FAIL

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

San Francisco Board of Appeals, June 19, 2019
San Francisco 4G/5G “Small” Cell Leads to Fast Brain Tumor, Mar 4, 2020
San Francisco Board of Appeals, September 25, 2019
San Francisco Board of Appeals, November 20, 2019

Take action: Call/email the City and County of San Francisco, urging them to . . .

  1. Immediately Power Off Brain-Tumor-Survior Cheryl Hogan’s "Small" Cell WTF in front of 3535 Sacramento St. — to create an electromagnetically-quiet environment for her healing (this sWTF did not have any NEPA review)

  2. Immediately Power Off All Other "Small" Cell WTFs in San Francisco — to boost the immune systems of the SF population for the expected commmunity-spread of Caronavirus/COVID-19

  3. Rescind and amend San Francisco Dept of Public Works’ Article 25, San Francisco’s non-protective, so-called Small Cell Wireless Ordinance that violates its own 2003 Precautionary Principle Ordinance

Call / email these gentlemen and tell them what you think San Francisco should do:

From the March 2, 2020 Radio Interview re: Eight (8) Months of Stonewalling by the San Francisco Dept of Health . . .

. . . that is refusing to regulate the Effective Radiated Power (ERP) of so-called “Small” Wireless Telecommunications Facilities (sWTFs)

San Francisco 4G/5G “Small” Cell Leads to Fast Brain Tumor, Nov 20, 2020
3535 Sacramento St., San Francisco, CA, Nov 20, 2020

Resonance: Beings of Frequency

Watch this documentary from 1:07:40 to 1:18:00 to learn about RF-EMR exposures causing mlatonin suppression and immuno-suppression.

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?

SF-DPH: CARONAVIRUS FACTS

From San Francisco’s Frequently Asked Questions About Novel Coronavirus (COVID-19) (link)

Q1. What can San Franciscans do to prepare for COVID-19?

Individuals can prevent illness from COVID-19:

  • Frequently wash hands with soap and water for at least 20 seconds;
  • Always cover your cough or sneeze;
  • Stay home if you are sick;
  • Get your flu shot to protect against flu or symptoms similar to COVID-19; and
  • If you have recently returned from a country with ongoing COVID-19 infection, monitor your health and follow the instructions of public health officials.

Individuals can prepare for the possible disruption caused by an outbreak of COVID-19:

  • Make sure you have a supply of all essential medications for your family;
  • Make a child care plan if you or a care giver are sick;
  • Make arrangements about how your family will manage a school closure; and
  • Make a plan for how you can care for a sick family member without getting sick yourself.

[Suggested Addition to] San Francisco’s Frequently Asked Questions About Novel Coronavirus (COVID-19)(link)

Q2. What can the City of San Francisco do to prepare for COVID-19?

Immediately power off all so-called "Small" Wireless Telecommunications Facilities (sWTFs) that have been installed in the public rights-of-way in San Francisco

  • Over 400 such Wireless Telecommunications Facilities (WTFs) have been constructed between 2015 and 2020, WTFS that output 1,000 to 7,000 Watts of Effective Radiated Power (ERP)24/7 day and night, week-after-week, — suppressing the immune systems of all, nearby.
  • Is this necessary? NO — because 0.1 Watts ERP is all that is needed to provide telecommunications service at ½-mile down the street, with five-bars on a cell phone, so everyone can make a call. This is the capacity that the Wireless industry needs in order to reliably enable phone calls, emergency or otherwise.
  • The current 400+ way over-sizedfalsely branded as "Small" — WTFs are essentially macro cell towers, as admitted by professional engineer Lee Afflerbach in the public record in Sonoma CA on Sept 12, 2019:

Afflerbach: "The radios of [these small cells] 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."

  • The City of San Francisco can demand that WTF antennas installed in the public rights-of-way have no chance of exceeding 0.1 Watts of Effective Radiated Power at any time, policed by City-owned and controlled, friendly $5 fuses
  • Watch the documentary, Resonance: Beings of Frequency (see above), from 1:07:25 to 1:18:00 to learn how RF-EMR exposures cause melatonin suppression and immuno-suppression.

