my son's symptoms resulting from electro-hypersensitivity. He is now almost 24, and about the only person in that age group that I know who does not (cannot) use a cell phone. He tries to maintain and balance a normal life and social connections, while at the same time attempting to surreptitiously avoid all sources of RF radiation from cell phones, cordless phones, wifi routers, cell transmitters, etc. As you can imagine, this is very challenging in our current wireless-everything environment, but he's learned to adapt the best he can.

Aside from finding the Oncologist in the story very irresponsible with his statements, I was most deeply dismayed to see the one Health Canada slide that said:   EVEN IF A SMALL CHILD WERE EXPOSED TO A CELL PHONE… "24 HOURS A DAY, 365 DAYS A YEAR … THERE WOULD BE NO ADVERSE HEALTH EFFECTS."

Given the vast amount of studies and data that I've seen firsthand that contradict this, I feel this misleading statement borders on being criminal.

There is more than enough evidence to dispute this ridiculous statement, and I respectfully request that Health Canada retract this outrageous and irresponsible claim immediately.


To: "jane philpott" <>
Cc: "pm" <>, "marketplace" <>
Sent: Wednesday, March 29, 2017 10:47:40 AM
Subject: Marketplace - CBC

Dear Honorable Philpott,

I am puzzled as to why the following statement that appeared on CBC Marketplace's program on cellphones has not been challenged by your Ministry:


This is an outrageous statement and is blatantly false. There are hundreds of scientific studies proving that exposure to cellphones on a long-term basis is hazardous to one's health. 

And anyone who knows anything about small children knows that their brains and bodies are still forming and are extremely vulnerable. If cellphone signals can pass through cement walls of buildings, don't you think they could also penetrate young bodies? And what about the rest of us? Don't you think we are affected by cellphone signals passing through our bodies as well?

The scientific research is out there on the dangers of ALL wireless technologies, not just cellphones. iPads, tablets, wireless printers and Smart Meters (that cannot be turned off) just to name a few. We need to be reducing our addiction to these harmful technologies, not encouraging them.

As the Minister of Health for Canada, is it not your responsibility to be informed about such topics of great importance? I ask that you contact CBC Marketplace and request that they retract this most misleading and legally-challenging statement.

As the Minister of Health for Canada you might also want to look into the future about 5-10 years from now. When I do that, I see hospitals bulging with people with brains tumors and other debilitating conditions caused by exposure to WiFi and other wireless technologies. What will this do to the health care budget? Isn't it time to deal with it now rather than later?

WiFi is the new smoking. It took 40 years to overcome the immense pressure by tobacco lobbyists and their lawyers to prove that smoking causes cancer. Thousands of people died because they believed what the government was telling them ie smoking is safe. We now know a different truth.

This same scenario is being played out again, only the lobbyists and lawyers that are involved are promoting the wireless industry. They sit on relevant Boards and governmental groups and exert their powerful influence. This powerful influence is now causing people harm and even death. Something needs to be done--sooner rather than later. You are in a position to help.

I hope you will.

Monday, 13 March 2017

Vancouver Island Conference

The display at the Vancouver Island Conference for the three school districts was a huge success thanks to Devra Davis and the volunteers who took time out of their busy Saturday to help.  We were so surprised to be welcomed and thanked for presenting parents with information packages with safety tips on how to reduce exposure from the wireless technology.

Parents wanted to know why their School Boards were not informing them about the health risks associated with RF exposure in our schools.

They also wanted to know why the resolutions passed by parents and teachers unions have been ignored by the School Districts and how they were allowed to move forward without consulting with parents. 

Parents are starting to ask questions!

Thanks again for an eventful day!

Janis and Tammy
Parents for Safe Schools
Victoria BC


More and more schools are implementing a 'No cell phone' policy during school hours due to distractions that negatively impact learning. However, much of this problem could be resolved with the removal of WiFi and the return to hard-wired Internet which is faster, cheaper, more reliable and more secure than wireless networks.

Unlike WiFi, hard-wired Internet gives teachers more control as to when the Internet is accessed in the classroom and allows oversight to ensure the content is appropriate for learning. Hard wired Internet allows oversight that benefits our children while also significantly reducing their daily exposure to RFR.  Peer reviewed science overwhelmingly suggests cumulative Radio Frequency Radiation is a health risk, particularly for developing children. Hard-wired Internet reduces RFR exposure making it the safest, healthiest choice for our children. 


