COVID-19

SARS-CoV-2 is the virus that causes the COVID-19 disease.

SARS = Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome

ARDS = Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome

Apr 4, 2020: Revelations from an NYC Intensive Care Physician:

Dr. Cameron Kyle-Sidell has just brought forward a critical piece of the puzzle:

"We’ve been operating under a false medical paradigm… patients are slowly being starved of oxygen."

"It appears as some kind of viral-induced disease most representing altitude sickness. It is as if tens of thousands of my fellow New Yorkers are on a plane at 30,000 feet and the cabin pressure is slowly being let out. These patients are slowly being starved of oxygen."

"I have seen patients . . . take off their oxygen masks . . . and eventually get blue in the face. And while they look like patients absolutely on the brink of death, they do not look like patients dying of pneumonia…. They look as if they’ve been dropped off on the top of Mount Everest without time to acclimate."

Ruthven78 (Youtube commment): "I confirmed Dr Kyle-Sidell is a licensed physician in the state of NY. License is currently active and he has had no disciplinary actions taken against him (his license is in good standing)."

Key COVID-19 Links

  • COVID-19 Tracking Data

  • Stanford COVID-19 Interactive Tool

  • Link to Bing COVID-19 Tracker

  • Link to COVID-19 Global Cases by the Center for Systems Science and Engineering (CSSE) at Johns Hopkins University (JHU)

  • Link to Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security COVID-19 page

  • Link to The Lancet article: Clinical course and risk factors for mortality of adult inpatients with COVID-19 in Wuhan, China: a retrospective cohort study


Causing Unnecessary Immuno-Suppression during COVID-19 Community Spread is, obviously, a bad idea.

Jump down to scientific studies.

The following is not medical advice. Scientists for Wired Technology is not qualified to provide any medical or legal advice. The following is for educational purposes only. This page is one of three legs of the stool that establishes local control over the operations of Wireless Telecommunications Facilities (WTFs); the other two are the US House/Senate Conference Report for the 1996 Telecommunications Act (“1996-Act”) and the stated purpose of the 1996-Act: to promote the safety of life and property.

March 2, Radio Interview: San Francisco Dept. of Public Health & Endangerment

Learn more about this endangerment here and here   |   The rest of the interview is here.


San Francisco 4G/5G “Small” Cells Leads to
Melatonin Suppression and Immuno-Suppression, Mar 4, 2020
WILL SAN FRANCISCO POWER OFF ALL OF THEIR SO-CALLED “SMALL” CELLS OR NOT?
Resonance: Beings of Frequency — Watch from 1:07:40 to 1:18:00 to learn about
pulsed, data-modulated, Radio-frequency Electromagnetic Microwave Radiation (RF-EMR) exposures
from 4G/5G cellular infrastructure causing melatonin suppression and immuno-suppression.
Dr. Andrew Saul Discuss Vitamin C, Coronavirus, and Censorship
— watch at least from 5:40 to 8:10 and read the slides
Judy Mikovitis, PhD — Coronavirus — What You Should Know
William Schaffner, MD, Vanderbilt University: Coronavirus FAQ: How Deadly Is It?
The 3rd Large Dose VIt C Clinical Study for NCP Approved

Link to China Treating Coronavirus COVID-19 with Intravenous Vitamin C

Consider the benefits of Vitamin C.


Marc Serota is a former allergy fellows at Childrens Mercy; he posted this on Facebook:

From an MD immunologist:

I don’t post a lot on facebook but I would like to give my perspective and context on the coronavirus outbreak. I hope I can be a more reputable source of perspective as a physician who specializes and is board certified in immunology (as well as pediatrics, allergy and dermatology).

  1. Coronaviruses are a family of viruses. “coronavirus” is not unique to this particular strain. Everyone reading this has likely had another different coronavirus infection. This particular strain has been named COVID-19.

  2. Every upper respiratory virus has the potential to be lethal. Patients unfortunately die from many upper respiratory viral infections every year – most prominently the influenza virus. 30,000 people died from the influenza virus in 2019. The media didn’t report each one. They have reported all 11 coronavirus deaths. Not telling us about the people lost but rather keeping a death “toll”.

Let me repeat that:

  • Coronavirus: 11 deaths (US in 2020), 3300 deaths (China in 2020).
  • Influenza: 30,000 deaths (US in 2019).
  • Influenza pandemic of 1918: 675,000! (US), 20-50 MILLION!! (worldwide)

This is not meant to minimize any of these deaths but rather to give context and put some facts to the hysteria.

The Bottomline

  1. If you’re healthy, there is no need to walk around wearing a mask. In addition to looking silly and most of the time wearing/taking them off wrong – which would actually make you more prone to acquiring an infection, they don’t prevent you from getting sick. If you’re actually sick stay away from people and then, sure, wear a mask so you aren’t spreading respiratory droplets every time you cough/sneeze. In medicine we don’t wear the masks you’re buying and we wear other protective equipment – not just a silly looking mask you found on Amazon. When you see doctor’s walking around the world wearing a mask then you should too. Until then, stop.

  2. The symptoms are that of the flu. As doctors we don’t test or know about most people with mild or moderate flu symptoms. That means most people will probably get it and just think they had the flu. That means you’re only going to hear about the cases that get serious – not all the minor ones which will be the vast majority of cases.

  3. When it is said that people who are older or have other medical conditions are most likely to die – that is equally true for EVERY upper respiratory virus. There is nothing unique about that to this particular virus. It does mean that the only cases we tend to know about are the severe ones. Once a case is severe it then makes sense to test the patient to find out what virus in particular they have. That means you can easily overestimate how severe or lethal the virus is because the only cases you end up knowing about are the serious ones.

In summary,

30,000 people died from the flu last year. Another 30,000 died in car accidents. I remember: H1N1 (2009), MERS (2012), Ebola (2014), Coronavirus (2020).

Take it from me, the poor resident who stood at the door of the ER to triage people in 2009’s swine flu (H1N1) hysteria. The over reaction is exponentially worse than the actual problem and in 2020 the over reactions I’m seeing are remarkable. In cold and flu season you’ll probably get sick once or twice for about a week each. You might even get this particular coronavirus and most of you won’t even know it. I’ve seen people raiding supermarkets, major meetings and sporting events getting cancelled and fear/racism towards Asian people. These reactions are totally unnecessary and panic based. Just do what you’ve always done during cold/flu season. Stay away from other people when you’re sick, wash your hands and keep them away from your face, and only go to the ER if you feel your symptoms are more severe than a bad cold/flu (shortness of breath, high fever, etc.). And also realize you can’t live on earth and not get viral illnesses from time to time. It’s a part of nature.

**Please don’t ask for antibiotics **(those treat bacteria – not viruses). Thats like asking for a fire extinguisher when you’re drowning. It can be a life saving device – but the wrong one for the problem at hand. Some doctor’s don’t want to fight about it when patients insist on antibiotics so they just prescribe them – but it doesn’t mean its actually helping you and in some cases they can be harmful (resistance, infections, allergic reactions just to name a few). If you’re one who asks for antibiotics every time you’re sick, again, take it from me: ask for a flu shot each year and a doctor’s note to stay home from work when you’re sick instead. You will be much better off.

The government is very proud that testing will be available to every American, but remember, we don’t test for any respiratory virus other than the influenza virus routinely. The reason is thats the only virus that has a treatment (pill) you can take to shorten the duration of severity of the illness. I suspect if we start testing everyone with cold symptoms for coronavirus we’re going to find lots of it. It’s not going to change the recommendations to stay home and rest. And its not going to predict the small percentage of people who may develop more severe symptoms. Essentially whether someone has coronavirus 19 or some other cold/flu virus isn’t going to matter to your doctor. What it will do is slam urgent cares, ER’s and hospitals with every patient who has a cold so they can be tested. It is much more sensible to reserve testing for patients requiring hospitalization or more advanced treatments. Even that wouldn’t change their management but would be more to confirm the diagnosis and to not waste time looking for other causes of the patients symptoms.

In conclusion, yes there is a novel virus that our immune systems haven’t seen yet so to get immune to it you will have to get infected – at least until a vaccine is developed to bypass the getting sick part and just jumping straight to immune. Most people’s immune systems will do that effectively and be fine. A small percentage of unfortunate patients (primarily elderly, immune compromised etc.) will not be able to do that effectively and will need more advanced care. This is true of the cold/flu viruses we deal with every year. Follow normal cold/flu precautions and seek medical care if you feel your symptoms are severe. No need to get hysterical.

If you still think you should be scared consider this: Doctors, nurses and other healthcare staff are going to hospitals every day. Crowded buildings with tons of sick people. They aren’t walking around the halls of the hospitals wearing masks and they haven’t stopped going to work. And they are all rolling their eyes at everyone else right now.

— Marc Serota, MD


Communications with San Francisco Department of Health (SF-DPW) and Public Utilities Commmission (SF-PUC)

Date: November 20, 2019 @ 1:00 pm, PT

To: Hieu Doan 415-227-8529

Re: I just left you a message about recalling your worker from 3535 Sacramento Street, SF, CA this afternoon.

 
I just left you a voicemail message about recalling your worker from 3535 Sacramento Street, SF, CA this afternoon.

The authority here is the 8/9/19 DC Circuit Court of Appeals Ruling that you can learn about at these links:

Read also what the gentleman who wrote the intervenor brief for Case 18-1129 (a retired attorney) has to say about it . . . at the end of this email.

>>> To San Francisco residents

Does anyone want to descend on San Francisco City Hall Room 416 San Francisco, CA 94102 tomorrow at 5:00 pm to shut this whole 4G/5G Densification thing down for a year or so? Calling all RF-EMR All-Stars . . . we need the best for a few hours in SF from 5:00 pm to 8:00 pm or so . . . who am I missing? Bring them along.

  • There are two separate appeals being presented tomorrow night starting at 5:00 pm at SF City Hall.

  • Two appeals + general public comment x 3 mins each = 12 minutes of public comment per person.

This is a great opportunity . . .


>>> From San Francisco resident Ron Rattner

Dear Friends,

There are two wireless antenna appeals on Wednesday’s November 20, 2019 San Francisco Board of Appeals agenda: https://sfgov.org/bdappeal/meetings/10

  1. 2736 Broderick Street (Item 6)
  2. 2735 Green Street (Items 7)

These are well-written appeal briefs which raise multiple issues, including a requested 4G/5G health moratorium. But both appeals involve SF-PUC light pole antennas the BOA may deny them based on the City Attorney’s disputed retroactive interpretation of the recently amended Article 25. Any such denial will probably be litigated under authorities cited by appellants.

Although item 7 involves a Verizon permit, the only opposing brief was filed by the DPW and not by Verizon’s outside counsel, Paul Albritton. Albritton’s credibility with the BOA has been severely damaged, if not destroyed, by the 1650 Baker appeal which documented his October 23rd false sworn public comment about illegal PG&E work for Verizon violating the appeal permit stay.

You can download and read all November 20 briefs at this link: https://sfgov.org/bdappeal/node/6469

Public comments favoring these appeals may be very helpful.

So please share this information.

Ron

——– Forwarded Message ——–
Subject: Re: Putting Our Shoulders to the Wheel
Date: Tue, 19 Nov 2019 15:04:01 +0000 (UTC)
From: Edward Myers edwardbmyers@yahoo.com
To: Recipients

Gentlemen,

I am happy to speak to the DC Circuit’s decision. Contrary to some of the content in the email chain that you sent me from LA County, it is not correct to interpret the decision as only having application in the District of Columbia and it has implications well beyond the need for the government to consult with Native American tribes under the NHPA.

Please keep me up to date as arrangements are made for my involvement. Thanks.

Ed Myers

Testimony Edward B. Myers has offered to be delivered for him tonight as he cannot attend the 11/19/19 hearing in Montgomery County, Maryland.

I am an attorney and was an "intervenor" in the Court proceeding. I worked closely with the Natural Resources Defense Council on the briefs filed with the Court. My reading of the Court decision is summarized in the following (and you can feel free to represent it as reflecting my view of the case):

The Federal Communications Commission issued a rulemaking order on March 30, 2018 to expedite the deployment of Densified 4G/5G and other advanced wireless facilities (what the FCC called "small cell" facilities). The FCC’s order exempted all of these 5G facilities from two kinds of previously required review: historic-preservation review under the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) and environmental review under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA).

On August 9, 2019, the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit vacated the FCC’s rulemaking order. The legal effect of vacating the FCC’s rule necessarily means that the prior rule was reinstated and any actions taken on the basis of the vacated rule have to be reconsidered under the terms of the prior rule.

The prior rule required the FCC to apply NEPA to the construction of 5G facilities. Consequently, it is not lawful for any such facilities to be constructed without prior NEPA review. While other actions of Congress and the FCC have attempted to circumscribe the County’s authority over the construction of Densified 4G/5G facilities, in light of the Court’s decision, the County is nevertheless within its rights in requiring the sponsors of Densified 4G/5G facilities to provide evidence that the FCC has conducted a NEPA review prior to approving any request for construction.

Moreover, inasmuch as the Court’s decision vacated the FCC’s rule, the decision applies nationwide and its effect is not limited to the District of Columbia.


