SF Chronicle — California 2009 cell phone advisory gutted in later versions, state refuses FOIA request; Sen. Kamala Harris blocked document access

From the San Francisco Chronicle

New records show how state reworked secret cell phone warnings

by Melody Gutierrez
May 19, 2017

State health officials, over a five-year period, wrote and revised guidelines for safe use of cell phones.

SACRAMENTO — Newly released public records show that California public health officials worked for five years on a set of guidelines to warn the public about the potential dangers of cell phones, revising their work 27 times with updated research before abandoning the efforts without ever making their concerns public until ordered by a judge.

The 27 versions of the guidelines, obtained by The Chronicle, show that California health officials deleted a section that warned state employees with work-issued cell phones about the potential increased risk for brain cancer from use of the devices over time. The final version of the guidelines was a broad warning to the public about exposure to electromagnetic fields emitted by cell phones. It included a list of best practices to minimize exposure.

Joel Moskowitz, a public health researcher at UC Berkeley who sued the state to force the release of the records, said state officials should never have withheld the warnings from the public. Lawyers for the state had argued in court that release of the warnings could cause unnecessary panic.

It would have to be purely political to deny distributing this,” Moskowitz said. “Science supports this.”

Sacramento County Superior Court Judge Shelleyanne Chang ordered the state in March to turn over the final version of the guidelines from 2014. Last week, as part of the lawsuit, the judge forced California health officials to turn over all the previous versions of the guidelines it had kept secret.

It’s unclear what debate went on inside the California Public Health Department over the guidelines — and whether there was any influence from outside the department.

The Chronicle submitted a public records request to the health department in March, asking for emails or documents related to why the cell phone guidelines were never approved to be made public — and to see whether there was any outside influence. The department refused to release records, saying those that existed were protected by attorney-client privilege.

The little information that is known about the state’s efforts to create and then abandon cell phone guidelines can be gleaned from Moskowitz’s lawsuit and the newly released documents.

The first version of the guidelines, from 2009, [PDF] said recent studies of cell phone and cordless phone use “suggest that after 10 years of heavy use there is an increased risk of malignant brain cancer and a kind of benign tumor in the inner ear, particularly on the side of the head where these phones are usually placed.” The state department reviewing the material, the Division of Environmental and Occupational Disease Control, wrote that following its own “unpublished meta-analysis,” it agreed with the conclusions of the studies. Similar language about long-term effects was included in the later versions, but not the part about a consensus of study findings by the division.

The first version also included this language, which was later removed: “Although most cell phone and cordless phone heavy users would not get brain cancer, the number of brain cancer patients coming to hospitals would increase and would represent a significant cost to society in suffering, medical costs and economic costs that one would want to avoid.”

Additionally, the first version noted that the lifetime risk of getting brain cancer is low, but that longtime heavy use of cell phones and cordless phones is enough to be of “regulatory concern.” That “regulatory concern” was removed in the later versions.

The early document also included the section of state employees, which was deleted. It detailed how state government and its employees could lower the risk of exposure, such as reducing the time workers were required to be on their cell phones, avoiding purchasing cordless phones for office use and ensuring that employees have headsets.

The first version also warned: “Do not allow children to use a cell phone, except for emergencies.” The final version said, “Parents may want to limit their child’s cell phone use to texting, important calls and emergencies.”

I want to know why this was suppressed,” Moskowitz said, referring to information he feels parents should be aware of.

The California Department of Public Health declined an interview request, releasing only written statements.

The draft cell phone guidelines attempted to characterize the complex science around radiofrequency electromagnetic field (EMF) and provide options for people who want to reduce their exposure,” the statement read.

The health department told The Chronicle in March that it abandoned the guidelines because the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention issued national guidance on the same subject in 2014. But, even those national guidelines were the subject of controversy.

CDC’s updated guidelines in 2014 read “we recommend caution in cell phone use,” but that language was deleted weeks later.

A New York Times investigation last year, examining more than 500 pages of internal CDC records, found the agency’s new language had been worked on for three years, but soon after it was published, officials grew concerned that it was being mistaken as a policy change. The language was then changed again in 2014 to say: “Some organizations recommend caution in cell phone use. More research is needed before we know if using cell phones causes health effects.”

Moskowitz said he hopes the state will decide to adopt and post the guidelines its own department created.

It seems to me better late than never to notify the public,” Moskowitz said. “The public has a right to this information paid for with their tax dollars.”

The statement from the California Department of Public Health said there are no plans to post the guidelines on its website.