Declare a moratorium on the installation of any additional sWTFs in the public rights-of-way, at least until all of the following has occurred

  • Dr. Tomas Aragon has completed the assignment given to him by the SF Board of Appeals on July 3, 2020: an update of the June 14, 2010 Memo SF-DPH Memo by Dr. Rajiv Bhatia re: Health Effects and Regulation of Wireless Communications Networks.
  • The community-spread of COVID-19 has passed or the coronavirus-based illness has been contained
  • The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals judges Schroeder, Bybee and Bress have ruled in Case No. 19-70144, City of Portland et al v. FCC re: Repeal of FCC Orders 18-111 and FCC 18-133
  • The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals judges or the DC Circuit Court of Appeals judges have ruled in the (most likely consolidated) lawsuits: Environmental Health Trust et al v. FCC and the Children’s Health Defense v FCC, Repeal of FCC Order 19-126

San Francisco Areas of Focus

We plan to focus on two city departments and two commissions:

  1. SF-DPWhttp://www.sfpublicworks.org/

    • Tue Mar 10 meeting at 9:00 am Public Works – Administrative Hearing, City Hall, Room 416
  2. SF-DPHhttps://www.sfdph.org/dph/default.asp
  3. SF Health Commissionhttps://www.sfdph.org/dph/hc/default.asp

    • Thu, March 12, 2020 at 10:30am Joint Meeting Between the SF Health Commission and Planning Commission (City Hall, Room 400, SF, CA 94102)
    • Regular Meetings are held the first and third Tuesdays of each month
    • Tue Mar 17 meeting at 4:00 pm at 101 Grove Street, Room 300 SF, CA
  4. SF Public Utilities Commissionhttps://sfwater.org/

San Francisco Dept of Public Works (SF-DPW)

San Francisco Dept of Public Health (SF-DPH)

  • General Information 415-554-2500
  • The San Francisco Department of Public Health strives to achieve its mission through the work of two Divisions –

    1. San Francisco Health Network (San Francisco General Hospital Medical Center, Laguna Honda Hospital and Rehabilitation Center)
    2. San Francisco Population Health and Prevention (Dr. Aragon)— comprised of the Community Health and Safety Branch, Community Health Promotion and Prevention Branch, and the Community Health Services Branch
    3. https://www.sfdph.org/dph/files/dph/DPH-Org-Chart.pdf
    4. Requests for Public Records & Subpoenas —> https://www.sfdph.org/dph/comupg/records/reqPublRecs/default.asp

The SF Health Commission

(membership list, as of October 15, 2019)

  1. Dan Bernal, President
  2. Edward A. Chow M.D.
  3. Cecilia Chung
  4. Suzanne Giraudo, Ph.D.
  5. Laurie Green, M.D.
  6. Tessie Guillermo

SF Public Utilities Commission (SF-PUC)

(information to follow)

March 6, 2020 Letter to Dr. Tomas Aragon at SF-DPH

From: Devra Davis [ddavis@ehtrust.org](mailto:ddavis@ehtrust.org)
Date: Fri, Mar 6, 2020 at 5:26 PM
Subject: An appeal for your assistance on behalf of Ms.Hogan
To: [omas.aragon@sfdph.org](mailto:omas.aragon@sfdph.org)

Dear Dr. Aragon,

I write to you as a public health colleague in the hopes that you will be able to use your good offices to provide much-needed relief to a citizen of San Francisco who is suffering with a malignant brain tumor and that you will join with those of us concerned about the recent highly selective FDA review on wireless radiation calling for the withdrawal of this FDA review.

As to the request for relief, I am referring to Ms. Cheryl Hogan, whose appeal to your office last fall was rejected to block the installation of a 4G+5G Wireless Telecommunications Facility (WTF) that was placed just 12-feet from her window at 3535 Sacramento St. in San Francisco.

As I write this note to you, Ms. Hogan remains hospitalized after major surgery to remove her tumor. There is no question in my professional opinion that a patient with cancer should not be exposed to the levels of wireless radiation that can be emitted from these WTFs that include beam-forming radiation from millimeter radiating 5G antennas, in addition to the 4G frequencies used to located any antennas that can connect to the 5G antennas.

It is noteworthy that Cheryl Hogan’s brain cancer developed within a few months of the installation of the WTF last fall, indicating the possibility of cancer promotional impacts of this exposure. This is a dreadful disease with a grim prognosis, as you know.

Millimeter-wave frequencies such as those employed in 5G are used in medicine for a wide-variety of applications some involving accelerating cell growth, others involved in the treatment of cancer to induce apoptosis, still others accelerating cell growth. Anything in medicine that can have positive benefits, may also have negative impacts, i.e. aspirin, Tylenol and others.

As you know, the National Toxicology Program, found clear evidence that wireless radiation can produce rare gliomas in rats and damage the DNA of both mice and rats, as well as promote hyperplastic and neoplastic growth, a finding that expands and extends studies carried out by European and Korean investigators.

Regarding the biased anonymous FDA review on the topic, I want to share with you and invite you to join in supporting the professional opinion that this FDA report — concluding that there is a scientific consensus that there is no evidence of harm from wireless radiation — should be withdrawn.

