News
Featured Image

LifeSiteNews has been permanently banned on YouTube. Click HERE to sign up to receive emails when we add to our video library.

July 22, 2021 (Children’s Health Defense) – A peer-reviewed study by the Environmental Working Group (EWG) recommends stringent health-based exposure standards for both children and adults for radiofrequency radiation emitted from wireless devices. EWG’s children’s guideline is the first of its kind and fills a gap left by federal regulators.

The study, published in the journal Environmental Health, relies on the methodology developed by the Environmental Protection Agency to assess human health risks arising from toxic chemical exposures. EWG scientists have applied the same methods to radiofrequency radiation from wireless devices, including cellphones and tablets.

EWG recommends the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) adjust its woefully outdated health standards for wireless radiation, last revised a quarter-century ago, well before wireless devices became ubiquitous, heavily used appliances synonymous with modern life.

The recommendation draws on data from a landmark 2018 study from the National Toxicology Program, or NTP, one of the largest long-term studies on the health effects of radiofrequency radiation exposure.

EWG’s new guidelines, the first developed in the U.S. to focus on children’s health, recommend that children’s exposure overall be 200 to 400 times lower than the whole-body exposure limit set by the FCC in 1996.

The EWG recommended limit for so-called whole-body Specific Absorption Rate, or SAR, for children is 0.2 to 0.4 milliwatts per kilogram, or mW/kg. For adults, EWG recommends a whole-body SAR limit of 2 to 4 mW/kg, which is 20 to 40 times lower than the federal limit.

The FCC has not set a separate standard for children. Its standards for radiofrequency radiation set a maximum SAR of 0.08 watts per kilogram, or W/kg, for whole-body exposure and an SAR for localized spatial peak — the highest exposure level for a specific part of the body, such as the brain — of 1.6 W/kg for the general population.

The NTP studies examined the health effects of 2G and 3G wireless radiation and found there is “clear evidence” of a link between exposure to radiofrequency radiation and heart tumors in laboratory animals. Similar results were reported by a team of Italian scientists from the Ramazzini Institute.

Cellphone radiation was classified a “possible carcinogen” in 2011 by the International Agency for Research on Cancer, part of the World Health Organization, a conclusion based on human epidemiological studies that found an increased risk of glioma, a malignant brain cancer, associated with cellphone use.

EWG scientists say that more research is needed on the health impacts of the latest generation of communication technologies, such as 5G. In the meantime, EWG’s recommendation is for strict, lower exposure limits for all radiofrequency sources, especially for children.

When the FCC established its radiofrequency radiation limits, following the passage of the 1996 Telecommunications Act, relatively few Americans, and likely no children, owned and used cellphones.

— Article continues below Petition —
Canada's Health Minister: Make abortion pill reversal information available
  Show Petition Text
864 have signed the petition.
Let's get to 1000!
Thank you for signing this petition!
Add your signature:
  Show Petition Text
Keep me updated via email on this petition and related issues.
Keep me updated via email on this petition and related issues.

Many women who choose to undergo a medical abortion procedure (Mifegymiso in Canada) change their minds having taken the first pill.

And now, a safe and effective procedure called abortion pill reversal has been developed to assist these women in an attempt to help them save their pre-born child from the effects of this first pill (Mifepristone).

Abortion advocates are currently engaged in a campaign to silence the message that Alliance for Life Ontario is providing women undergoing a medical abortion in Canada, including even calling facts “mis-information”.

Our message is that there is a safe, effective (64%-68%) method that may save their child if they have second thoughts after starting the Mifegymiso process.

That's why Alliance for Life Ontario and LifeSiteNews are now partnering on this petition: To give Canadian women a second chance at choice!

Abortion Pill Reversal is being offered around the world with 2,000 little ones saved to-date.

But, in Canada, abortion advocates do not want women to have a second chance at choice! Alliance for Life Ontario's Facebook page has been taken down after erroneous complaints, and now their website abortionpillreversal.ca is being attacked.

Women deserve to know the truth about this second chance at choice and to know there are physicians trained and willing to help them try and save their child, if that is their choice.

We need your help to let the Minister of Health know that Canadian women do not give up their right to the truth when they choose induced abortion.

Please SIGN and SHARE this urgent petition today! Thank you.

FOR MORE INFORMATION:

Abortion Pill Reversal - A Second Chance: https://abortionpillreversal.ca/

  Hide Petition Text

Much has changed since the federal limits were set, including technology and how these devices are used. A survey completed by the nonprofit Common Sense Media in March 2020, just before the start of the COVID-19 spread in the U.S., found that 46% of 2- to 4-year-olds, and 67% of 5- to 8-year-olds, had their own mobile devices, such as a tablet or smartphone.

With remote learning, a necessity during the COVID-19 pandemic, phones, tablets and other wireless devices became a part of life for young children, tweens and teens nationwide.

“The FCC must consider the latest scientific research, which shows that radiation from these devices can affect health, especially for children,” said Uloma Uche, Ph.D., EWG environmental health science fellow and lead author of the study.

“It has been 25 years since the FCC set its limits for radiofrequency radiation. With multiple sources of radiofrequency radiation in the everyday environment, including Wi-Fi, wireless devices and cell towers, protecting children’s health from wireless radiation exposures should be a priority for the FCC,” she added.

“Based on our review of the health risks and the inadequacy of current standards to protect children, while the science evolves, it is perfectly reasonable for parents to consider minimizing or eliminating radiofrequency radiation sources at home by relying more on wired internet access, and to urge schools to take comparable steps to reduce classroom and campus exposure,” said Cook.

Other health-protective tips for consumers who want to reduce radiofrequency radiation from wireless devices include using a headset or speaker, texting instead of talking, and limiting the time children spend on smartphones.

Find all of EWG’s tips to reduce exposure to wireless radiation here.

EWG’s recommendation for limits for radiofrequency radiation exposure is its latest effort to advance the public dialogue about science-based standards that protect public health.

Originally published by the Environmental Working Group.

The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of Children’s Health Defense.

© July 21, 2021 Children’s Health Defense, Inc. This work is reproduced and distributed with the permission of Children’s Health Defense, Inc. Want to learn more from Children’s Health Defense? Sign up for free news and updates from Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. and the Children’s Health Defense. Your donation will help to support us in our efforts.

Comments

Commenting Guidelines

LifeSiteNews welcomes thoughtful, respectful comments that add useful information or insights. Demeaning, hostile or propagandistic comments, and streams not related to the storyline, will be removed.

LSN commenting is not for frequent personal blogging, on-going debates or theological or other disputes between commenters.

Multiple comments from one person under a story are discouraged (suggested maximum of three). Capitalized sentences or comments will be removed (Internet shouting).

LifeSiteNews gives priority to pro-life, pro-family commenters and reserves the right to edit or remove comments.

Comments under LifeSiteNews stories do not necessarily represent the views of LifeSiteNews.