Melody Gutierrez is a San Francisco Chronicle staff writer. Email: mgutierrez@sfchronicle.com Twitter: @MelodyGutierrez

Guidelines on safe mobile usage

  • Increase the distance between you and your cell phone by:
  • Using the speaker phone.
  • Sending text messages.
  • Use a headset, and carry your phone away from your body. EMFs from wireless (Bluetooth) and wired headsets are usually weaker than those from a cell phone.
  • Keep your phone away from your body. A cell phone that is on can emit EMFs even when it is not being used.
  • Do not sleep with your cell phone near you or carry it in a pocket or directly on your body unless the phone is turned off.
  • Keep cell phone calls short, even when using a wireless or wired headset.
  • Take off your headset when you’re not on a call. Wireless and wired headsets emit EMFs even when you are not using your phone.
  • Do not rely on devices that claim to shield or neutralize EMFs from cell phones. These devices have not been shown to reduce exposures.

Source: California Department of Public Health


Posted under Fair Use Rules.

Civil Case Details — 2016 80002358

Case Information

Case Title
Dr.Joel Moskowitz an individual vs. California Department of Public Health a California State Agency
Case Number
Case Type
Writ of Mandate
Filing Date
Case Category
Civil – Unlimited


Participant Name Role Represented By
California Department of Public Health a California State Agency Respondent Kamala Devi Harris
Dr.Joel Moskowitz an individual Petitioner Claudia Polsky


Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , ,

Lawsuit update: California Dept. of Public Health releases 27 versions of cell phone safety guidance 2009-2014; suppressed by political appointees, say agency sources

From Safer EMR

PDF of original fact sheet “Document 25” (file date: 6-17-2009)

Updates on the lawsuit:

by Dr. Joel Moskowitz
May 19, 2017

The San Francisco Chronicle published this news story online May 19, 2017.

The California Attorney General’s Office released 27 versions of a cell phone radiation safety fact sheet prepared by the California Department of Public Health (CDPH) initially in 2009 and revised multiple times through January, 2015.

The State has never adopted this fact sheet nor released it to the public due to suppression by “political appointees” according to my sources.

The recommendations in the final version of the fact sheet are sound. CDPH should adopt and disseminate the fact sheet now. The public has a right to know the information that the Department’s health professionals have been trying to share with them since 2009. I further recommend that the fact sheet be updated annually consistent with the latest research.

The fact sheet is based upon reviews of the research conducted by the CDPH Division of Environmental and Occupational Disease Control between 2009 and 2014.

The original document reflected a consensus of the Division (Document 25, file date: 6/17/2009; pp.104-109).
[PDF ]  The fact sheet summarized research on the health effects associated with exposure to cell phone and cordless phone radiation. It provided recommendations to the California Department of General Services, the “business manager” for the State, regarding cell phone purchases. The fact sheet also included safety tips for state employees and the general public, especially children, about safe use of phones to minimize exposure to wireless radiation.

The final version of the fact sheet omits recommendations to the Department of General Services and does not discuss cordless phones (Document 1, file date 1/26/2015; pp. 6-8).

In 2014, I submitted three requests to the CDPH under the California Public Records Act for this information. All three requests were denied.

In 2016, the UC Berkeley School of Law Environmental Law Clinic and the First Amendment Project filed a lawsuit on my behalf in the Sacramento Superior Court.

On May 12 of this year, the Attorney General’s office mailed us 27 documents to comply with the March 13 court ruling.

The case is Dr. Joel Moskowitz v. California Department of Public Health (#34-2016-80002358).

Supplemental materials

Substantive changes to fact sheet: http://bit.ly/CDPHchanges

Table of contents for 27 versions of fact sheet: http://bit.ly/CDPHToC

Contents of 27 versions of fact sheet (8 MB file): http://bit.ly/AGCDPHdocs

CDPH fact sheet with draft watermark


Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , ,

EKG proof that “Smart” Meters affect the human heart

Information & Perspective by Warren Woodward
May 17, 2017

I take great pleasure in introducing ground-breaking new evidence that proves everyone’s health is being affected by “smart” meters.

This evidence is a world first, and shifts the debate from whether anyone should have to pay a fee to refuse a “smart” meter to: When does the safety recall start?

In EKG Proof That “Smart” Meters Affect the Human Heart you will see me connected to an EKG monitor while resting near an Elster brand “smart” meter of the type used by APS here in Arizona. When the “smart” meter transmits, the EKG shows that my heart rhythm is interrupted. Looking at the results of the EKG is startling.