March 2, 2020

Tomás J. Aragón, MD, DrPH
Health Officer, City & County of San Francisco
Director, Population Health Division (PHD)
San Francisco Department of Public Health
101 Grove St., Rm 308, SF CA 94102

cc: Grant Colfax grant.colfax@sfdph.org
     Patrick Fosdahl patrick.fosdahl@sfdph.org
     Jennifer Callewaert jennifer.callewaert@sfdph.org
     Arthur Duque arthur.duque@sfdph.org
     Aaron Peskin Aaron.Peskin@sfgov.org
     Sunny Angulo Sunny.Angulo@sfgov.org

Dear Dr. Aragon et al.

I am sure you have your hands full with preparations for the spread of Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). I read that there are many theories that have contributed to its current community spread.

I would like to discuss with you by phone today or tomorrow information that I will be entering into the public record on Wed Mar 4, that may have direct impacts on the SF-DPH’s role in endangerment.

San Francisco resident, Cheryl Lea Hogan, who resides at 3535 Sacramento St is a woman who wrote an excellent Appeal brief that argued that the City of San Francisco should neither install nor power on (at unnecessary projected maximum power output levels) the Close Proximity Microwave Radiation Antennas (CPMRA) Wireless Telecommunications Facilities (WTFs) in front of her home. Ms. Hogan, unfortunately, underwent emergency surgery to remove a fast-growing brain tumor, over the weekend.

I recommend that you first read this Dec 30, 2019 letter written by San Francisco resident Ron Rattner —> https://scientists4wiredtech.com/sanfrancisco/2019-rattner-letter/.

I also would carefully read this SF Board of Appeals appeal brief, which I shared with you, Patrick Fosdahl, Jennifer Callewaert and Arthur Arthur Duque on October 22, 2019 in your office, including this relevant part:

The following photos were taken on Nov 20, 2020 of the CPMRA-WTF that was installed in front of 3535 Sacramento St. in San Francisco. Cheryl Hogan lives on the second floor of the building behind the blue car.

Photo taken from inside Chery’s bedroom: The Macro Tower Antenna is 12 feet from her window.

The City of San Francisco’s actions/inaction in failing to adequately address these conditions of endangerment since Oct 22, 2019 are very germane to this appeal and to Cheryl Lea’s Hogan current condition. In addition, the specific roles being being played by Medical Doctors, Grant Colfax and Tomás J. Aragón, MD, DrPH are also germane. Dr. Aragon, I informed you by email on October 23, 2019 to which specific person in the San Francisco Police department you would need to report such endangering conditions. I am now following up to see if you took the mandated reporting action. Please forward any evidence that shows you have been responsive to these mandated reporting duties and obligations.

I would like to discuss with you and Dr. Colfax today any actions that the City of San Francisco can immediately take to address this kind of well-documented endangerment.

I will report your response or lack the response by Drs. Aragon and Colfax to the SF Board of Appeals and into the SF Public record on Wed Mar 4, 2020.

Here is some more background on Cheryl Lea Hogan, who may not be with us much longer.

Cheryl Hogan’s father’s Wikipedia entry is here –> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lester_Hogan

"Clarence Lester "Les" Hogan (February 8, 1920 – August 12, 2008) was an American physicist and a pioneer in microwave and semiconductor technology.

He grew up as a brother to three sisters in Great Falls, Montana, where his father worked for the Great Northern Railway. After graduating from Montana State University with a degree in chemical engineering he joined the United States Navy in 1942. He did some work on acoustic torpedoes in Chesapeake Bay, and when being approached by Bell Laboratories, subsequently went to the Pacific theatre to train submarine crews in the use of that technology.

After the war he did post-graduate studies at Lehigh University and obtained a Ph.D. in Physics. He then joined Bell Labs in 1950. A couple of months later he invented the Microwave Gyrator (a device which can simulate inductance by substituting an RC circuit, thus getting rid of awkward coil assemblies). He worked under Bill Shockley, inventor of the transistor and Nobel Prize laureate. From 1953 through 1958 he was a professor at Harvard University, when he was asked by Dan Noble to join Motorola Semiconductor in Phoenix, Arizona as Vice President and General Manager of the semiconductor operation.

In 1968 he moved to Fairchild Camera & Instrument as Chairman and CEO, taking eight senior executives (nicknamed Hogan’s Heroes) with him. This move caused Motorola to sue Fairchild (unsuccessfully) for theft of trade secrets.

In 1975 he received IEEE’s "Frederik Philips Award". In 1978 he was honored with the "AeA Medal of Achievement". In 1993 he received the "MTT-S Microwave Pioneer Award". In 1996, a chair at the department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science at the University of California, Berkeley was named in his honor. On October 20, 1999, he was inducted as "Eminent Member" of Eta Kappa Nu, "the society’s highest membership classification, to be conferred upon those select few whose technical attainments and contributions to society through leadership in the field of electrical and computer engineering have resulted in significant benefits to humankind".

C. Lester Hogan died at the age of 88 due to complications of Alzheimer’s disease at his home in Atherton, California. He is survived by his wife, the former Audrey Biery Peters and his daughter Cheryl Lea Hogan.
Cheryl Lea Hogan (415-572-8231) was diagnosed with a brain tumor a few months after the so-called "Small Cell" outside of her home was turned on around Nov 20, 2019.

See the photos, above of the Wireless Telecommunications Facilities (WTF) installation from Nov 20, 2019. This antenna is only 12 feet from Cheryl’s home at 3535 Sacramento St., SF, CA.

Cheryl’s appeal of this cell tower is here –> https://scientists4wiredtech.com/sanfrancisco/sf-appeal-18wr-0171/

The Appeal was denied.

Thank you.


March 2, 2020

Brent Andrew brent.andrew@sfdph.org
San Francisco Department of Public Health
work 415-206-6995
cell 415-530-1199

Dear Mr. Andrews,

We are seeking comments from Dr. Grant Colfax, MD and Dr. Tomás J. Aragón, MD, DrPH on our Mar 2, 2020 email, quoted below. We will reproduce the quotes sent to us by Mar 3, 2020 at 6:00 pm. In the absence of comments, we can only report them as no-shows on this critically-important San Francisco public health disaster — a consistent no-show for a full eight months.

I just called Dr. Tomas Aragon. I reached him at 415-554-2898 and asked for the SF-DPH’s response. Today, I received from Dr. Aragon just another series of stock replies: "I am too busy . . . I cannot speak . . . I don’t know."

That’s eight full months of stonewalling since this July 3, 2019 letter from Julie Rosenberg, the Executive Director of the SF Board of Appeals to San Francisco Dept. of Health.

On Wed Mar 4, 2018, we will be publishing this page:

We are documenting and releasing to the press, the many failures of the SF-DPH to address this critically-important issue of excessive exposures to pulsed, data-modulated, Radio-frequency Electromagnetic Microwave Radiation (RF-EMR) which results in scientifically-established melatonin-suppression, immuno-suppression, immediate and direct neurological damages as well as speeding the growth of cancerous tumors, as in Cheryl Hogan’s case in San Francisco and in 25-year-old Kelly’s case in Sebastopol —>https://youtu.be/7JJtBtcNmeU?t=1068
and https://scientists4wiredtech.com/sebastopol/#death

This is particularly relevant as we prepare for the spread of Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in San Francisco.

We already have well-documented outcomes (all shared with Drs. Colfax and Aragon) of what happens to people who live too close to Wireless Telecommunications Facilities (WTFs) antennas that are in line with second- and third-story bedroom windows at pulsed, data-modulated, Radio-frequency Electromagnetic Microwave Radiation (RF-EMR) exposure levels that are well within the FCC RF-EMR exposure guidelines which have never been protective of scientifically-established melatonin-suppression, immuno-suppression, immediate and direct neurological damages as well as speeding the growth of cancerous tumors,

Despite many empty promises, Dr. Aragon has not sufficiently followed through on completing the assignment given to him: an update of the June 14, 2010 Memo SF-DPH Memo by Dr. Rajiv Bhatia re: Health Effects and Regulation of Wireless Communications Networks.

These are also integral parts of the story:

  1. https://scientists4wiredtech.com/2020/01/mohammed-nuru-head-of-sf-public-works-arrested-in-fbi-corruption-probe

  2. https://scientists4wiredtech.com/sanfrancisco/#F

  3. https://scientists4wiredtech.com/sanfrancisco/sf-appeal-18wr-0296/

  4. Nov 22, 2019 San Francisco Board of Appeals Hearing —> https://scientists4wiredtech.com/action/#sanfrancisco(see Cheryl Hogan featured in this video)

  5. Oct 22, 2019 San Francisco Board of Supervisors Meeting —> http://mystreetmychoice.com/sanfrancisco.html

  6. San Francisco Board of Appeals: September 25, 2019 —> http://mystreetmychoice.com/sanfrancisco.html


March 3, 2080

Tomás J. Aragón, MD, DrPH
Health Officer, City & County of San Francisco
Director, Population Health Division (PHD)
San Francisco Department of Public Health
101 Grove St., Rm 308, SF CA 94102

cc: Grant Colfax, MD
     Brent Andrew

Dear Dr. Aragon et al.,

Any statements, gentlemen, about the plight San Francisco resident Cheryl Hogan and her unsuccessful WTF appeal in 2019? (see the news, below)

We will be addressing in the public record tomorrow the critically-important issues of excessive exposures to pulsed, data-modulated, Radio-frequency Electromagnetic Microwave Radiation (RF-EMR) which results in scientifically-established melatonin-suppression, immuno-suppression, immediate and direct neurological damages as well as speeding the growth of cancerous tumors, as in Cheryl Hogan’s case in San Francisco and in 25-year-old Kelly’s case in Sebastopol –> https://youtu.be/7JJtBtcNmeU?t=1068

Will Drs. Aragon and Colfax make any substantive statements about a prudent and logical Public Health policy of powering off all Close Proximity Microwave Radiation Antennas (CPMRA) so-called "Small" Wireless Telecommunications Facilities (WTFs) in San Francisco in order to no longer suppress melatonin levels and the immune systems of the people of San Francisco in order to prevent unnecessary deaths from the expected community spread of COVID-19?

We would like to report some response from the SF-DPH and not just radio silence.

Will you please let me know?

——– Forwarded Message ——–

Subject: Cheryl
Date: Tue, 3 Mar 2020 16:03:14 -0800
From: Gary W
To: Recipient

I called Cheryl Hogan’s room and the call was picked up by Mark, one of Cheryl’s sons. I asked how she was doing, and he said he couldn’t talk right now. So if he can’t talk about her condition in front of her, that is worrisome.

I also asked if she would be able, or would want to see, visitors tomorrow. His answer was “Probably not”. He suggested waiting 2-3 days and then asking again.

So all in all, that is not really the news we had hoped to hear.

Gary


March 3, 2080

Tomás J. Aragón, MD, DrPH
Health Officer, City & County of San Francisco
Director, Population Health Division (PHD)
San Francisco Department of Public Health
101 Grove St., Rm 308, SF CA 94102

Dear Dr. Aragon,

Please find below just a few melatonin suppression studies from this established science for you, Dr. Aragon.

. . . and this . . . Resonance Beings of Frequency

https://scientists4wiredtech.com/what-are-4g-5g/resonance-beings-of-frequency/

Please watch from 1:07:40 to 1:18:00 . . . a documentary I shared with you back on October 22, 2019.

"We have in our lab 12,000 studies on melatonin suppression . . . that is more studies than have been published on in Paracetamol [/Acetaminophen]."

Paracetamol/Acetaminophen

This drug is used to treat mild to moderate pain (from headaches, menstrual periods, toothaches, backaches, osteoarthritis, or cold/flu aches and pains) and to reduce fever.
Take this product by mouth as directed. Follow all directions on the product package. If you are uncertain about any of the information, consult your doctor or pharmacist.
There are many brands and forms of acetaminophen available.

EPIDEMIOLOGIC NEUROLOGICAL, HORMONAL and GENETIC STUDIES for INFRASTRUCTURAL RF-EMR RADIATION

Alaa El-Din Sallam, Soha A. Hassan, Ehab Hassaneen & Elham M. Ali; Biological Rhythm Research, 47:4, 597-607, DOI: 10.1080/09291016.2016.1173361, 2016

Biological clocks are innate timing mechanisms that regulate many behavioral and physiological parameters in most organisms. In our modern life, heavy use of mobile phones (MPs) exerts a massive stress on organisms because their electromagnetic radiation usually results in varying degrees of damage to their biological systems including the biological rhythms. In the present study, the possible effects of exposure to radiofrequency–electromagnetic radiation (RF–EMR) from MPs on two characteristic circadian rhythms, locomotor activity and melatonin hormone rhythms, were investigated. Rats were exposed to RF–EMR from MPs at 900 MHz frequency (2-h/day for 2 weeks) during nighttime (20:00–22:00 h) followed by another two weeks without exposure for recovery. Locomotor activity rhythms of the control and treated groups (n = 5/group) were daily recorded using running wheels along the experimental period. For evaluating melatonin hormone rhythm, blood samples of control and treated groups (n = 12/group), were collected at the end of exposure and recovery periods, at 6-h time intervals per day (at 4:00, 10:00, 16:00, and 22:00 h). Rats exposed to RF–EMR exhibited phase shifting as well as a significant increased acrophase level in locomotor activity. Meanwhile, a significant decrease in serum melatonin levels with retaining lower amplitude rhythmicity was observed. Ceasing exposure for two weeks did not restore melatonin levels and circadian locomotor activity rhythms. It could be concluded that, under the current conditions, exposure to RF–EMR revealed disturbances in locomotor activity and melatonin level, although they maintained rhythmicity.