Classroom Wiring Plan:
One Central 8-port Gigabit Ethernet Switch mounted on the center of the ceiling
Six to Eight tentacles that travel to the corners and wall-midpoints of the room and down the walls to desk-height
Four to Six additional 8-port Gigabit Ethernet Switches mounted on the wall at desk height (the tentacle feet)
Flexible, colored tentacle conduits that easily fasten Ethernet cables to the ceilings and walls, eliminating the need to snake the cables behind ceilings and walls

Typical Classroom Wiring Cost: US pricing
$250 for five 8-port Gigbabit Switches
$125 for OctoWired Flexible Conduit System
$  25 for Ethernet cable and connectors
$100 for two hours of labor to install
$500 total per classroom
USB-to-Ethernet Adapters for iPads
ipadipad access
First State In The Nation: Maryland State Advisory Council Recommends Reducing School WiFi
Children’s environmental health experts respond to new US study linking wireless radiation to cancer after the American Academy of Pediatrics recommends reducing cell phone exposures.


Cellphone Radiation Exposure Fact Sheet Draft Ordered to be Released By California Judge
SAN FRANCISCO (CBS SF) — After keeping it hidden for 7 years by the California’s Department of Public Health,  the Judge Rules California Must Release Papers Discussing Risk Of Cellphone Use.
Division of Environmental and Occupational Disease Control- California Department of Public Health – Document on Cell Phones and Health

(Response) World Health Organization - A Call for Action and Accountability

Dear James/Natacha:

Your response is of no help whatsoever and merely reiterates the misleading claims you’ve already made ad nauseam. I received exactly the same message from Phil Bourke, on behalf of Tim Singer. Clearly, a great deal of time and energy is wasted on sending meaningless standard emails rather than being devoted to actually protecting our health.

I have already addressed the issues regarding the science on EMR and will not go into this again. The fact remains that, regardless of your claims, I have been irreversibly harmed by this radiation and continue to suffer damaging effects. Nothing you say about your assessment of the scientific facts will change this – or the fact that microwave sickness/electro-sensitivity has reached epidemic proportions in Canada and worldwide. People are being harmed and it is inexcusable for you to dispute the science so you can avoid taking action to protect us. No investigation has been made into the countless claims of harm, nor has any action been taken to alleviate the effects, yet you have an obligation to do both.

The WHO document I sent you, attached again for your info, explains why you and other government agencies make the claims that you make about microwave radiation not causing harm – and get away with it.

I have never received a response to the many technical questions I asked in my first document, Heads in the Sand Pies in the Sky (also attached again), about Safety Code 6, and would like to know why this is so. Perhaps you could also clarify what you mean by ‘increasing awareness and responding to Canadians’ concerns’. I have seen no evidence of either claim, and responding to our concerns is not the same as acting on them.

I'm connected to many large networks of people concerned about EMR, and not one of them has, to my knowledge, received a satisfactory or meaningful response from Health Canada – if they received a response at all. As I’ve explained in my documents, it is very clear that you are dodging the facts, disputing the science and denying the dangers, regardless of the indisputable and widespread evidence of the harm being caused.

Enough. We are all sick of you dodging your responsibilities and failing to do your job. This is unacceptable and egregiously irresponsible for a government health agency in a supposedly democratic country.

As more cell towers are installed near my home, I am being forced to retreat into the wilderness to protect my health and avoid the ongoing and progressive harm being caused to me. It's time for you to be held accountable. Once I have recovered some of my health, I will be taking legal action and holding Health Canada entirely responsible for the harm done to me.

I await a direct response to my questions, as well as details of the actions you are taking to protect my health and the health of the countless others being affected by microwave radiation.

Olga Sheean
From: Natacha Whissell [] On Behalf Of CPSD-DSPC-ESD-DSE
Sent: March 14, 2017 6:46 AM
Subject: In response to your correspondence of November 7, 2016 and February 9, 2017 concerning radiofrequency (RF) energy and your struggle with electromagnetic hypersensitivity (EHS)

Dear Ms. Sheean,

Thank you for your emails of November 7, 2016 and February 9, 2017, addressed to the Honourable Jane Philpott, Minister of Health concerning radiofrequency (RF) energy and your struggles with electromagnetic hypersensitivity (EHS). I have been asked to respond on the Minister's behalf. I apologize for the delay in responding.

As you are aware, the Government of Canada tabled its response to the House of Commons Standing Committee on Health (HESA) report in Parliament on October 6, 2016. This response recognizes Government efforts directed at increasing awareness and responding to Canadians’ concerns about the potential effects from electromagnetic energy. This includes the funding of research proposals, monitoring the international scientific literature, and increasing awareness on exposure to electromagnetic radiofrequencies (EMF), while also promoting information sharing amongst all levels of government. A number of recommendations within HESA’s report were directed at organizations outside of the federal government. Health Canada has shared the report with these organizations for their consideration and action, as appropriate.