We now know that even if people are not showing outward symptoms, their bodies are being unnecessarily and involuntarily stressed by “smart” meters.

There must be a complete safety recall of all “smart” meters at once.


Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , ,

Power restored, but surge ignites Detroit home killing 95-year-old grandmother

Different Smart Meter models lack surge protection.

From Fox 2, WJBK

By Erika Benson
March 17, 2017

– A 95-year-old grandmother died this week after she was rushed to the hospital after power was restored to the family’s home and a surge started a fire.

Reginald Hollman said after last week’s powerful storm, his family home lost power. When power was restored, he said a surge rushed through home, starting a massive fire.

Hollman, 56, said his childhood home is where is aunt and grandmother still lived. He would regularly stop by to see his 95-year-old grandmother, Amanda Walker, and on Monday he did just that. He was sitting in his car and charging his phone when a neighbor told him the power was back on. When he walked in, he immediately knew there was a problem.

“Then I went to go see if it was on and zzzz zzzz pop pop pop… it was burning,” Hollman said.

He rushed down to the basement to try and put the fire out but the flames were too much.

“It was blazing. I tried to put it out but the smoke was choking me up,” he said.

His grandmother was lying in the back bedroom and Hollman said he couldn’t get to her in time. Fire crews arrived and had to pull the woman out but she was in trouble.

“She came out all lifeless. It didn’t look right. I was hurt by that,” he said. “I started crying. I just couldn’t take it. They put her in the (ambulance) and took her to Detroit Receiving.”

He thought his grandmother would be okay since she hadn’t been sick – but the smoke was too much to take.

Three days later, Walker died at the hospital

“It’s a tragedy, but forget the house. I want my grandma back. But she’s gone,” he said.

Hollman admits that he wishes he or someone could have gotten to her sooner.

On Friday, he returned to his home on Garland Street to survey what’s left: melted photographs, broken glass, and walls damaged by smoke. Everything was burned. It’s all a painful reminder of everything he lost, the most important of which was his grandmother.

For now, he’s left with memories of his sweet grandmother and her southern style.

“My grandma was cool! She’s like Madea! My grandma was cool.”

The family needs help for the home and her funeral. Anyone willing to donate is asked to visit their GoFundMe account by clicking here.


Posted under Fair Use Rules.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , ,

Mobilfunk: Neue Studienergebnisse bestätigen Risiken der nicht-ionisierenden Strahlung

[English — PDF]
Artikel in umwelt-medizin-gesellschaft

Autor: Peter Hensinger und Isabell Wilke

Der Artikel dokumentiert neue Studienergebnisse zu den Endpunkten Gentoxizität, Fertilität, Blut-Hirn-Schranke, Herzfunktionen, Kognition und Verhalten. Ein gesicherter Schädigungsmechanismus ist oxidativer Zellstress. Neue Hypothesen zu weiteren Wirkmechanismen werden dargestellt.

Download PDF

Studien bestätigen Risiken der Handystrahlung

umg-Artikel zu Studienergebnissen
diagnose:funk veröffentlicht mit freundlicher Genehmigung des umg-Verlags den gemeinsamen Artikel von Peter Hensinger (diagnose:funk) und Isabel Wilke (ElektrosmogReport).

In der Einleitung heißt es: “Digitale mobile Geräte funken mit nicht-ionisierender Strahlung. Die Risiken der elektromagnetischen Felder (EMF) für den Menschen sind seit den 50er Jahren aus Medizin und Militärforschung bekannt. Der Artikel dokumentiert neue Studienergebnisse zu den Endpunkten Gentoxizität, Fertilität, Blut-Hirn-Schranke, Herzfunktionen, Kognition und Verhalten. Ein gesicherter Schädigungsmechanismus ist Oxidativer Zellstress. Neue Hypothesen zu weiteren Wirkmechanismen werden dargestellt. Über die Risiken der Mobilfunktechnologien werden die Nutzer unzureichend informiert, eine Vorsorgepolitik wird nicht eingeleitet. Die Unsicherheiten über die Risiken in der Öffentlichkeit sind nicht auf unklare Forschungsergebnisse zurückzuführen, sondern auf den beherrschenden Einfluss der Industrie auf Politik und Medien.”