Qin F1, Zhang J, Cao H, Yi C, Li JX, Nie J, Chen LL, Wang J, Tong J.; J Toxicol Environ Health A., 2012

  • "Effects of 1800-MHz radiofrequency fields on circadian rhythm of plasma melatonin and testosterone in male rats."

  • ABSTRACT

Radiofrequency fields (RF) at 1800 MHz are known to affect melatonin (MEL) and testosterone in male rats, but it remains to be determined whether RF affected circadian rhythm of these plasma hormones. Male Sprague-Dawley rats were exposed to 1800-MHz RF at an average of 2,080,000 μW/m² power density (SAR: 0.5762 W/kg) at different zeitgeber (ZT) periods of the day, including 0 (ZT0), 4 (ZT4), 8 (ZT8), 12 (ZT12), 16 (ZT16), and 20 (ZT20) h. RF exposure was 2 h/d for 32 d. From each rat, the concentrations of plasma MEL and testosterone were determined in plasma after RF exposure and compared with controls.

The results confirmed the existence of circadian rhythms in the synthesis of MEL and testosterone, but revealed an inverse relationship in peak phase of these rhythms. These rhythms were disturbed after exposure to RF, with the effect being more pronounced on MEL than testosterone. The most pronounced effect of RF exposure on MEL and testosterone appears to be in rats exposed to RF at ZT 16 and ZT0 h, respectively. Data suggest that regulation of testosterone is controlled by MEL and that MEL is more sensitive to RF exposure.

Meo, S. A., Almahmoud, M., Alsultan, Q., Alotaibi, N., Alnajashi, I., & Hajjar, W. M. (2018); American Journal of Men’s Health, 2018

The use of mobile phones has remarkably increased and become a basic need of daily life. Increasing subscriptions of mobile phones boost the installation of mobile phone base station towers (MPBSTs) in crowded commercial and residential areas including near school buildings. This study investigated the impact of exposure to radiofrequency electromagnetic radiation (RF-EMR) generated by MPBSTs on cognitive functions. Two hundred and seventeen volunteer male students aged between 13 and 16 registered from two different intermediate schools: 124 students were from School 1 and 93 students were from School 2. The MPBSTs were located within 200 m from the school buildings. In School 1, RF-EMF was 20,100 µW/m² with a frequency of 925 MHz and in School 2, RF-EMF was 100,210 µW/m² with a frequency of 925 MHz. Students were exposed to RF-EMR for 6 hr a day, 5 days a week for a total period of 2 years.

The Narda Safety Test Solution device SRM-3006 was used to measure RF-EMF in both schools, and cognitive functions tasks were measured by the Cambridge Neuropsychological Test Automated Battery (CANTAB). Significant impairment in Motor Screening Task (MOT; p = .03) and Spatial Working Memory (SWM) task ( p = .04) was identified among the group of students who were exposed to high RF-EMF produced by MPBSTs. High exposure to RF-EMF produced by MPBSTs was associated with delayed fine and gross motor skills, spatial working memory, and attention in school adolescents compared to students who were exposed to low RF-EMF.

Abdel-Rassoul et al.; Neurotoxicology, 2007

  • https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16962663

  • "Neurobehavioral effects among inhabitants around mobile phone base stations"

  • This study found that living nearby mobile phone base stations (cell antennas) increased the risk for neuropsychiatric problems such as headaches, memory problems, dizziness, tremors,depression, sleep problems and some changes in the performance of neurobehavioral functions.

  • ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: There are possible hazardous health effects of exposure to radiofrequency electromagnetic radiations (RFR) emitted from mobile phone base station antennas on the human nervous system.

AIM: To identify the possible neurobehavioral deficits among inhabitants living nearby mobile phone base stations.

METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted on** (85) inhabitants** living nearby the first mobile phone station antenna in Menoufiya governorate, Egypt, 37 are living in a building under the station antenna while 48 opposite the station. A control group (80) participants were matched with the exposed for age, sex, occupation and educational level. All participants completed a structured questionnaire containing: personal, educational and medical histories; general and neurological examinations; neurobehavioral test battery (NBTB) [involving tests for visuomotor speed, problem solving, attention and memory]; in addition to Eysenck personality questionnaire (EPQ).

RESULTS: The prevalence of neuropsychiatric complaints as headache (23.5%), memory changes (28.2%), dizziness (18.8%), tremors (9.4%), depressive symptoms (21.7%), and sleep disturbance (23.5%) were significantly higher among exposed inhabitants than controls: (10%), (5%), (5%), (0%), (8.8%) and (10%), respectively (P<0.05).

The NBTB indicated that the exposed inhabitants exhibited a significantly lower performance than controls in one of the tests of attention and short-term auditory memory [Paced Auditory Serial Addition Test (PASAT)].

Also, the inhabitants opposite the station exhibited a lower performance in the problem solving test (block design) than those under the station. All inhabitants exhibited a better performance in the two tests of visuomotor speed (Digit symbol and Trailmaking B) and one test of attention (Trailmaking A) than controls. The last available measures of RFR emitted from the first mobile phone base station antennas in Menoufiya governorate were less than the allowable standard level.

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS: Inhabitants living nearby mobile phone base stations are at risk for developing neuropsychiatric problems and some changes in the performance of neurobehavioral functions either by facilitation or inhibition. So, revision of standard guidelines for public exposure to RER from mobile phone base station antennas and using of NBTB for regular assessment and early detection of biological effects among inhabitants around the stations are recommended.

Shahbazi-Gahrouei D, Karbalae M, Moradi HA,. et al., Electromagnetic Biology Medicine, 2013

  • https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23781985

  • "Health effects of living near mobile phone base transceiver station (BTS) antennae: a report from Isfahan, Iran"

  • This cross-sectional study found the symptoms of nausea, headache, dizziness, irritability, discomfort, nervousness, depression, sleep disturbance, memory loss and lowering of libido were statistically increased in people living closer than 300 meters from cell antennas as compared to those living farther away. The study concludes that “antennas should not be sited closer than 300 m to people to minimize exposure.”

  • ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: In recent years, by tremendous use of mobile phone telecommunication, possible health hazards have increased greatly among the public and among scientists. The mobile phone exposure has been shown to have many effects upon the immune functions, stimulating hormones, mammalian brain, sperm motility and morphology, and neurological pathologies syndrome. The aim of this study was to find out the psychological and psychobiological reactions of the people who are living near mobile phone base transceiver stations (BTS) antenna, in Isfahan, Iran.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: A cross-sectional study on 250 randomly selected inhabitants (133 women and 117 men) was performed in October 2012 till November 2012. The inhabitants were requested to complete a standardized questionnaire that focused on the relevant psychological and psychobiological reactions parameters. A computer program (SPSS version16.0, Chicago, IL) was used for statistical analysis using the Chi-square test with Yates correction. All the data were tested using a criterion level of p = 0.05.

**RESULTS: **The results showed that most of the symptoms such as nausea, headache, dizziness, irritability, discomfort, nervousness, depression, sleep disturbance, memory loss and lowering of libido were statistically significant in the inhabitants living near the BTS antenna (<300 m distances) compared to those living far from the BTS antenna (>300 m).

CONCLUSION: It is suggested that cellular phone BTS antenna should not be sited closer than 300 meters to populations to minimize exposure of neighbors.

Bortkiewicz et al, 2004 (Poland), ,Med Pr.2004;55(4):345-51.

  • https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15620045
  • "Subjective symptoms reported by people living in the vicinity of cellular phone base stations: review"
  • Residents close to mobile phone masts reported: more incidences of circulatory problems, sleep disturbances, irritability, depression, blurred vision and concentration difficulties the nearer they lived to the mast.
  • The performed studies showed the relationship between the incidence of individual symptoms, the level of exposure, and the distance between a residential area and a base station.

  • ABSTRACT

The problem of health effects of electromagnetic radiation (EMR) emitted by cellular phone base stations evokes much interest in view of the fact that people living in their vicinity are fated to continuous exposure to EMR. . A questionnaire was used as a study tool. The results of the questionnaire survey reveal that people living in the vicinity of base stations report various complaints mostly of the circulatory system, but also of sleep disturbances, irritability, depression, blurred vision, concentration difficulties, nausea, lack of appetite, headache and vertigo. The performed studies showed the relationship between the incidence of individual symptoms, the level of exposure, and the distance between a residential area and a base station. This association was observed in both groups of persons, those who linked their complaints with the presence of the base station and those who did not notice such a relation. Further studies, clinical and those based on questionnaires, are needed to explain the background of reported complaints.

Wolf R and Wolf D, International Journal of Cancer Prevention, (Israel) VOLUME 1, NUMBER 2, 2004

  • https://www.powerwatch.org.uk/science/paper.asp?paperID=3454

  • Increased Incidence of Cancer Near a Cell-phone Transmitter Station

  • A significant higher rate of cancer (300% increase) among all residents living within 300 meter radius of a mobile phone mast for between three and seven years was detected.

  • ABSTRACT

In the area of exposure (area A) eight cases of different kinds of cancer were diagnosed in a period of only one year. This rate of cancers was compared both with the rate of 31 cases per 10,000 per year in the general population and the 2/1222 rate recorded in the nearby clinic (area B). The study indicates an association between increased incidence of cancer and living in proximity to a cell-phone transmitter station. Relative cancer rates for femaleswere 10.5 for area A, 0.6 for area B and 1 for the whole town of Netanya. Cancer incidence of women in area A was thus significantly higher (p less than 0.0001) compared with that of area B and the whole city. A comparison of the relative risk revealed that there were 4.15 times more cases in area A than in the entire population. The study indicates an association between increased incidence of cancer and living in proximity to a cell-phone transmitter station.

Santini R, Santini P, Danze JM, Le Ruz P, Seigne M. , Pathol Biol (Paris). Jul;50(6):369-73, 2002

  • https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12168254

  • "Investigation on the health of people living near mobile telephone relay stations: I/Incidence according to distance and sex"

  • People living near mobile phone masts reported more symptoms of headache, sleep disturbance, discomfort, irritability, depression, memory loss and concentration problems the closer they lived to the installation. Study authors recommend that the minimal distance of people from cellular phone base stations should not be < 300 m.

  • ABSTRACT

A survey study using questionnaire was conducted in 530 people (270 men, 260 women) living or not in vicinity of cellular phone base stations, on 18 Non Specific Health Symptoms. Comparisons of complaints frequencies (CHI-SQUARE test with Yates correction) in relation with distance from base station and sex, show significant (p < 0.05) increase as compared to people living > 300 m or not exposed to base station:

  • 300 meters for tiredness,
  • 200 meters for headache, sleep disturbance, discomfort, etc.
  • 100 meters for irritability, depression, loss of memory, dizziness, libido decrease, etc.

Women significantly more often than men (p < 0.05) complained of headache, nausea, loss of appetite, sleep disturbance, depression, discomfort and visual perturbations. This first study on symptoms experienced by people living in vicinity of base stations shows that, in view of radioprotection, minimal distance of people from cellular phone base stations should not be < 300 m.

Navarro EA, Segura J, Portoles M, Gomez-Perretta C, Electromagnetic Biology and Medicine, Volume 22, Issue 2, (): 161 – 169 2003

  • http://www.emrpolicy.org/science/research/docs/navarro_ebm_2003.pdf

  • The Microwave Syndrome: A Preliminary Study. 2003 (Spain)

  • Statistically significant positive exposure-response associations between RFR intensity and fatigue, irritability, headaches, nausea, loss of appetite, sleeping disorder, depressive tendency, feeling of discomfort, difficulty in concentration, loss of memory, visual disorder, dizziness and cardiovascular problems.

Oberfeld, A.E. Navarro, M. Portoles, C. Maestu, C. Gomez-Perretta, Public Health Department Salzburg, Austria, 2003

  • https://www.powerwatch.org.uk/science/paper.asp?paperID=5026

  • The microwave syndrome: further aspects of a Spanish study,

  • A health survey was carried out in La Ñora, Murcia, Spain, in the vicinity of two GSM 900/1800 MHz cellular phone base stations. The adjusted (sex, age, distance) logistic regression model showed statistically significant positive exposure-response associations between the E-field and the following variables: fatigue, irritability, headaches, nausea, loss of appetite, sleeping disorder, depressive tendency, feeling of discomfort, difficulty in concentration, loss of memory, visual disorder, dizziness and cardiovascular problems.

Tetsuharu Shinjyo and Akemi Shinjyo Umwelt-Medizin-Gesellschaft, 27(4), S. 294-301. Subject to a special peer-review procedure by the Scientific Advisory Board of Umwelt-MedizinGesellschaft, 2014

  • Link to original study in pdf form

  • "Significant Decrease of Clinical Symptoms after Mobile Phone Base Station Removal – An Intervention Study"

  • Japanese study shows statistically Significant Adverse Health Effects from electromagnetic radiation from mobile phone base stations. Residents of a condominium building that had cell tower antennas on the rooftop were examined before and after cell tower antennas were removed. In 1998, 800MHz cell antennas were installed, then later in 2008 a second set of antennas (2GHz) were installed. Medical exams and interviews were conducted before and after the antennas were removed in 2009 on 107 residents of the building who had no prior knowledge about possible effects. These results lead researchers to question the construction of mobile phone base stations on top of buildings such as condominiums or houses.