On February 10, 2020, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) released an anonymous report on cell phone radiation and cancer entitled “Review of Published Literature between 2008 and 2018 of Relevance to Radiofrequency Radiation and Cancer.” Subsequently that same report was cited by the agency to justify changes to numerous FDA webpages indicating that there is scientific consensus that cellphone radiation does not cause cancer or any other health problem. That statement is not correct.

In fact, the majority of scientists working independently in the field has reached the consensus that such radiation constitutes a significant avoidable health threat based on published peer-reviewed studies of humans and experimental animals indicating that cancer and other serious health problems are caused by wireless radiation. Further, the FDA report does not at all address growing evidence from the American Academy of Pediatrics and others about the special vulnerability of children, as well as studies showing that wireless radiation adversely affects bees, birds, plant growth, and other environmental factors.

Letters which have been sent to the FDA include:

  • Link to Letter calling for a retraction signed by several scientists
  • Link to Ronald Melnick PhD’s letter to the FDA on the National Toxicology Program study
  • Link to Prof. Tom Butler of the University College in Cork, Ireland’s letter to the FDA
  • Link to Igor Belyaev, PhD, Dr. Sc. Head, Department of Radiobiology of the Cancer Research Institute, Biomedical Research Center of the Slovak Academy of Science letter to the FDA

I look forward to hearing from you about this. Please suggest a good time for us to speak directly next Wednesday as befits your schedule.I would also welcome a chance to brief you and others on this matter through ZOOM or SKYPE.

Yours sincerely,
 

Devra Davis, PhD MPH
Fellow American College of Epidemiology
Visiting Prof. Hebrew Univ. Hadassah Medical Center & Ondokuz Mayis Univ. Medical School
Associate Editor, Frontiers in Radiation and Health
President Environmental Health Trust
P.O. Box 58
Teton Village, WY 83025
EHTRUST.ORG
Facebook

Please Sign up for the EHT Newsletter
Follow me on Twitter @DevraLeeDavis
ResearchGate

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.

Jan 10, 2020 Letter to Dr. Tomas Aragon at SF-DPH

January 10, 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
Lee Hepner lee.hepner@sfgov.org
 

Subject: The Rubber is Meeting the Road in the Next 20 days

 
Dear Dr. Aragón et al.

First, to Lee Hepner, thanks for the 15 minutes of your time. Here is the link that we discussed near the end of our call on Wed –> https://scientists4wiredtech.com/compare/ I will follow up.

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.

It is time for the San Francisco Board of Supervisors and the employees of the City and County of San Francisco to stop allowing Big Wireless to bully their way onto San Francisco’s streets and into the interior of San Franciscan’s homes with unfettered Effective Radiated Power — which is electromagnetic pollution, as defined by Big Wireless, itself, and the Insurance heavyweights, Lloyd’s of London, Swiss Re AM Best and others — the industry that will not insure Big Wireless from the harms caused by pulsed, data-modulated, Radio-frequency Electromagnetic Microwave Radiation (RF-EMR) exposures. It is also time for the City Attorney’s office to stop aiding and abetting this bullying.

The current FCC is off the reservation, so to speak. Their orders are mere Wireless Industry wish-lists, devoid of reasoned decisionmaking. The DC Circuit Court of Appeals judges ruled on Aug 9, 2019:

"We rule that the Order’s deregulation of small cells is arbitrary and capricious because its public-interest analysis did not meet the standard of reasoned decisionmaking."

The FCC’s scheme to pass 30+ interlocking orders in 2017-2018 to attempt to give their duplicitous and propagandistic "Race to 5G" some cover in Federal regulation is unraveling in the Courts. The FCC has become a serial loser in the courts in 2019 and the next case up is the Cities’ challenge of FCC 18-111 and FCC 18-133 on Feb 10, 2020 in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. Do you want to be unwitting "cogs" in the wheel of the "Race to 5G" (which requires 4G at close proximity for 5G beamforming to even work) or do you want to change this sordid history-in-the-making?

People are getting sick from exposures to 4G/5G installations next to their homes right now, Dr. Aragon. Many have told you this plainly and directly. It is in the public record as substantial medical evidence. This is a medical issue and you (and Dr. Colfax) are medical doctors. We are asking for your help.

I have detailed for you and placed into the San Francisco public record all that you need. Please do not allow the politics of San Francisco (and the SF City Attorney’s office) to aid and abet a complicity with this current unfettered 4G/5G densfication scheme that is built on lies. We are asking you to use your medical judgement and the authorities granted to you by the 1996 Telecommunications Act (1996-TCA), the 2003 San Francisco Precautionary Principle and your medical license to stop this this unfettered 4G/5G rollout by simply pausing the rollout long enough to pass Municipal code that will actually preserve the quiet enjoyment of streets via regulating the maximum Effective Radiated Power outputto a level that provides sufficient Telecommunications service — and nothing higher.