Please be assured that Health Canada leverages the best science available when assessing scientific research and formulating policy. The Department monitors the scientific research on the biological effects of RF energy on an ongoing basis, considering all peer-reviewed scientific studies and employing a weight-of-evidence approach. The weight-of-evidence approach takes into account both the quantity of studies on a particular endpoint (whether adverse or no effect), and more importantly, the quality of those studies. Poorly conducted studies (e.g., an inadequate exposure evaluation, a lack of appropriate control samples or an inadequate statistical analysis) receive relatively little weight, while properly conducted studies (e.g., with all controls included, appropriate statistics and a complete exposure evaluation) receive more weight.

As with most scientific conclusions, it is possible to find differing scientific opinions. There are scientific studies that have reported biological effects of RF fields that are below the limits in Safety Code 6. These studies are in the minority, are very far from conclusive, and do not represent the prevailing line of scientific evidence. Health Canada continues to monitor the scientific research in this area. If new scientific evidence were to demonstrate that exposure to RF energy below levels found in Safety Code 6 from wireless technologies is a concern, Health Canada would take appropriate action to help protect the health and safety of Canadians.

Health Canada scientists consider many different potential health effects, including thermal and non-thermal biological effects, when evaluating possible health risks from exposure to RF energy. Harmful non-thermal/biological effects at levels below the limits in Safety Code 6 have not been scientifically established. Health Canada has incorporated large safety margins into these limits to provide a significant level of protection for the general public and personnel working near RF sources. Safety Code 6 has always established and maintained a human exposure limit that is far below the threshold for potential adverse health effects.

As stated in the Government Response, Health Canada is a participant in the World Health Organization’s (WHO) International EMF Project and a Health Canada scientist participated in the WHO’s International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) working group reviewing the scientific evidence pertaining to the possible cancer causing ability of RF energy. As you are aware, in 2011, the IARC classified RF energy as “possibly carcinogenic to humans” based on an increased risk for glioma associated with long-term heavy cell phone use. The IARC classification of RF energy reflects the fact that some limited evidence exists that RF energy might be a risk factor for cancer. However, the vast majority of research to date does not support a link between RF energy exposure and cancers in humans. At present, the evidence of a possible link between RF energy exposure and cancer risk is far from conclusive and more research is needed to clarify this “possible” link. The Government of Canada supports the collaborative work undertaken by the WHO.

Health Canada is aware of the work of the US National Toxicology program and has reviewed the study report which states that there was a statistically significant increase in certain types of cancer among males rats exposed to cell phone signals over two years. The RF exposure levels tested in the study were 19 to 75 times higher than the human exposure limits established internationally and within Canada for whole body exposure for humans. Our officials will continue to review published studies as they become available and consider this new evidence alongside existing scientific knowledge in this area when assessing possible health risks from exposure to RF fields.

Department scientists are also familiar with the BioInitiative Report which was referred to in your correspondence. This report is considered to be an advocacy document that does not contain any new scientific data and regrettably presents an unbalanced review of the scientific literature as it excludes numerous studies that are not supportive of the Report’s conclusions. A detailed review of the document shows a number of weaknesses including internal inconsistencies amongst the various chapters. The report recommends "precautionary" limits for human exposure to EMFs that are much lower than the internationally recognized exposure standards that are based on established effects, yet presents no clear rationale to support these exposure limits. Based on these and other shortcomings, Health Canada concludes that the report does not provide any grounds for revising our current views on EMF health risk assessment.

Health Canada acknowledges that some people have reported an array of health symptoms that they attribute to exposure to EMF. At present, the symptoms attributed to EMF exposure have been termed idiopathic environmental intolerance by the WHO, where “idiopathic” refers to unknown causes. This means that while the symptoms attributed by some persons to EHS are real, the scientific evidence provides strong support that these health effects are not associated with EMF exposure. More information about EHS is available on our website at:
Health Canada – Electromagnetic Hypersensitivity

The limits within Safety Code 6 are designed to provide protection for all age groups, including infants and children, on a continuous basis. Based on the latest scientific evidence, Health Canada has determined that exposure to low-level RF energy, including that from Wi-Fi technology, is not dangerous to the public. Health Canada stands by its position as outlined in the Government response to HESA. I hope that you will understand the Department's position on this matter and that my comments are helpful.

I appreciate having had this opportunity to respond to your enquiry and I hope that my comments are helpful in addressing your concerns.

Yours sincerely,

James Van Loon, Director General
Consumer Product Safety Directorate
Healthy Environments and Consumer Safety Branch
Health Canada

This document has been sent to the WHO and the UN to provide details of these inexcusable failures and what urgently needs to be done to address them.  It also outlines what World Health Organization must do to reverse this destructive course—for itself and for the global citizens it is supposed to protect.  One of the most crucial and urgent steps to be taken is the replacement of the head of the EMF Project, Emilie van Deventer (an electrical engineer with zero health credentials) with an independent, unbiased, medically qualified professional who has firsthand experience and knowledge of microwave sickness/electro-sensitivity and the many other devastating consequences, such as brain cancer, neurological disorders, DNA damage and infertility.