  • Symptoms include sleeping problems, and cognitive performance in subjects living near mobile phone base stations,

Hutter HP et al. , Occup Environ Med. 2006 May;63(5):307‐13, 2006

  • https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16621850

  • Found a significant relationship between some cognitive symptoms and measured power density in 365 subjects; highest for headaches. Perceptual speed increased, while accuracy decreased insignificantly with increasing exposure levels.

  • ABSTRACT:

BACKGROUND: The erection of mobile telephone base stations in inhabited areas has resulted in health effects caused by emitted microwaves.

METHODS: In a cross-sectional study of randomly selected inhabitants living in urban and rural areas for more than one year near to 10 selected base stations, 365 subjects were investigated. Several cognitive tests were performed, and well-being and sleep quality were assessed. Field strength of high-frequency electromagnetic fields (HF-EMF) was measured in the bedrooms of 336 households.

RESULTS: Total RF-EMR and exposure related to mobile telecommunication were far below recommended levels (maximum of 4,100 µW/m² is far below 10,000,000 µW/m²). Distance from antennas was 24-600 meters in the rural area and 20-250 meters in the urban area.

Average power density was slightly higher in the rural area (50 µW/m²) than in the urban area (20 µW/m²). Despite the influence of confounding variables, including fear of adverse effects from exposure to RF-EMR from the base station, there was a significant relation of some symptoms to measured power density; this was highest for** headaches. Perceptual speed** increased, while accuracy decreased insignificantly with increasing exposure levels. There was no significant effect on sleep quality.

CONCLUSION: Despite very low exposure to RF-EMR, effects on well-being and performance cannot be ruled out, as shown by recently obtained experimental results.

Bucher,. Klaus and Eger, Horst; Journal of Electromagetic Fields, 2011

  • https://ecfsapi.fcc.gov/file/7521095891.pdf

  • "Changes of Neurochemically Important Transmitters under the influence of modulated RF fields – A Long Term Study under Real Life Conditions, (Germany)

  • German study showing elevated levels of stress hormones (adrenaline, noradrenaline), and lowered dopamine and PEA levels in urine in area residents during 1st 6 months of cell tower installation. Even after 1.5 years, the levels did not return to normal.

Eskander EF et al.; Clin Biochem, 2011

  • https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22138021

  • "How does long term exposure to base stations and mobile phones affect human hormone profiles?"

  • RFR exposures significantly impacted ACTH, cortisol, thyroid hormones, prolactin for females, and testosterone levels for males.

  • ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: This study is concerned with assessing the role of exposure to radio frequency radiation (RFR) emitted either from mobiles or base stations and its relations with human’s hormone profiles.

DESIGN AND METHODS: All volunteers’ samples were collected for hormonal analysis.

RESULTS: This study showed significant decrease in volunteers’ ACTH, cortisol, thyroid hormones, prolactin for young females, and testosterone levels.

CONCLUSION: The present study revealed that high RFR effects on pituitary-adrenal axis.

Ghandi et al.; 2014 (India):

A cross-sectional case control study on genetic damage in individuals residing in the vicinity of a mobile phone base station.
• This cross-sectional case control study on genetic damage in individuals living near cell towers found genetic damage parameters of DNA were significantly elevated. The authors state.”

  • ABSTRACT

"Mobile phone base stations facilitate good communication, but the continuously emitting radiation from these stations have raised health consequences. Hence in this study, genetic damage using the single cell gel electrophoresis (comet) assay was assessed in peripheral blood leukocytes of individuals residing in the vicinity of a mobile phone base station and comparing it to that in healthy controls. The power density in the area within 300 m from the base station exceeded the permissive limits and was significantly (p = 0.000) higher compared to the area from where control samples were collected. The study participants comprised 63 persons with residences near a mobile phone tower, and 28 healthy controls matched for gender, age, alcohol drinking and occupational sub-groups. Genetic damage parameters of DNA migration length, damage frequency (DF) and damage index were significantly (p = 0.000) elevated in the sample group compared to respective values in healthy controls. The female residents (n = 25) of the sample group had significantly (p = 0.004) elevated DF than the male residents (n = 38). The linear regression analysis further revealed daily mobile phone usage, location of residence and power density as significant predictors of genetic damage. The genetic damage evident in the participants of this study needs to be addressed against future disease-risk, which in addition to neurodegenerative disorders, may lead to cancer.

Gulati S, Yadav A, Kumar N, Kanupriya, Aggarwal NK, Kumar R, Gupta R; Arch Environ Contam Toxicol., 2015

  • https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00244-015-0195-y

  • "Effect of GSTM1 and GSTT1 Polymorphisms on Genetic Damage in Humans Populations Exposed to Radiation From Mobile Towers"

  • In our study, 116 persons exposed to radiation from mobile towers and 106 control subjects were genotyped for polymorphisms in the GSTM1 and GSTT1 genes by multiplex polymerase chain reaction method. DNA damage in peripheral blood lymphocytes was determined using alkaline comet assay in terms of tail moment (TM) value and micronucleus assay in buccal cells (BMN).

  • Our results indicated that TM value and BMN frequency were higher in an exposed population compared with a control group and the difference is significant. In our study, we found that different health symptoms, such as depression, memory status, insomnia, and hair loss, were significantly associated with exposure to RF-EMR. Damaging effects of nonionizing radiation result from the generation of reactive oxygen species (ROS) and subsequent radical formation and from direct damage to cellular macromolecules including DNA.

  • ABSTRACT

"All over the world, people have been documenting associated health risks due to radiation from mobile phones and mobile towers. The carcinogenicity of this nonionizing radiation has been the greatest health hazard associated with mobile towers exposure.

The objective of our study was to evaluate the genetic damage caused by radiation from mobile towers and to find an association between genetic polymorphism of GSTM1 and GSTT1 genes and DNA damage. In our study, 116 persons exposed to radiation from mobile towers and 106 control subjects were genotyped for polymorphisms in the GSTM1 and GSTT1 genes by multiplex polymerase chain reaction method. DNA damage in peripheral blood lymphocytes was determined using alkaline comet assay in terms of tail moment (TM) value and micronucleus assay in buccal cells (BMN).

There was a significant increase in BMN frequency and TM value in exposed subjects (3.65 ± 2.44 and 6.63 ± 2.32) compared with control subjects (1.23 ± 0.97 and 0.26 ± 0.27).

Pandey N, Giri S, Toxicol Ind Health. ;34(5):315-327. doi: 10.1177/0748233718758092, 2018.

Increasing male infertility of unknown etiology can be associated with environmental factors. Extensive use of mobile phones has exposed the general population to unprecedented levels of radiofrequency radiations (RFRs) that may adversely affect male reproductive health. Therefore, the present study investigated the effect of RFR Global System for Mobile communication (GSM) type, 900 MHz and melatonin supplementation on germ cell development during spermatogenesis.

Swiss albino mice were divided into four groups. One group received RFR exposure for 3 h twice/day for 35 days and the other group received the same exposure but with melatonin ( N-acetyl-5-methoxytryptamine) (MEL; 5 mg/kg bw/day). Two other groups received only MEL or remain unexposed.

Sperm head abnormality, total sperm count, biochemical assay for lipid peroxides, reduced glutathione, superoxide dismutase activity and testis histology were evaluated. Additionally, flow cytometric evaluation of germ cell subtypes and comet assay were performed in testis.

Extensive DNA damage in germ cells of RFR-exposed animals along with arrest in pre-meiotic stages of spermatogenesis eventually leading to low sperm count and sperm head abnormalities were observed. Furthermore, biochemical assays revealed excess free radical generation resulting in histological and morphological changes in testis and germ cells morphology, respectively.

Even more studies can be found here.


March 6, 2020
   

To:
Tomás J. Aragón, MD, DrPH
Health Officer, City & County of San Francisco
Director, Population Health Division (PHD)
San Francisco Department of Public Health
101 Grove St., Rm 308, SF CA 94102

cc:
Grant Colfax grant.colfax@sfdph.org
Brent Andrew brent.andrew@sfdph.org
Patrick Fosdahl patrick.fosdahl@sfdph.org
Jennifer Callewaert jennifer.callewaert@sfdph.org
Arthur Duque arthur.duque@sfdph.org
Aaron Peskin Aaron.Peskin@sfgov.org
Sunny Angulo Sunny.Angulo@sfgov.org
Ahsha Safai Ahsha.Safai@sfgov.org
Matt Haney Matt.Haney@sfgov.org
Erica Major Erica.Major@sfgov.org
Hieu Doan hdoan@sfwater.org
SF Health Commission healthcommission.dph@sfdph.org
James Loyce, Jr., M.S., President
Dan Bernal, Vice President
Edward A. Chow M.D.
Cecilia Chung
Suzanne Giraudo, Ph.D.
Laurie Green, M.D.
Tessie Guillermo
SF Board of Appealsboardofappeals@sfgov.org
Rick Swig: President
Ann Lazarus: Vice President
Darryl Honda: Commissioner
Rachael Tanner: Commissioner
Eduardo Santacana: ​Commissioner
Julie Rosenberg julie.rosenberg@sfgov.org

Re: Request for Immediate Humanitarian Help from the SF Dept of Health for Cheryl Hogan —> San Francisco 4G/5G "Small" Cell Leads to Fast Brain Mass

I would listen carefully to the testimony at the March San Francisco Board of Appeals:

https://scientists4wiredtech.com/sanfrancisco/fail/

We are seeking answers from the SF Dept of Health this week. Cheryl Hogan (we hope) will be returning home on Mon Mar 9 and we need the Cell Tower at 3529 Sacramento Street powered off as soon as possible

Also . . . WILL SAN FRANCISCO POWER OFF ALL OF THEIR 4G/5G SO-CALLED "SMALL" CELLS OR NOT?

From the March 4, 2020 San Francisco Board of Appeals Meeting.

"As we prepare for caronavirus/COVID-19 community spread, cities can make choices, too. With over 12,000 studies of established science, concluding that pulsed, data-modulated, Radio-frequency Electromagnetic Microwave Radiation (RF-EMR) blocks melatonin production and causes immuno-suppression, WILL SAN FRANCISCO POWER OFF ALL OF THEIR 4G/5G SO-CALLED "SMALL" CELLS OR NOT?"

March 4, 2020 Testimony From Attorney Gary Widman

TO: SAN FRANCISCO BOARD OF APPEALS

Board Members –

I attest and affirm that the following statements are true, accurate within my own personal knowledge.

I speak to you tonight as a friend of Ms. Cheryl Hogan, not as her retained attorney. However, to acquaint you with my background — I served as General Counsel of the Council on Environmental Quality in the White House under Presidents Nixon and Ford. I also served as Associate Solicitor of the Department of the Interior appointed by President Carter, and as the Director of the Office of Staff Attorneys at the US Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Among other tasks, I also taught Environment Law in all the "local" UC Law Schools; Hastings in San Francisco, U.C. Berkeley and Davis.

Last fall you rejected Ms. Hogan’s appeal asking rejection of a "small wireless facility" that was later installed just 12 feet from her window at 3535 Sacramento St. She provided you with a binder of peer-reviewed scientific evidence that was compiled by SF-DPH Director Dr. Aragon’s "other boss" Dr. Joel Moskowitz at UC Berkeley (where Dr. Aragon teaches). I understand that you referred that binder to Dr. Aragon for comment, but for whatever reason, now, eight months later, neither the Board nor the public has received Dr. Aragon’s evaluations of these scientific studies. (Back to the binder below.)

Shortly after installation of the WTF on or about Nov. 20, 2019, Ms. Hogan became ill and was diagnosed with a fast-growing brain tumor, a glioblastoma. That is the same type of tumor that killed Ted Kennedy, John McCain and Joe Biden’s son Beau. Ms. Hogan underwent surgery on Monday, March 2. As I write this on March 3, she is still in the Intensive Care Unit of the CPMC Van Ness hospital. We have our fingers crossed.

My first request is that for the love of God, please provide some humanitarian help here! Please turn off the power to that facility immediately so that Ms. Hogan can recover from this devastating experience in her own home.

Second, we request that you remove this WTF entirely, as you now know that it is almost certain to promote growth of her brain cancer.

We know that one cannot argue with 100% certainty that her cancer was caused by this installation. On the other hand, probabilities are that for woman of her age, with no family or personal history of brain cancer, when diagnosed with a fast growing gliobastoma growing within three months of a WTF installation a few yards from her home, it is highly unlikely she contracted that cancer from any other source.

The information in the binder presented to you in June, 2019 is evidence that in 2011, WHO’s International Agency for Research on Cancer classified RF-EMR exposures from any source as a Group 2B possible carcinogen and is poised to soon reclassify RF-EMR exposures from any source to be a Group 1 definite human carcinogen — based on results in 2018-2019 from peer-reviewed animal studies by the US Govt. National Toxicology program, the Ramazzini Institute in Italy and the on-going work by Lennart Hardell in Sweden. That knowledge by itself — shared with the SF Board of Appeals back in June 2019 — (especially in light of SF’s ordinances requiring proof of safety before permitting exposure to potential sources of cancer) would have justified your halting approval WTFs in the public rights-of-way at once.

In addition, that black binder included peer-reviewed science establishing that RF Electromagnetic Microwave Radiation at levels hundreds of thousands of times lower than the 1996 FCC exposure guidelines causes a multitude of adverse health effects, including melatonin-suppression, immune-suppression, and neurological damage, as well as speeding the growth of cancerous tumors. That information should have guided your decision.

We ask for your humanitarian help for a woman who appears to have contracted brain cancer from microwave radiation from a small wireless facility installed pursuant to a decision of this Board. We ask your help in order to make her home safe for her to return to.