This is what the CA Supreme Court judges affirmed in the April 4, 2019 Ruling in T-Mobile v. San Francisco: cities have police powers to regulate these installations to preserve the quiet enjoyment of streets. Their ruling extended the definition of incommode to include

"noise (RF-EMR is acoustic), negative health consequences and safety." (detailed here → https://scientists4wiredtech.com/2019-ca-supreme-court-decision-t-mobile-v-san-francisco/.

The SF City Attorney’s office knows all about it.

This is all you need, Dr. Aragon to regulate the maximum Effective Radiated Power for the aesthetics reason of quiet enjoyment of streets. Do you see the path to avoid the "legally unfashionable" topic that I dare not mention?

This is a simple, elegant, cost-efficient, defensible and revenue-generating position. It starts with your objective, medical opinion which requires you to leave the politics at the door. You have what you need to step up to the plate and do the right thing for us all. Will you please not just kick this can further down the road, summon your courage, use your medical judgment and help us all by January 31, 2019?

Medical opinions from enlightened doctors and attorneys all over the US are using their medical opinions and Federal laws — Fair Housing Act Amendments of 1988 (42 U.S. Code § 3604(f)(3)(B)), Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, as amended by the ADA Amendment Act of 2008 (42 U.S. Code § 12132; 28 C.F.R. §§ 35.101(b); 35.130(b)(4)(i)), Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (29 U.S. Code § 794), Unruh Civil Rights Act (Cal. Civ. Code § 51, et. seq.), and Fair Employment and Housing Act (Cal. Gov. Code § 12900, et seq.). — right now — to reduce the Effective Radiated Power and to eliminate the endangering conditions that San Franciscans are facing today. I know people who are being forced to move out of their homes in San Francisco just so they can sleep. You, of course, know this. You have met them in your office, it is in San Francisco’s public record and I have reported it to you multiple times, since October 22, 2019. The latest was here to a large group of scientists and medical doctors at the Commonwealth Club of San Francisco on Dec 3, 2019.

Today is January 10, 2020 — the very day that the repeal of FCC Orders 18-111 and 18-133 are being argued in the Ninth Circuit. Dr. Aragon, you and the City and County of San Francisco have an opportunity to send the FCC, the Ninth Circuit judges and the residents of San Francisco a clear message by Jan 31, 2019. Will you seize this important history-changing opportunity? We hope so — and inviting the CA Dept of Health to the table is not the way to do that (see more below). Let them weigh in separately. The July 3, 2019 letter from the SF Board of Appeals asked for the SF-DPH’s determination, not the very-conflicted opinion of CA-DPH. Doing this will not provide the cover that some politician might be seeking.

In short, the rubber is meeting the road in the next 20 days. Have you ever faced a full-court press on a basketball court, Dr. Aragon? The key to a great defense is tenacity.

I explained the following to the SF Board of Appeals on 11/20/19 –> https://scientists4wiredtech.com/action/#sanfrancisco

The DC Circuit judges published the following reasons for their 8/9/19 Ruling, concluding:

  • The FCC failed to address that it was speeding densification “without completing its investigation of . . . health effects of low-intensity radiofrequency [microwave] radiation”
  • The FCC did not adequately address the harms of deregulation
  • The FCC did not justify its portrayal of those harms as negligible
  • The FCC’s characterization of the Order as consistent with its longstanding policy was not “logical and rational.” . . . because the FCC mischaracterized the size, scale and footprint of the anticipated nationwide deployment of 800,000-unit network of sWTFs
  • Such sWTFs are “crucially different from the consumer signal boosters and Wi-Fi routers to which the FCC compares them”
  • “It is impossible on this record to credit the claim that [sWTF] deregulation will ‘leave little to no environmental footprint.’”
  • The FCC fails to justify its conclusion that sWTFs “as a class” and by their “nature” are “inherently unlikely” to trigger potential significant environmental impacts.

The simple equation we can all embrace is (maximum output power from a Wireless Radio) x (antenna gain) = Effective Radiated Power (ERP). The real problem is that in San Francisco there is no effective policing of Effective Radiated Power, which can be solved with simple city-owned. controlled and locked fuse boxes on each so-called "Small Cell" installation.

One has to address all three variables as an integrated system, to define a meaningful solution.