Der Artikel ist eine Zusammenfassung der Studienlage der letzten 5 Jahre, 140 Quellen wurden ausgewertet, u.a.: 

  • Studienergebnisse zur Kanzerogenität
  • Der ATHEM REPORT Teil II der AUVA-Versicherung Österreich
  • Erkenntnisse zu Wirkmechanismen nicht-ionisierender Strahlung
  • Wirkungen auf Spermien & Embryo
  • Öffnung der Blut – Hirn – Schranke
  • Auswirkungen auf Kognition, Verhalten und Veränderungen bei Neurotransmittern
  • Auswirkungen auf Herz- und Blutfunktionen
  • Neue Sendemaststudien

Der Artikel zeigt, dass die Risiken der Mobilfunktechnologie nachgewiesen sind. Helfen Sie mit, diesen Artikel an Ärzte, Journalisten, Politiker und Behörden zu verbreiten, auch mit der Bitte, dazu Stellung zu nehmen.


Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , ,

Wireless communications technologies: New study findings confirm risks from non-ionizing radiation; verified mechanism of damage

The uncertainties regarding the risks among the public are not due to unclear research findings, but to the industry’s controlling influence over politics and the media.

From umwelt-medizin-gesellschaft

By Peter Hensinger, Isabel Wilke
March 29, 2016
Translated into English by Katharina Gustavs: May 2017

PDF — entire article


Digital mobile devices emit nonionizing radiation. The risks of electromagnetic fields (EMF) to human health have been known from medical and military research since the 1950s. This article documents the latest study findings regarding the endpoints of genotoxicity, fertility, blood-brain barrier, cardiac functions, cognition, and behavior. A verified mechanism of damage is oxidative cell stress. New hypotheses of additional mechanisms of action will also be presented. Users are only insufficiently informed about the risks of wireless communication technologies; prevention policies are not introduced. The uncertainties regarding the risks among the public are not due to unclear research findings, but to the industry’s controlling influence over politics and the media.

Conclusions: Insights and Interests

Based on a review of the research findings from in vitro, in vivo, and epidemiological studies, there can only be one conclusion:

Long-term risks, in particular, pose huge health risks that cannot yet be determined.

Why the public is not informed about this, Prof. Martin Blank (USA), former president of the Bioelectromagnetics Society, documents in his book “OVERPOWERED. What Science Tells Us About the Dangers of Cell Phones and Other WiFi-age Devices” (2014) the history and the current state of the research as well as his own experience of the U.S. industry’s influence over politics and its communication of research findings.

Some long-term effects are known through the research reviews by Prof. Karl Hecht (HECHT 1996, 2012, 2015, 2016), which he carried out on behalf of the German federal government as early as the 1990s. They were banished to the archives. We are in the middle of an open trial that was sanctioned by the government against its better knowledge as reported by the eye witness Prof. Hecht in the UMG interview 2/2016 (HECHT 2016).

Fifty billion in licensing fees in 2001 and the German Chancellor Gerhard Schröder, also referred to as the “chancellor of the bosses,” delivered: He often claimed that it would be completely wrong, in the context of innovations, to talk about risks first and opportunities second. The other way around, it would make senseFirst realize opportunities and do not talk about risks; only talk about risks when they also manifest themselves, that is, when they cannot be avoided anymore,’ “ Mirko Weber writes in the newspaper Stuttgarter Zeitung.

The organizational theorist Günther Ortmann calls this “too late as a political program” (WEBER 2016).

The Federal Office for Radiation Protection responded to this in its 2005 radiation protection guidelines with criticism:

On the other hand, we face a large-scale introduction of new exposures without having been able to reach a final estimate and assessment of their risks (e.g. wireless communication technologies)” (p. 50).

In the guidelines, the suspicion of a cancer promoting effect had already been confirmed. After calls from industry associations to withdraw the guidelines, the discussion about this issue stopped.

So now we have an industry with a worldwide sale of billions of euros, excessive profits, hundreds of thousands of jobs, which is why people are expected to accept risks “without any alternative.”

In his book World Risk Society (2007), the sociologist Ulrich Beck writes:

The predominant definitions grant engineering and natural sciences monopoly status: They — in fact, the mainstream, not counter experts and alternative scientists — decide without any participation of the public what is tolerable and what is not in the face of threatening uncertainties and risks. (…) The sequence of laboratory first, implementation second no longer applies. Instead, assessment comes after implementation and manufacturing prior to research. The dilemma, the big risks have rushed scientific logic into, applies universally: The sciences hover blindly above the boundary of risks” (BECK 2007, p. 73ff).

This is why Ulrich Beck, with reference to the English state theorist Thomas Hobbes, advocates

an individual right of resistance for citizens. When the government produces or tolerates life-threatening conditions, then, according to Hobbes, ‘citizens are free to refuse them’ (…) For risks are produced by the industry, externalized by the economy, individualized by the legal system, legitimized by natural sciences, and played down by politicians“ (BECK 2007, p. 177).