Finally we ask that you recognize the real life health effects of all the WTFS you have approved and will consider in the future. Ms. Hogan’s cancer shows you that these health effects are very real and that your decisions could have life or death effects on the citizens of San Francisco.

(I express these matters based on facts and law, and not out of a mere feeling for the consequences in this particular case.)

If you and your counsel would like to consider these matters of fact and/or law in the future, please call on me at any time.

Thank you.


March 9, 2020

Jeremy Spitz jeremy.spitz@sfdpw.org
Office of Director of Public Works
City Hall, room 348
San Francisco, CA

cc:
Aaron Pesksin
Sunny Angulo
Erica Major
Mark Torres

Re: Immediate Disclosure Request

Dear Mr. Spitz and Mr. Steinberg,

[Ms. Erica Major, will you please add this email to the San Francisco Public Record for Ordinance 190-19, which made changes to SF-DPW Article 25? Thank you for doing so].

Mr. Spitz, I got your name and number from Erica Major; she told me that you were the key legislative contact for SF-DPW. You and I just finished our call. Thank you for sharing your contact at the SF-PUC

Barbara Hale is the Assistant General Manager of the SF-PUC’s Power Enterprise, San Francisco’s Municipal Power Utility, with an operating budget of $150 million/year and capital budget of about $25 million/year. Ms. Hale oversees all aspects of the sales of 1.6 billion kWh/yr to retail and wholesale customers; needed purchases of energy, transmission and distribution services; development and implementation of energy efficiency and renewable generation projects and programs; and maintenance and operation of City-owned and located streetlights, switch gear and substations. Ms. Hale provides strategic advice on energy policy matters to the SF-PUC Commission. She also acts as liaison for the SF-PUC with State and Federal agencies responsible for energy policy. Prior to her employment with SF-PUC, Ms. Hale worked for the State of California PUC in progressively responsible positions, including Advisor to the President, Administrative Law Judge, and Director of Strategic Planning.

I also heard from the Communications Dept. of the SF-PUC that Mark Torres, copied on this email, is in charge of the installation of Wireless Telecommunications Facilities (WTFs) on the metal and concrete light poles throughout the City of San Francisco. In round %’s, it appears that the whole universe of poles in the SF public rights-of-way are comprised of wooden utility poles owned by PG&E (40%) metal and concrete light poles owned by SF-PUC (55%) and various metal and concreted traffic poles owned by the MTA (5%). Mark will you please call me so we can discuss the current SF-PUC process for accepting and approving application for so-called "small" Wireless Telecommunications Facilities (WTFs) in the public rights-of-way?

Our interest is in finding out what is the current trajectory for the repeal of Ordinance 190-19, which made changes to SF-DPW Article 25.

Thank you for pointing out the following:

  • Suggested changes to Article 25 to align it with Aug 2018 FCC Order 18-111 (No Moratoria/One Touch-Make-Ready) and the Sept 2018 FCC Order 18-133 (Small Cell Streamlining Order) came from Bill Sanders, after the Wireless industry approached him in around April 15, 2019, when FCC Order 18-133 became fully effective.
  • You said that you took changes suggested by Mr. Sanders and created Ordinance 190-19 and that you introduced it around May 24, 2019
  • The discussion of the Ordinance 190-19 can be found in a recording of the July 15, 2019 hearing of the Land Use and Transportation Committee here –> for only ten minutes! from 1:16:30 to 1:26:30 (presented by Deborah Letsky-sp?) and exactly one public comment — including some late-breaking clerical(?) amendments, allegedly from Bill Sanders

I understand that during the Dec 16, 2019 hearing of the Land Use and Transportation committee, all actions on 190-19 were continued due to the absence of City Attorney Bill Sanders.

Here are some questions, Mark

  1. What are the next steps with proposed repeal of Oridinance 190-19?
  2. Will there be another hearing?
  3. Why are installations of so-called "Small" Wireless Telecommunications Facilities (WTFs) continuing across San Francisco without proper NEPA review?
  4. Separately, how can we make quick progress on powering off the sWTF at 3329 Sacramento St. Permit No. No.: 18WR-0171 (https://scientists4wiredtech.com/sanfrancisco/sf-appeal-18wr-0171/) so Cheryl Lea Hogan can return to her home and heal without excessive transmissions of Effective Radiated Power being transmitted into her home. –> https://scientists4wiredtech.com/sanfrancisco/fail/

I am requesting of David Steinberg, the agendas and links to audio recordings of all SF-DPW public meetings from Jan 1, 2019 through Dec 31, 2019.

Immediate Disclosure Record Request FOR PUBLIC RECORDS

From https://sfgov.org/sunshine/public-records-request-form

To facilitate the effort to inspect, copy and acquire documents pursuant to the California Public Records Act, Government Code Section 6250, and the San Francisco Sunshine Ordinance, San Francisco Administrative Code Section 67.1, the Sunshine Ordinance Task Force recommends that

  • The requester and the department treat each other with respect and politeness
  • The requester specify a time they are available to review the public records
  • The requester indicate if the request is an Immediate Disclosure Request (within 24 hours)

The cost for copies is 10 cents per page (20 cents per page for two-side copies), except for mass-produced records for agenda items for policy body meetings. Postage costs are additional.

I want links to digital files: agenda.pdf, audio.mp3 and/or video.mp4 files

PLEASE SEND REQUESTS FOR PUBLIC DOCUMENTS TO THE RESPONSIBLE DEPARTMENT. DO NOT SEND REQUESTS TO THE SUNSHINE ORDINANCE TASK FORCE.

PUBLIC RECORDS REQUEST FORM

To: Custodian of Records

Date: March 9, 2020

Department: SF-DPW

Subject or Item Requested:

I am requesting of David Steinberg, the agendas and links to audio recordings of all SF-DPW public meetings from Jan 1, 2019 through Dec 31, 2019.

List of recordings from 7/3/19 to 12/11/19:

https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLmbPcbo6wr_JlnKCEJwW1CgFiX70SltFJ

I can find no agendas archived for these meetings anywhere on http://sfpublicworks.org/ or

Please call me at the above phone number and email me when the records are ready for viewing.

Do not make copies on my behalf. I will review the documents first and then indicate those documents I wish copied. I can review them tomorrow afternoon on March 10, 2020 at 1:00 pm.

Immediate Disclosure Requests: (Requests satisfied no later than the close of business on the day following the day of the request.) This deadline shall apply only if the words "Immediate Disclosure Request" are placed across the top of the request and on the envelope, subject line, or cover sheet in which the request is transmitted.

Thank you.


Date: March 11, 2020

To:
Barbara Hale blhale@sfwater.org
Erica Major erica.major@sfgov.org
Mark Torres (PUC) MJTorres@sfwater.org

cc:
Spitz, Jeremy (DPW) eremy.Spitz@sfdpw.org
Peskin, Aaron (BOS) aaron.peskin@sfgov.org
Angulo, Sunny (BOS) sunny.angulo@sfgov.org
Somera, Alisa (BOS) alisa.somera@sfgov.org
Kate Long klong@sfwater.org

Re: Powering off the Wireless Telecommunications Facility (sWTF) at 3329 Sacramento St., Permit No.: 18WR-0171

 

Dear Ms. Hale, Mr. Torres and Ms. Major,

[Ms. Erica Major, will you please add this email to the San Francisco Public Record for Ordinance 190-19, which made changes to SF-DPW Article 25? Thank you for doing so].

I believe you are misinformed, Erica. We need to talk to Mr. Torres and Ms. Hale at the SF-PUC as soon as possible.

>>> Major, Erica (BOS) wrote on 3/11/2020 10:39 AM:

Greetings,

Thank you for your email. This matter has been heard and enacted and is no longer an active file. Your comments will be made part of our communication page on the upcoming Board agenda.

ERICA MAJOR
Assistant Clerk
Board of Supervisors
1 Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett Place, City Hall, Room 244 San Francisco, CA 94102
Phone: (415) 554-4441
Erica.Major@sfgov.org | www.sfbos.org

Most importantly, Erica, you did not address: how can we make quick progress on powering off the sWTF at 3329 Sacramento St. Permit No. No.: 18WR-0171 (https://scientists4wiredtech.com/sanfrancisco/sf-appeal-18wr-0171/) so Cheryl Lea Hogan can return to her home and heal without excessive transmissions of Effective Radiated Power being transmitted into her home. —> https://scientists4wiredtech.com/sanfrancisco/fail/

The implementation of Ordinance 190-19 is not complete. It was continued on Dec 16, 2019.

We are entering substantial written evidence into the public record tomorrow that the City of San Francisco and the SF-PUC knowingly violated Federal law (National Environmental Policy Act) by powering on the Wireless Telecommunications Facilities (WTFs) in front of 3535 Sacramento St. on Nov 20, 2019.

What written evidence can you email to me today to substantiate your statement that "This matter [the implementation of Ordinance 190-19] has been heard and enacted and is no longer an active file."

Please provide such written evidence today, if possible. In the absence of any written evidence, I can only treat this matter as an active file, because Ordinance 190-19 deserves to be repealed as it is not consistent with the legislative intent 1996 Telecommunications Act, per United States Supreme Court (2005) CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES et al. v. ABRAMS (2005) and the 1996 TCA Conference Report. See the evidence, below:

1. From https://scientists4wiredtech.com/compare:*

This page is one of three legs of the stool that establishes local control over the operations of Wireless Telecommunications Facilities (WTFs); the other two are the US House/Senate Conference Report for the 1996 Telecommunications Act ("1996-Act") and the stated purpose of the 1996-Act: to promote the safety of life and property.

2. Justice Breyer, with whom Justice O’Connor, Justice Souter and Justice Ginsburg join, concurring.

Congress initially considered a single national solution, namely a Federal Communications Commission wireless tower siting policy that would pre-empt state and local authority. Ibid.; see also H. R. Conf. Rep. No. 104-458, p. 207 (1996). But Congress ultimately rejected the national approach and substituted a system based on cooperative federalism. Id., at 207-208. — S4WT: View this Conference Report for the 1996 Telecommunications Act.

State and local authorities would remain free to make siting decisions They would do so, however, subject to minimum federal standards [just "placement, construction and modification of personal wireless facilities" — both substantive and procedural — as well as federal judicial review.

3. 1996 TCA Conference Report:

  • will provide localities with the flexibility to treat facilities that create different visual, aesthetic, or safety concerns differently to the extent permitted under generally applicable zoning requirements even if those facilities provide functionally equivalent services. For example, the conferees do not intend that if a State or local government grants a permit in a commercial district, it must also grant a permit for a competitor’s 50-foot tower in a residential district.

. . .

  • Under subsection (c)(7)(B)(ii), decisions are to be rendered in a reasonable period of time, taking into account the nature and scope of each request. If a request for placement of a personal wireless service facility involves a zoning variance or a public hearing or comment process, the time period for rendering a decision will be the usual period under such circumstances. It is not the intent of this provision to give preferential treatment to the personal wireless service industry in the processing of requests, or to subject their requests to any but the generally applicable time frames for zoning decision.’

March 12, 2020

To: SF-PUC Management

Barbara Hale bhale@sfwater.org

Richard Stephens rstephens@sfwater.org

Ramone Abeug rabeug@sfwater.org

Hieu Doan hdoan@sfwater.org

Mark Torres mjtorres@sfwater.org

To: SF BOS Supervisors

Aaron Peskin (BOS) aaron.peskin@sfgov.org

Sunny Angulo (BOS) sunny.angulo@sfgov.org

Erica Major Erica.Major@sfgov.org

To: SF-DPH

Dr. Grant Colfax grant.colfax@sfdph.org

Dr. Tomas Aragon, (DPH) tomas.aragon@sfdph.org
 

Dear Ms. Hale et al.

[Ms. Erica Major, will you please add this email to the San Francisco Public record, attached to the open (continued) matter of Land Use and Transportation Committee’s 12/16/19 Hearing re: the Repeal of Ordinance 190-19 and additional changes to SF-DPW Article 25? Thank you for doing so.]

We need immediate assistance. It has been four days since I have been calling you, Ms. Hale. I have heard nothing back from you at all.

I had my first conversation with Mr. Mark Torres today (after 7 unanswered emails/voicemails) and learned the following:

The proposed locations for each carrier’s Wireless Facilities are identified in Appendix B to each of the Executive Directives.

  • SF-PUC Executive Directive – AT&T
  • SF-PUC Executive Directive – Verizon
  • There are approximately 30 current active applications and over 300 locations targeted for 2020
  • Mr. Torres was unwilling to commit to a date/time when I could review these applications for completeness; he had to check with his Management first

. . . so what public communication will there be about the specifics of these installations, including the antenna details (manufacturer, model number, power consumption):

  • Vertical: antenna(s) installed at how many feet off the ground
  • Horizontal: antenna(s) installed how many feet from where people live, sleep and heal
  • Power: maximum Effective Radiated Power (ERP) in Watts able to exit the antenna shroud/covering

Has each of these applications completed NEPA review, as required by the FCC?

Feb 28, 2020 Conversation with FCC NEPA Attorney, Erica Rosenberg

  • At 0:25 –> Erica Rosenberg: "All Wireless Telecommunication Facilities applications need a NEPA review. That is correct."
  • At 1:00 –> Erica Rosenberg: "If one of those circumstances are met, then an Environmental Assessment is triggered. In other words, if the RF is above our limits, they need to do an Environmental Assessment.
  • At 6:00 –> Erica Rosenberg: "[When] it triggers an Environmental Assessment, that gets public review and notice and also people can file complaints and sometimes we can order more environmental processing."
  • At 7:00 –> Erica Rosenberg: "If they file an EA, they do need to register the facility, file the EA and we see it.
  • At 7:00 –> Caller: "So really it is up to the people to keep an eye on these things and see if they actually, in fact do meet the NEPA [review standards]."
  • At 7:18 –> Erica Rosenberg: "Yes."
  • At 7:40 –> Erica Rosenberg: "Also there’s another thing that you raised that we actually haven’t addressed it yet. It’s the one about the facilities that got installed without a NEPA review. We just haven’t addressed this."
  • At 7:55 –> Caller: "So you [the FCC] haven’t figured out what you are going to do in that case."
  • At 8:08 –> Erica Rosenberg: "Yes."

Most importantly, how can we make quick progress on powering off the sWTF at 3329 Sacramento St. Permit No. No.: 18WR-0171? (https://scientists4wiredtech.com/sanfrancisco/sf-appeal-18wr-0171/) so Cheryl Lea Hogan can return to her home and heal without excessive transmissions of Effective Radiated Power being transmitted into her home. –> https://scientists4wiredtech.com/sanfrancisco/fail/

On 11/20/19, I informed both Hieu Doan and the SF Board of Appeals that every single WTF requires NEPA review. Did the sWTF at 3329 Sacramento St. Permit No.: 18WR-0171 have substantial written evidence of NEPA review before the SF-PUC powered it on? If not, the SF-PUC will need to power this sWTF off.

The San Francisco City Attorney’s opinion on this matter is immaterial. This is a Federal matter between the FCC and the applicant. San Francisco and the SF-PUC must follow all Federal laws. Talk to the FCC, if you have any questions.

We need a timely response. Four days and counting . . .


March 13, 2020

To: SF-PUC Management

Barbara Hale bhale@sfwater.org
Richard Stephens :rstephens@sfwater.org
Ramone Abeug rabeug@sfwater.org
Hieu Doan hdoan@sfwater.org
Mark Torres mjtorres@sfwater.org

To: SF Supervisor

Aaron Peskin (BOS) aaron.peskin@sfgov.org
Sunny Angulo (BOS) sunny.angulo@sfgov.org
Erica Major Erica.Major@sfgov.org

To: SF-DPH

Dr. Grant Colfax grant.colfax@sfdph.org
Dr. Tomas Aragon, (DPH) tomas.aragon@sfdph.org

Re: We Need An Immediate Response from the SF-PUC and the SF-DPH

Dear Ms. Hale et al.

[Ms. Erica Major, will you please add this email to the San Francisco Public record, attached to the open (continued) matter of Land Use and Transportation Committee’s 12/16/19 Hearing re: the Repeal of Ordinance 190-19 and additional changes to SF-DPW Article 25? Thank you for doing so.]

At around 9:00 am this morning, I had a short phone conversation with Dr. Tomas Aragon. I asked him if he had reported the endangering condition that we asked him to report on October 22, 2020, described at the October 22, 2019 San Francisco Board of Supervisors meeting. This request of a mandated reporter of child endangerment has been in the public record for nearly five months.

http://mystreetmychoice.com/sanfrancisco.html

See video embedded on this page for Oct 22, 2019 San Francisco Board of Supervisors Meeting at 3:33:50 and at 4:58:05

Listen to radio program from Mar 2, 2020 here —> http://mystreetmychoice.com/audio/2020-0302-Romine-Radio-Interview-01.mp3

Dr. Aragon told me today over the phone that he had not done so. I was in the midst of asking him if he would recommend Immediately powering off all so-called "Small" Wireless Telecommunications Facilities (sWTFs) that have been installed in the public rights-of-way in San Francisco, when he hung up the phone without answering the question.

Over 400 such Wireless Telecommunications Facilities (WTFs) have been constructed between 2015 and 2020, WTFS that output 1,500 to 7,000+ Watts of Effective Radiated Power (ERP) — 24/7 day and night, week-after-week — suppressing the immune systems of all, living nearby.

"As we prepare for caronavirus/COVID-19 community spread, cities can make choices, too. With over 12,000 studies of established science, concluding that pulsed, data-modulated, Radio-frequency Electromagnetic Microwave Radiation (RF-EMR) blocks melatonin production and causes immuno-suppression, WILL SAN FRANCISCO POWER OFF ALL OF THEIR 4G/5G SO-CALLED "SMALL" CELLS OR NOT?"

Here is additional data from two other communities in the US, further establishing the disaster created by insufficiently-regulated Effective Radiated Power from Wireless Telecommunications Facilities (WTFs):

It is All About Limiting Effective Radiated Power From WTF Antennas

A 4G Kathrein 840-10511 Dual Omni Antenna Band 698-894 | 1710-2180

From https://www.kathreinusa.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/84010515.pdf

Frequencies Max. input power (at 122 °F) Antennna Gain (dbi) Equation Total Watts ERP
698–806 MHz 250 Watts 10.4 dBi 250 × 10.4 = 2,132 Watts ERP
806–894 MHz 250 Watts 11.6 dBi 250 × 11.6 = 2,900 Watts ERP
1710–1880 MHz 200 Watts 13.5 dBi 200 × 13.5 = 2,700 Watts ERP
1850–1990 MHz 200 Watts 13.5 dBi 200 × 13.5 = 2,700 Watts ERP
1920–2180 MHz 200 Watts 13.2 dBi 200 × 13.2 = 2,640 Watts ERP
Total ERP 13,032 Watts ERP

Conclusion: This antenna outputs Macro Tower maximum Effective Radiated Power levels . . . a fact already admitted by professional engineer Lee Afflerbach in the public record in Sonoma CA on Sept 12, 2019:

"The [antennas and] radios of [these small cells] are the exact same that are up on the macro towers. It’s not a different technology . . . the same as on macro towers. I see them all the time."

This is Why is Regulating Effective Radiated Power is So Important

5 Years in Glencoe, IL: The Wireless Telecommunications Facilities (WTF) has a Kathrein Model #840 10515 Omni Directional Dual Band 700/2000 MHz Antenna mounted on top of a ComEd wooden utility pole located adjacent to 340 Randolph, Glencoe, IL 60022.

Wireless Telecommunications Facilities (WTF) Installation

  • This WTF is owned by AT&T Mobility.
  • Permit applied for 5/26/2015 and approved 6/25/2015 with the handwritten comments "Install AT&T equipment on ex-ComEd pole. Location does not meet 100′ spacing to residential properties but location is acceptable alternative."
  • The WTF was installed . . .

    • 20 feet from a home
    • 50 feet from a home
    • 50 feet from a tennis courts
    • 30 feet from an elementary school payground
    • 100 feet from an ice rink

Negative Health Consequences in Glencoe, IL, similar to the outcomes in Seabastopol, CA —> http://scientists4wiredtech.com/sebastopol#death

We have a real problem here, folks. This demands an immeidate response, as we are preparing San Francisco and other communities for COVID-19 community spread.

Ms. Hale, we need a timely response. It has been five days since I have been calling you. I have heard nothing back from you at all.

Five days and counting . . .


March 16, 2020

To: SF-PUC Management
Barbara Hale bhale@sfwater.org
Richard Stephens rstephens@sfwater.org
Ramone Abeug rabeug@sfwater.org
Hieu Doan hdoan@sfwater.org
Mark Torres mjtorres@sfwater.org

To: SF Supervisor
Aaron Peskin (BOS) aaron.peskin@sfgov.org
Sunny Angulo (BOS) sunny.angulo@sfgov.org
Erica Major Erica.Major@sfgov.org

To: SF-DPH
Dr. Grant Colfax grant.colfax@sfdph.org
Dr. Tomas Aragon, (DPH) tomas.aragon@sfdph.org

Re: We Need An Immediate Response from the SF-PUC and the SF-DPH, Day 2 (really day 7)

[Ms. Erica Major, will you please add this email to the San Francisco Public record, attached to the open (continued) matter of Land Use and Transportation Committee’s 12/16/19 Hearing re: the Repeal of Ordinance 190-19 and additional changes to SF-DPW Article 25? Thank you for doing so.]

As we face community spread of COVID-19 across the country, I am not certain which government offices will be open today, but I am writing to enter the following substantial written evidence into the public record of the City and County of San Francisco.

Much of the email chain (from me to all of you) is now open for the public to read (it is already in the public record)

I am guessing that I will not be hearing from anyone from the City and County of San Francisco today (though I am open to being pleasantly surprised by a return call) because the COVID-19 flood messaging has achieved compliance from many governors and people over the weekend.

. . . yet, I am still considering my following requests both timely and important.

  1. When will the SF-PUC and SF-DPH decide to reduce the endangering conditions (melatonin suppression and immuno-suppression) being created by the powering on of so-called "small" Wireless Telecommunications Facilities (WTFs) with insufficient maximum power output regulation — they are actually MACRO TOWERS, once one considers . . .

    • the maximum Effective Radiated Power (ERP) of the antennas

    • the lack of regulation of the power input and

    • Federal legislation enabling upgrades of antenna and radios without public review/due process.

    • Please watch Resonance: Beings of Frequency –> https://youtu.be/9mK93gHFWXs?t=4045

  2. The following comments were entered into the City of Sonoma Public record on 9/12/19, by a Professional RF Engineer hired by many cities to advise them (Monterey, Sonoma and Napa come to mind):

    • Lee Afflerbach from CTC Technology and Energy states at 3:10:24 in the video —> https://youtu.be/HRYFXx7oNN4?t=3h10m24s

      “many people are [wirelessly] streaming video and other services like that . . . each [small] cell is capable of almost putting out the same energy as one macro cell.”

    • Lee Afflerbach from CTC Technology and Energy states at 3:13:22 in the video —> https://youtu.be/HRYFXx7oNN4?t=3h13m22s

      ". . . my staff has probably reviewed several hundred of these small cells in the last year . . . and they are all 4G . . . The radios that they are using are the exact same radios that are up on the macro towers. It’s not a different technology . . . the same boxes as on macro towers. I see them all the time.”

Here is an antenna from AT&T’s stable of so-called "small" Wireless Telecommunications Facility (sWTF) Antennas:

AT&T’s 4G Kathrein 840-10511 Dual Omni Antenna Band 698-894 | 1710-2180

From https://www.kathreinusa.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/84010515.pdf

Frequencies Max. input
power (at 122 °F)
Antennna
Gain (dbi)
Equation Total Watts
ERP
698–806 MHz 250 Watts 10.4 dBi 250 × 10.4 = 2,132 Watts ERP
806–894 MHz 250 Watts 11.6 dBi 250 × 11.6 = 2,900 Watts ERP
1710–1880 MHz 200 Watts 13.5 dBi 200 × 13.5 = 2,700 Watts ERP
1850–1990 MHz 200 Watts 13.5 dBi 200 × 13.5 = 2,700 Watts ERP
1920–2180 MHz 200 Watts 13.2 dBi 200 × 13.2 = 2,640 Watts ERP
Total ERP 13,032 Watts ERP

Verizon often uses antennas like the following

https://scientists4wiredtech.com/santarosa/cell-tower-specs/

  • For both antennas, the input power is (2 connectors × 500 W) + (4 connectors x 300 W) = 2,200 Watts, but the antenna gains are different between the 48 in. and 24 in. antennas.

  • Note: From Kevin Hietpas, Amphenol Product Support (815-381-7817), a 3 dBi antenna gain difference means double the power output and twice the transmission distance.

Verizon’s Amphenol CUUT360X12: Antenna gain (48" tall)

  • 696-806 MHz: 500 Watts x 8.6 dBi antenna gain = 4,300 Watts ERP
  • 806-960 MHz: 500 Watts x 9.1 dBi antenna gain = 4,550 Watts ERP
  • 1695-1880 MHz: 300 Watts x 12.0 dBi antenna gain = 3,600 Watts ERP
  • 1850-1990 MHz: 300 Watts x 12.0 dBi antenna gain = 3,510 Watts ERP
  • 1920-2200 MHz: 300 Watts x 10.9 dBi antenna gain = 3,270 Watts ERP
  • 2300-2700 MHz: 300 Watts x 10.1 dBi dBi antenna gain = 3,030 Watts ERP
  • TOTAL Max Effective Radiated Power = 22,260 Watts ERP

Verizon’s Amphenol CUUT360X06 Antenna gain (24" tall)

  • 696-806 MHz: 500 Watts x 6.3 dBi antenna gain = 3,150 Watts ERP
  • 806-960 MHz: 500 Watts x 5.6 dBi antenna gain = 2,800 Watts ERP
  • 1695-1880 MHz: 300 Watts x 9.2 dBi antenna gain = 2,760 Watts ERP
  • 1850-1990 MHz: 300 Watts x 9.3 dBi antenna gain = 2,790 Watts ERP
  • 1920-2200 MHz: 300 Watts x 9.5 dBi antenna gain = 2,850 Watts ERP
  • 2300-2700 MHz: 300 Watts x 9.6 dBi dBi antenna gain = 2,880 Watts ERP
  • TOTAL Max Effective Radiated Power = 17,230 Watts ERP

Conclusion: these Macro-Tower class antennas are wholly inappropriate when installed 6 to 12 feet from 2nd-story and 3rd-story windows.

7 days and counting . . . no response, yet.


March 17, 2020
 

To: SF-PUC Management

Barbara Hale bhale@sfwater.org
Richard Stephens rstephens@sfwater.org
Ramone Abueg abeug@sfwater.org
Hieu Doan hdoan@sfwater.org
Mark Torres mjtorres@sfwater.org

To: SF Supervisor
Aaron Peskin (BOS) aaron.peskin@sfgov.org
Sunny Angulo (BOS) sunny.angulo@sfgov.org
Erica Major Erica.Major@sfgov.org

To: SF-DPH
Dr. Grant Colfax grant.colfax@sfdph.org
Dr. Tomas Aragon, tomas.aragon@sfdph.org

cc:
Cheryl Hogan clhogan3@gmail.com
Ron Rattner ronrattner@gmail.com
Michael LeVesque michael@rayguardprotect.com
Gary Widman gwidman@mindspring.com

 

Re: We Need An Immediate Response from the SF-PUC and the SF-DPH, Day 3 (really day 8) –> Sacramento Teacher Dies of Coronavirus — Tip of the Iceberg

 

Dear Ms. Hale et al.

 
[Ms. Erica Major, will you please add this email to the San Francisco Public record, attached to the open (continued) matter of Land Use and Transportation Committee’s 12/16/19 Hearing re: the Repeal of Ordinance 190-19 and additional changes to SF-DPW Article 25? Thank you for doing so.]

This is the most unusual St. Patrick’s Day I have experienced. I hope all is well for you and your families.

Now, we need to know . . . are you all, and each individually, going to be sitting on your hands and just silently allow San Franciscans to unnecessarily die because you are too timid to take action?

Really?

We are all watching, documenting and building up a large pile of disgust bewilderment re: your willful ignorance and inaction. Have you read the emails here –> https://scientists4wiredtech.com/covid19/#fail . . . by now, Ms. Hale? Will you please call me asap? You have my tel. Thank you.

Will you please take action tomorrow to power off the sWTF in front of 3529 Sacrarmento Street Permit number Application No.: 18WR-0171 –> https://scientists4wiredtech.com/sanfrancisco/sf-appeal-18wr-0171/ by heeding Attorney Widman’s words from Mar 4, 2020 (quoted below): "My first request is that for the love of God, please provide some humanitarian help here!"

Doing so will convince you how easy it is to use the "Shut off" switch that is on every one of these misleadingly branded so-called "Small" Wireless Telecommunications Facilities (sWTFs) –> https://scientists4wiredtech.com/testimony/

We all know that the San Francisco Dept. of Health (SF-DPH) and the SF-PUC can take immediate action to stop the melatonin suppression and immuno-suppression of the San Francisco population caused by unnecessary, insufficiently regulated, forced exposures to hazardous, pulsed, data-modulated, Radio-frequency Electromagnetic Microwave Radiation (RF-EMR) for strictly frivolous entertainment purposes.

These sWTFs are unnecessary, ancillary and frivolous sources of entertainment; they are not needed for making emergency calls — we could already do that in San Francisco — without any of these sWTFs.

Learn more here:

And will you please then take action the next day to power off all of the other 400+ or so so-called "Small" Wireless Telecommunications Facilities (sWTFs) throughout the City and County of San Francisco, for the very same reasons?

Here is some very recent data from Sacramento.

Is hiding an effective strategy, Ms. Hale?

No one can lie to one’s biology or bend the laws of physics. No amount of "spin" from any industry representative, SF-PUC executive, SF-DPH executive or SF city attorney can alter the facts of established science —> http://mystreetmychoice.com/slt/#/22 et seq.

This is falling on each of your desks right now.

The $64 Billion question is what will you do and when?

Every day of delay could cost many lives . . . you are being fully and publicly warned — for all to read and comprehend.

From https://scientists4wiredtech.com/2020/03/sacramento-teacher-died-of-coronavirus/

Sacramento Teacher Dies of Coronavirus

From a resident in Sacramento . . .

"March 17, 2020

Hello City Council and County health officials,

The woman who died went to my church and lives in my neighborhood.

I am following up on my last email about the negative effects of RF radiation on the human immune system. Today the Bee released an article about a cluster of cases at my neighborhood church. https://www.sacbee.com/news/coronavirus/article241257951.html

The article states:

“The concentration of confirmed coronavirus cases appears to be the largest in a single location in the Sacramento region since the crisis began in late February,”

Do you really think it just coincidence that the largest cluster in Sacramento just happens to be in Sacramento’s 5G pilot area??? Another coincidence that Wuhan happened to be one of China’s 5G pilot areas??? Milan, capital of Lombardy, is another 5G pilot area . . .

I am not arguing that 5G is “causing” Covid-19. I am arguing that people living near small cells will have a lowered immune response and thus more infections and more severe infections. I have been trying to warn you about this issue for over a year and you simply have not taken the issue seriously. Now your constituents are paying the price. Shame on you all."

From the Sacramento Bee: The woman was member of church with at least 4 other cases

By Sam Stanton, Sawsan Morrar, and Phillip Reese , Mar 17, 2020 | Original Sacramento Bee article here.

The Sacramento substitute teacher who died from coronavirus Sunday had been active in a church in Greenhaven that now reports five church members have tested positive for the COVID-19 disease and that others are awaiting test results.

The concentration of confirmed coronavirus cases appears to be the largest in a single location in the Sacramento region since the crisis began in late February, when U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention officials announced the first case of unknown origin in the United States was a Solano County resident being treated at UC Davis Medical Center . . .


March 4, 2020 Testimony From Attorney Gary Widman

TO: SAN FRANCISCO BOARD OF APPEALS

Board Members –

I attest and affirm that the following statements are true, accurate within my own personal knowledge.

I speak to you tonight as a friend of Ms. Cheryl Hogan, not as her retained attorney. However, to acquaint you with my background — I served as General Counsel of the Council on Environmental Quality in the White House under Presidents Nixon and Ford. I also served as Associate Solicitor of the Department of the Interior appointed by President Carter, and as the Director of the Office of Staff Attorneys at the US Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Among other tasks, I also taught Environment Law in all the “local” UC Law Schools; Hastings in San Francisco, U.C. Berkeley and Davis.

Last fall you rejected Ms. Hogan’s appeal asking rejection of a “small wireless facility” that was later installed just 12 feet from her window at 3535 Sacramento St. She provided you with a binder of peer-reviewed scientific evidence that was compiled by SF-DPH Director Dr. Aragon’s “other boss” Dr. Joel Moskowitz at UC Berkeley (where Dr. Aragon teaches). I understand that you referred that binder to Dr. Aragon for comment, but for whatever reason, now, eight months later, neither the Board nor the public has received Dr. Aragon’s evaluations of these scientific studies. (Back to the binder below.)

Shortly after installation of the WTF on or about Nov. 20, 2019, Ms. Hogan became ill and was diagnosed with a fast-growing brain tumor, a glioblastoma. That is the same type of tumor that killed Ted Kennedy, John McCain and Joe Biden’s son Beau. Ms. Hogan underwent surgery on Monday, March 2. As I write this on March 3, she is still in the Intensive Care Unit of the CPMC Van Ness hospital. We have our fingers crossed.

My first request is that for the love of God, please provide some humanitarian help here! Please turn off the power to that facility immediately so that Ms. Hogan can recover from this devastating experience in her own home.

Second, we request that you remove this WTF entirely, as you now know that it is almost certain to promote growth of her brain cancer.

We know that one cannot argue with 100% certainty that her cancer was caused by this installation. On the other hand, probabilities are that for woman of her age, with no family or personal history of brain cancer, when diagnosed with a fast growing gliobastoma growing within three months of a WTF installation a few yards from her home, it is highly unlikely she contracted that cancer from any other source.

The information in the binder presented to you in June, 2019 is evidence that in 2011, WHO’s International Agency for Research on Cancer classified RF-EMR exposures from any source as a Group 2B possible carcinogen and is poised to soon reclassify RF-EMR exposures from any source to be a Group 1 definite human carcinogen — based on results in 2018-2019 from peer-reviewed animal studies by the US Govt. National Toxicology program, the Ramazzini Institute in Italy and the on-going work by Lennart Hardell in Sweden. That knowledge by itself — shared with the SF Board of Appeals back in June 2019 — (especially in light of SF’s ordinances requiring proof of safety before permitting exposure to potential sources of cancer) would have justified your halting approval WTFs in the public rights-of-way at once.

In addition, that black binder included peer-reviewed science establishing that RF Electromagnetic Microwave Radiation at levels hundreds of thousands of times lower than the 1996 FCC exposure guidelines causes a multitude of adverse health effects, including melatonin-suppression, immune-suppression, and neurological damage, as well as speeding the growth of cancerous tumors. That information should have guided your decision.

We ask for your humanitarian help for a woman who appears to have contracted brain cancer from microwave radiation from a small wireless facility installed pursuant to a decision of this Board. We ask your help in order to make her home safe for her to return to.

Finally we ask that you recognize the real life health effects of all the WTFS you have approved and will consider in the future. Ms. Hogan’s cancer shows you that these health effects are very real and that your decisions could have life or death effects on the citizens of San Francisco.

(I express these matters based on facts and law, and not out of a mere feeling for the consequences in this particular case.)

If you and your counsel would like to consider these matters of fact and/or law in the future, please call on me at any time.


March 18, 2020
 

To: SF-PUC Management

Barbara Hale bhale@sfwater.org
Richard Stephens rstephens@sfwater.org
Ramone Abueg abeug@sfwater.org
Hieu Doan hdoan@sfwater.org
Mark Torres mjtorres@sfwater.org

To: SF Supervisor
Aaron Peskin (BOS) aaron.peskin@sfgov.org
Sunny Angulo (BOS) sunny.angulo@sfgov.org
Erica Major Erica.Major@sfgov.org

To: SF-DPH
Dr. Grant Colfax grant.colfax@sfdph.org
Dr. Tomas Aragon, tomas.aragon@sfdph.org

cc:
Cheryl Hogan clhogan3@gmail.com
Ron Rattner ronrattner@gmail.com
Michael LeVesque michael@rayguardprotect.com
Gary Widman gwidman@mindspring.com

 

Re: We Need An Immediate Response from the SF-PUC and the SF-DPH, Day 4 (really day 9) –> Shelter in Place Orders, but No Action to Stop Immuno-Suppression of San Francisco’s Population

 

Dear Ms. Hale et al.,

[Ms. Erica Major, will you please add this email to the San Francisco Public record, attached to the open (continued) matter of Land Use and Transportation Committee’s 12/16/19 Hearing re: the Repeal of Ordinance 190-19 and additional changes to SF-DPW Article 25? Thank you for doing so.]

I read with great interest, yesterday, the Mar 17 Order by Health Officer of Sonoma County, which states:

10. Definitions and Exemptions.

c. For purposes of this Order, individuals may leave their residence to provide any services or perform any work necessary to the operations and maintenance of “Essential Infrastructure,” including, but not limited to, public works construction, construction of housing (in particular affordable housing or housing for individuals experiencing homelessness), airport operations, water, sewer, gas, electrical, oil refining, roads and highways, public transportation , solid waste collection and removal, internet, and telecommunications systems (including the provision of essential global, national, and local infrastructure for computing services, business infrastructure, communications, and web-based services), provided that they can carry out those services or that work in compliance with Social Distancing Requirements as defined this Section, to the extent possible.

Apparently, it looks as if the installations of so-called "small" Wireless Telecommunications Facilities (WTFs) — which are actually Macro Cell Towers — will continue unabated, while the rest of us are ordered to stay home, public meetings are cancelled and, therefore, we will have no chance to air our grievances to our government face-to-face, which is our right to do so.

Do the rights of corporations so fully trump the rights of Americans in 2020? Apparently so . . . and that is unacceptable.

In this email, I am airing the following grievances:

  1. The SF-PUC is engaging in a coordinated plan to hide from the public, relevant public information about the next 30-60 or so active applications for sWTFs (from AT&T, Verizon and others) that are scheduled for installation in San Francisco’s public rights-of-way, including but not limited to:

    • the application submittal date,
    • the shotclock end date,
    • the application itself
    • verifcation of the party submitting the application (including a list of the entity’s board of directors)
    • the date and written evidence of NEPA review,
    • the antenna and radio specifications
    • the power consumption calculations
  2. I have requested from Mark Torres a meeting (in person, by Skype or phone) during which he and I could review such complete records together, but I have received no response this request, despite over ten emails and phone calls making such a request, Mark did say he would check with his "Management". I am addressing that "Management" right now. What is the next step?

  3. I have asked for response to the following reasonable questions which have been ignored by Mark Torres, including these:

    • Was the "revisions to the wireless facilities siting program" ever discussed in any SF-PUC public meetings? If so, when? Are there any agendas, recordings (audio/video) of these public meetings? If never discussed in a public meeting, then why not?
    • Was the "revisions to the wireless facilities siting program" ever discussed in any SF-PUC private meetings? If so, when? Are there any agendas, recordings (audio/video) of these private meetings?
    • Since you wrote "link you have to sfwater.org is before the Master License Agreements for concrete poles were finalized" . . . will you please provide the link to the sfwater.org page that reflects the final Master License Agreements for both concrete poles and steel poles?
    • Why has Barbara Hale, Mike Torres, Rod Clavell or anyone else involved in the "revisions to the wireless facilities siting program" not called me back in the last three eight days?
    • How can we make quick progress on powering off the sWTF at 3329 Sacramento St. Permit No. No.: 18WR-0171 (https://scientists4wiredtech.com/sanfrancisco/sf-appeal-18wr-0171/) so Cheryl Lea Hogan can return to her home and heal without excessive transmissions of Effective Radiated Power being transmitted into her home. –> https://scientists4wiredtech.com/sanfrancisco/fail/
    • May I please have the email addresses and phone numbers of the SF-PUC personnel listed in the photo that Michelle Peters provided to me, below?

Further Education of the SF-DPH and the SF-PUC:

The official COVID-19 tally from Johns Hopkins University at 10:30 am:

From https://www.arcgis.com/apps/opsdashboard/index.html#/bda7594740fd40299423467b48e9ecf6
8,724 Deaths / 211,853 Confirmed —> 4.1%

Read Dr. Martin Pall, PhD, from Feb 25, 2020
(see 2020-0225-Martin-Pall-RF-EMR-Guidelines-Are-Not-Scientific.pdf, attached)

Failures of the FCC RF-EMR exposure “safety" guidelines must be considered in terms of the principle that is at the core of the scientific method. That principle is that when we have a scientific theory and we test predictions of that theory and the theory predictions are shown to be false, then we must throw the theory out.

It follows that when we have eight highly repeated findings each of which show that the FCC RF-EMR exposure “safety" do not predict biological effects and do not, therefore, predict safety, it is a scientific requirement that these guidelines be thrown out. The failure of the FCC, FDA and various regulatory agencies to throw out the guidelines clearly shows that their actions are both unscientific and anti-scientific.

Listen to Nine Clips From an Important Mar 2, 2020 Radio Interview

https://scientists4wiredtech.com/what-are-4g-5g/#radio

So, what are you waiting for?

Will I hear from you today about what I have already written?

From 3/12/2020:

The proposed locations for each carrier’s Wireless Facilities are identified in Appendix B to each of the Executive Directives.

  • SF-PUC Executive Directive – AT&T
  • SF-PUC Executive Directive – Verizon
  • There are approximately 30 current active applications and over 300 locations targeted for 2020
  • Mr. Torres was unwilling to commit to a date/time when I could review these applications for completeness; he had to check with his Management first

. . . so what public communication will there be about the specifics of these installations, including the antenna details (manufacturer, model number, power consumption):

  • Vertical: antenna(s) installed at how many feet off the ground
  • Horizontal: antenna(s) installed how many feet from where people live, sleep and heal
  • Power: maximum Effective Radiated Power (ERP) in Watts able to exit the antenna shroud/covering

Has each of these applications completed NEPA review, as required by the FCC?

From 3/13/2020:

"Over 400 such Wireless Telecommunications Facilities (WTFs) have been constructed between 2015 and 2020, WTFS that output 1,500 to 7,000+ Watts of Effective Radiated Power (ERP) — 24/7 day and night, week-after-week — suppressing the immune systems of all, living nearby. "

From 3/16/2020:

  1. When will the SF-PUC and SF-DPH decide to reduce the endangering conditions (melatonin suppression and immuno-suppression) being created by the powering on of so-called "small" Wireless Telecommunications Facilities (WTFs) with insufficient maximum power output regulation — they are actually MACRO TOWERS, once one considers . . .

    • Maximum Effective Radiated Power (ERP) of the antennas,

    • The lack of regulation of the power input and

    • Federal legislation enabling upgrades of antenna and radios without public review/due process.

    • Please watch Resonance: Beings of Frequency –https://youtu.be/9mK93gHFWXs?t=4045

  2. When will the SF-PUC and SF-DPH and Supervisor Peskin discuss repealing SF-DPW Article 25, which has an incomplete implementation of Ordinance 190-19 (see the video here–> https://scientists4wiredtech.com/sanfrancisco/

  3. When can we make progress on powering off the sWTF at 3329 Sacramento St. Permit No.: 18WR-0171 so Cheryl Lea Hogan can return to her home and heal without excessive transmissions of Effective Radiated Power being transmitted into her home. –> https://scientists4wiredtech.com/sanfrancisco/fail/

From 3/17/2020:

Will you please take action tomorrow today to power off the sWTF in front of 3529 Sacrarmento Street Permit number Application No.: 18WR-0171 –> https://scientists4wiredtech.com/sanfrancisco/sf-appeal-18wr-0171/ by heeding Attorney Widman’s words from Mar 4, 2020 : "My first request is that for the love of God, please provide some humanitarian help here!"

I will look forward to your prompt response today.

Thank you.


March 19, 2020
 

To: SF-PUC Management
Barbara Hale bhale@sfwater.org
Richard Stephens rstephens@sfwater.org
Ramone Abueg rabueg@sfwater.org
Hieu Doan hdoan@sfwater.org
Mark Torres mjtorres@sfwater.org

To: SF Supervisor
Aaron Peskin (BOS) aaron.peskin@sfgov.org
Sunny Angulo (BOS) sunny.angulo@sfgov.org
Erica Major Erica.Major@sfgov.org

To: SF-DPH
Dr. Grant Colfax grant.colfax@sfdph.org
Dr. Tomas Aragon, (DPH) tomas.aragon@sfdph.org

cc:
Cheryl Hogan clhogan3@gmail.com
Ron Rattner ronrattner@gmail.com
Michael LeVesque michael@rayguardprotect.com
Gary Widman gwidman@mindspring.com

Re: We Need An Immediate Response from the SF-PUC and the SF-DPH, (Losing Count of the Days This Request is Receiving NO RESPONSE)

Dear Ms. Hale et al.

[Ms. Erica Major, will you please add this email to the San Francisco Public record, attached to the open (continued) matter of Land Use and Transportation Committee’s 12/16/19 Hearing re: the Repeal of Ordinance 190-19 and additional changes to SF-DPW Article 25? Thank you for doing so.]

As we are now in our second full-day of shelter in place to combat the spread of COVID-19 across the country, I am working from home and writing to enter the following substantial written evidence into the public record of the City and County of San Francisco.

Questions needing a response: when will I hear from you about what I have already written from Mar 12 through Mar 19, including but not limited to . . .

  • When will you please take action to power off the sWTF in front of 3529 Sacrarmento Street Permit number Application No.: 18WR-0171 –> https://scientists4wiredtech.com/sanfrancisco/sf-appeal-18wr-0171/ by heeding Attorney Widman’s words from Mar 4, 2020 : "My first request is that for the love of God, please provide some humanitarian help here!"

  • When will you please take action to power off all of the other 400+ or so so-called "Small" Wireless Telecommunications Facilities (sWTFs) throughout the City and County of San Francisco, for the very same reasons?

Please read at the links below about San Francisco’s own Dr. Thomas Cowan, who has repeatedly warned the officials of San Francisco (the SF-DPH, SF-DPW and the SF-PUC) in person and in videos that you will find at the links below. I am also citing, yet another, peer-reviewed scientific study below that establishes that the "immune system is able to react in a measurable way to discrete environmental stimuli . . . the bulk of available evidence clearly indicates that various shifts in the number and/or activity of immunocompetent cells [cells that can develop an immune response] are possible."

>>> From https://scientists4wiredtech.com/dr-thomas-cowan-primer/

>>> From https://www.saferemr.com/2020/03/wireless-radiation-effects-on-immune-system.html

Reaction of the immune system to low-level RF/MW exposures

Szmigielski S. Reaction of the immune system to low-level RF/MW exposures. Science of the Total Environment. 2013 Jun 1; 454-455:393-400. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2013.03.034.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23562692

Abstract

Radiofrequency (RF) and microwave (MW) radiation have been used in the modern world for many years. The rapidly increasing use of cellular phones in recent years has seen increased interest in relation to the possible health effects of exposure to RF/MW radiation. In 2011 a group of international experts organized by the IARC (International Agency for Research on Cancer in Lyon) concluded that RF/MW radiations should be listed as a possible carcinogen (group 2B) for humans. The incomplete knowledge of RF/MW-related cancer risks has initiated searches for biological indicators sensitive enough to measure the "weak biological influence" of RF/MWs. One of the main candidates is the immune system, which is able to react in a measurable way to discrete environmental stimuli.

In this review, the impacts of weak RF/MW fields, including cell phone radiation, on various immune functions, both in vitro [cell culture studies] and in vivo [live animal studies], are discussed. The bulk of available evidence clearly indicates that various shifts in the number and/or activity of immunocompetent cells [cells that can develop an immune response] are possible. For example, a number of lymphocyte [small white blood cells especially found in the lymphatic system] functions have been found to be weakened within single experiments based on exposure to low intensities of MW radiation.

Certain premises exist which indicate that, in general, short-term exposure to weak MW radiation may temporarily stimulate certain humoral or cellular immune functions, while prolonged irradiation inhibits the same functions.


Thank you.


March 26, 2020

To: SF-PUC Management

Barbara Hale bhale@sfwater.org
Richard Stephens rstephens@sfwater.org
Ramone Abueg abeug@sfwater.org
Hieu Doan hdoan@sfwater.org
Mark Torres mjtorres@sfwater.org

To: SF Supervisor
Aaron Peskin aaron.peskin@sfgov.org
Sunny Angulo sunny.angulo@sfgov.org
Erica Major erica.major@sfgov.org

To: SF-DPH
Dr. Grant Colfax grant.colfax@sfdph.org
Dr. Tomas Aragon tomas.aragon@sfdph.org

cc:
Cheryl Hogan clhogan3@gmail.com
Ron Rattner onrattner@gmail.com
Michael LeVesque michael@rayguardprotect.com
Gary Widman widman@mindspring.com
 

Re: We Still Require An Immediate Response from the SF-PUC and the SF-DPH –> No Action, YET, to Stop Immuno-Suppression of San Francisco’s Population

 

Dear Ms. Hale et al.,

[Ms. Erica Major, will you please add this email to the San Francisco Public record, attached to the open (continued) matter of Land Use and Transportation Committee’s 12/16/19 Hearing re: the Repeal of Ordinance 190-19 and additional changes to SF-DPW Article 25? Thank you for doing so.]

This morning, I read a surgical pathology final report from the CPMC DAVIES CAMPUS PATHOLOGY LABORATORY

  • Status: Final
  • Tissues: Left Frontal Temporal Brain Tumor
  • Clinical: Hemorrhagic left frontal opercular mass, worrisome for hemorrhagic tumor. Small development venous anomaly along the anterior margin of the mass also raises the possibility of large cavernous malformation.

So, where does that leave us, ladies and gentlemen?

In the absence of any credible response from the SF-DPH, SF-PUC or SF-DPW for the last 22 days (Mar 4 to Mar 26), Ms. Hogan was released from her rehab assignment, is undergoing additional therapy and has chosen to stay with family members because she cannot return to her home for healing, as the interior of her second story apartment at 3535 Sacramento St, SF, CA is simply too hazardous due to excessive Effective Radiated Power being forcibly sprayed into her home from the Verizon Wireless Telecommunications Facilities (WTF) that is still operating out on the sidewalk a mere 12 feet from her second-story window — which is clearly an endangering condition, as established by Medical and scientific evidence.

She did briefly stop by her home on Mar 25 to pick up some clothes and other personal items and found these workers performing upgrades/maintenance on the small cell that is within a few blocks of her home on 3535 Sacreamento St. It looks like business as usual in San Francisco,n despite substantial written evidence of harms from Wireless Telecommunications Facilities (WTFs) installed in the public rights-of-way being placed into the San Francisco public record consistently since throughout 2019 and 2020 to date.

Cheryl Hogan wrote on 3/25/2020 11:32 AM:


Jackson and Presidio. San Francisco.
My son took this photo.
Cheryl Hogan

From Google Maps:

Once again . . . from 3/17/2020:

"Will you please take action today to power off the sWTF in front of 3529 Sacrarmento Street Permit number Application No.: 18WR-0171 –> https://scientists4wiredtech.com/sanfrancisco/sf-appeal-18wr-0171/ by heeding Attorney Widman’s words from Mar 4, 2020 : ‘My first request is that for the love of God, please provide some humanitarian help here!’ "

I will look forward to your prompt response today.

Now, should I have any expectation of a substantive response from any one of you . . . those to whom I have addressed these emails?

So far, we have experienced the big bagel, a goose egg, nada, bubkes, zero from each of you, — i.e. no credible response at all — which is unacceptable:

This is what all San Franciscans are facing in 2020 . . . view here from 46:10 to at least 51:10; simple introductory web-based slides are here and more comprehensive information is here.

  1. Europe Investigates: How Much RF-EMR Exposure is Safe?read here and view here from 52:15 to at least 54:15.

  2. Joel Moskowitz, PhD, UC Berkeley: We Have No Reason to Believe That Densified 4G + 5G Is Safe — read here and view here from 18:15 to at least 20:15.

  3. April 2019 CA Supreme Court Decision: read here (quote from pp. 8-9) about what San Francisco’s Article 25 being upheld means for San Francisco’s local Police powers — the definitions of "aesthetics" and "incommode" have been expanded to include "negative health consequences" and "safety concerns".

The public and Public Health professionals can no longer approach the growing weight of scientific and medical evidence that establishes adverse biological effects and negative health consequences from RF-EMR exposures at levels that are many thousands of times lower than FCC RF-EMR guidelines (as low as -37 dBM, 0.1 Volts/meter or 30 µW/m²) like this:

See Bioinitiative.org RF color charts for the details –> https://bioinitiative.org/rf-color-charts/

Will you please return my voice-mails and emails promptly?

Thank you.