  1. Vertical offset: at how many feet off the ground will the antenna(s) be installed
  2. Horizontal offset: at how many feet away from people will the antenna(s) be installed
  3. Maximum Effective Radiated Power Output: the amount of cumulative power (in Watts ERP) that exits the face of the antenna shrouds from all antennas within these shrouds transmitting any frequencies.

We are starting a New Year with some successes and are hoping for more return emails and return phone calls from SF-DPH personnel — something of which we have had too few in 2019. We, and many San Franciscans are awaiting the completion of the update of the June 14, 2010 Memo SF-DPH Memo by Dr. Rajiv Bhatia re: Health Effects and Regulation of Wireless Communications Networks.

  1. Here is one success from yesterday –> https://scientists4wiredtech.com/action/nepa-strategies/#incomplete (scroll down to see that it worked).

  2. Here is a recent tweet from Prof Trevor Marshall (@trevmar)

"See this excellent interview with Dr Martin Pall:" "You’re looking here at imminent extinction . . . You don’t just sit around and not do anything." At 33 mins he discusses changing symptoms as people start protecting themselves from RF-EMR exposures.

Waarom EMF en 5G voor de mens schadelijk is: Rob van der Boom en Dr. Martin Pall
The Interview is in English –> https://youtu.be/YxD6H-NCvso?t=1477

An encouraging call from Dr. Aragon the week before Christmas, asking for my help, turned out to be nothing of substance since then. Despite my offers of free expert assistance and education, none was sought by Dr. Aragon from me before he finished 80% of the revised memo and commenced peer-review with the CA Dept of Health, which is not very confidence-inspiring considering:

  • The first draft of CDPH cell phone guidance document was from June, 2009, but the document was not released until May 2017 and only after a successful law suit by Dr. Joel Moskowitz. Calif. Attorney General’s Office court order in case #34-2016-80002358 in Sacramento Superior Court was needed to motivate the CA-DPH to do their work,

  • A side-by-side comparison of the cell phone safety guidance published by CDPH in December, 2017 with the original draft prepared in June, 2009 can be viewed at https://youtu.be/YxD6H-NCvso?t=1475.

Was this CA-DPH peer-review even necessary, Dr. Aragon? How much additional delay will result? Years? It took the CD-DPH eight years, last time.

Why is the SF-DPH still rubber-stamping the applications to install Densified 4G/5G Macro towers (yes, the Effective Radiated Power exposures from so-call Small cells exceed exposures from Macro Towers because the so-called Small Cells use Macro Tower antennas and radios) that are installed six to twelve feet from homes with insufficient local Effective Radiated Power limit regulations. How long with the SF-DPH ignore the comments that were entered into the City of Sonoma Public record on 9/12/19, by a Professional RF Engineer hired by many cities:

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.”

The evidence, to date, shows that, so far, our expert and common-sense recommendations have mostly fallen on deaf ears. There has been confusion in that a desired "tone" seems more important than "substantial written evidence" in the public record. I can assure you, it is not.

We have entered into the SF Public Record, volumes of relevant data and specific steps that the SF-DPH could take to avoid the current disaster of unfettered Effective Radiated Power (EPR) from Wireless Telecommunications Facilities (WTFs). WTFs that are installed six to twelve feet from homes in San Francisco ruins the quiet enjoyment of streets and damages many in San Francisco, right now. What has been the consistent response from the SF-DPH? We are too busy — every time — we are too busy . . . it is just a question of priorities.

Therefore, after more than six months, the current SF-DPH practices show that, despite good intentions, the SF-DPH has not come far enough down the learning curve to do what is needed. We cannot inch-pebble San Francisco to an effective solution. An effective solution requires bolder and swifter action than we see.

From the letters to and from Dr. Aragon that were read at the SF Board of Appeals here, (at 8:40 in the video), we learned that while the SF-DPH has delayed, the densified 4G/5G installations in San Francisco have been rolling on, virtually unabated in violation of San Francisco’s 2003 Precautionary Principle Ordinance and in violation of the basic Hippocratic Oaths of some SF-DPH employees to do no harm.

Learning that the release of the updated memo will now be further delayed by peer-review from the CA Dept of Health was not welcome news. The public’s frustration with the SF-DPH’s lack of priority on addressing this growing public health crisis was communicated clearly by this Dec 30, 2019 letter by San Francisco’s Ron Rattner: https://scientists4wiredtech.com/sanfrancisco/2019-rattner-letter. Ron’s letter is well worth reading. It has been shared widely.

We remain open to returned phone calls and returned emails. Ignoring what is in the public record on this matter will not be in anyone’s best interests. We are happy to help in any way possible, but this is the time for decisive action, not more delay.

Thank you.