As early as 1994, the ECOLOG Institute warned in its book Risiko Elektrosmog? [Electrosmog a Risk?]:

The entire earth turns more and more into a huge laboratory in which we, depending on our attitude and profession, observe with eagerness or horror which global impact the mass use of chemicals, electromagnetic fields, genetically manipulated organisms will have – only we cannot clean up this laboratory quite as easily when we realize the experiment went wrong” (NEITZKE et al. 1994, p. 319).

We cannot allow this to continue because, for reasons of profit, the sum total of all human-caused environmental damage poses a risk to the very existence of the human species.

Copyright by diagnose:funk e.V., Germany –
http://www.diagnose-funk.org, http://www.mobilfunkstudien.org

Posted under Fair Use Rules.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , ,

California legislators meet with telecom lobbyists at hush-hush event on eve of 5G bill

Timing is everything.

Last weekend, May 6-7, California Democrat Party Assemblymembers gathered for a lavish telecom industry fund-raising and lobbying event at Pebble Beach — the Speakers Cup. Hosted by the Speaker of the California Assembly – currently, Assemblyman Anthony Rendon –, it has been sponsored by AT&T for many years.

The timing was perfect. Though the Speakers Cup is an annual event, this year is special. The industry is eagerly anticipating the passage of its legislative piece de resistance – Senate Bill 649. Written by the wireless industry association CTIA, this bill strips cities and counties of most of their regulatory authority regarding “small cell” towers and essentially eliminates any obstacle to installing small cells everywhere. AT&T and Verizon are at the front, lobbying hard. Obviously, there is opposition from municipal governments and California residents, but they don’t vote on this bill.

The wireless industry hosted a similar event in March for California Senators in San Diego, called the Pro Tem Cup, hosted by the President of the Senate Kevin de Leon. Since that event, SB 649 has enjoyed easy passage and few obstacles through Senate committees, and the bill seems assured of an easy win when the full Senate votes later this month, unless there is a major hiccup.

If all goes well for the industry, SB 649 will head to the Assembly next. And the timely Speakers Cup greases the Assembly wheels.

It was virtually impossible to find out information about this year’s event. Perhaps California legislators became more secretive after the Los Angeles Times wrote an expose on the Speakers Cup in 2012 (see below). Contrary to popular belief, California is not the Sunshine State; legislators adopted rules years ago that keep their calendars, and who they meet with, secret.

Assembly Speaker Anthony Rendon’s office repeatedly said they couldn’t give out any information about the Speakers Cup, and referred questions to David Pruitt Consulting. That firm never responded. A local assemblymember’s office said they weren’t allowed to talk about it, saying it was not state-related but campaign-related. His office did say there would be no press conference. That isn’t a surprise.

Capitol Weekly ranked AT&T lobbyist Bill Devine as 16th in its top influential people in Sacramento for 2016.[1] For 2015, he was ranked 12th. [2]

Where does the public rank?

[1] http://capitolweekly.net/capitol-weeklys-top-100/
[2] http://capitolweekly.net/top-100-1-50/

From the Los Angeles Times

AT&T wields enormous power in Sacramento

No other single corporation has spent more trying to influence legislators in recent years. It dispenses millions in political donations and has an army of lobbyists. Bills it opposes are usually defeated.

April 22, 2012
|By Shane Goldmacher and Anthony York, Los Angeles Times

SACRAMENTO — As the sun set behind Monterey Bay on a cool night last year, dozens of the state’s top lawmakers and lobbyists ambled onto the 17th fairway at Pebble Beach for a round of glow-in-the-dark golf.

With luminescent balls soaring into the sky, the annual fundraiser known as the Speaker’s Cup was in full swing.

Lawmakers, labor-union champions and lobbyists gather each year at the storied course to schmooze, show their skill on the links and rejuvenate at a 22,000-square-foot spa. The affair, which typically raises more than $1 million for California Democrats, has been sponsored for more than a decade by telecommunications giant AT&T.

At the 2010 event, AT&T’s president and the state Assembly speaker toured Pebble Beach together in a golf cart, shaking hands with every lawmaker, lobbyist and other VIP in attendance.

The Speaker’s Cup is the centerpiece of a corporate lobbying strategy so comprehensive and successful that it has rewritten the special-interest playbook in Sacramento. When it comes to state government, AT&T spends more money, in more places, than any other company.

Continue reading

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , ,