November 01, 2022 6 min read
As sensitive population groups, children and adolescents have been the focus of research into the potential health risks of radio-frequency electromagnetic field (RF-EMF) exposure from mobile communication devices for more than 20 years. Yet, it is still unknown whether this exposure poses a particular risk to their health.
Most kids today are exposed to different artificial electromagnetic fields (EMFs) under 300 GHz. The growing concern among parents about the negative effects of EMFs on a child's health is due to the vulnerability of a developing child's brain to electromagnetic radiation.
EMF exposure is broken down into two categories: radio frequencies (RFs; 30 kHz to 300 GHz), which include mobile phones, smart gadgets, base stations, WiFi, and 5G technologies; and very low frequencies (ELFs; 3-3,000 Hz), which involve high-voltage transmission lines and in-house wiring. It also has stimulation, thermal, and nonthermal impacts on people; the latter is the least understood.
Human carcinogenicity is the most significant concern among the many health problems connected to EMFs as it was considered potentially carcinogenic to people in the International Agency for Research on Cancer's (IARC) assessment of carcinogenic risks to humans (Group 2B).
This article examines many initiatives made by children's health organizations to combat the negative effects of EMF radiation on children, including those of the Child Defense Fund (CDF) and others.
Founded in 1973 by Marian Wright Edelman, theChildren's Defense Fund (CDF) is an American 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization based in Washington, D.C., that focuses on child advocacy and research. The foundation is a result of the inspiration from the Civil Rights Movement to improve federal policies concerning child welfare and public education systems.
CDF is headquartered in Washington, D.C., and has offices in several states: California, Minnesota, New York, Ohio, Mississippi, South Carolina, Tennessee, and Texas — its programs operate in 28 states.
Children must have secure housing, decent health care, access to a sufficient supply of nutrient-rich food, good schools, safe communities, and access to opportunities and resources that will help them realize their full potential. But the reality is that too many children lack access to these fundamental success factors, and CDF comes to tackle the deficits.
They create and support laws and initiatives that shield kids from harm and neglect, help them escape poverty, and give them access to health care, high-quality education, and a strong moral and spiritual basis. Children are always the priority, thanks to CDF's nationwide advocacy efforts, which are funded by the foundation and corporate funding as well as private donations.
Their policy and advocacy work includes spreading awareness, collecting and analyzing data, publishing reports and research, highlighting promising practices, looking for administrative and legislative improvements, and, perhaps most importantly, putting policies into practice, so they truly benefit the most vulnerable children. Hence, children are protected from harmful wireless communications policies from big corporations that may threaten their health or expose them to a dangerous amount of EMF radiation.
Children's Health Defense, formerly known as the World Mercury Project, is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit American activist organization most known for championing initiatives against Electromagnetic Radiation effects on kids. Robert F. Kennedy Jr. serves as the World Mercury Project's chairman, established in 2011.
The group has been advocating against many public health initiatives, including children's exposure to electromagnetic radiation. According to Children's Health Defense, exposure to various chemicals and radiation has led to a significant number of American children developing disorders like autism, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, food allergies, cancer, and autoimmune diseases.
Children's Health Defense has accused and advocated against a variety of chemicals and radiation, including pesticides, fluoridation of drinking water, paracetamol (acetaminophen), aluminum, wireless technology, and others. It has filed litigation against providers of wireless communications and has won some of these litigations.
Children's Health Defense (CHD) successfully argued that the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) should have reviewed its 1996 health and safety recommendations for wireless-based technologies, including 5G, but did not.They then sued the Federal Communications Commission on February 2, 2020. The US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit received the case. The Administrative Procedures Act (APA), which controls how federal agencies create and disseminate regulations, was used in the lawsuit.
The brief they submitted is a fantastic and succinct exposition of the concerns raised in action.On July 29, 2020, a brief in the lawsuit was submitted — it served as the petitioners' main brief in the proceeding. The evidence in the brief demonstrated that the FCC's 1996 guidelines, which ignored human biology and are based on an out-of-date, false, and disproven scientific assumption promoted by physicists and engineers. The guidelines assumed that non-ionizing radiation at non-thermal levels (levels that do not change tissue temperature) could not have biological and detrimental health effects.
Additionally, the brief referenced hundreds of testimonials from persons who have fallen ill from radiation exposure at levels within the FCC-allowed range, as well as thousands of studies and medical reports, including those produced by U.S. government organizations and providing unambiguous evidence of harm.
Overall, the CHD claimed that the FCC's rules ignored evidence of harmful mechanisms, did not consider actual cell phone use, ignored the biological effects of key components of this technology like pulsation, modulation, and specific frequencies, and did not address the reality of long-term, cumulative effects of exposure to numerous sources of radiation.
The U.S. Federal Drug Administration's (FDA) analysis, which theFCC used to make its conclusion, was likewise not evidence-based, according to the court, and fell short of the standard of analysis needed by a government agency. The FCC's attempt to interpret other agencies' silence as assent was similarly rejected by the court. Their choice reveals the FCC and FDA as captive organizations that have neglected their responsibility to safeguard the public's health in favor of a relentless crusade to boost telecom sector profits.
On October 19, 2021, the Petitioners' Reply Brief—a rebuttal tothe FCC's brief—was submitted. The petitioners drew attention to the fact that the standard-setting bodies on which the FCC decided are biased, business-related entities. Despite their influence, these organizations speak for the minority. The brief presents information demonstrating, for instance, that courts have decided that ICNIRP, on which the FCC relied, is prejudiced and that its suggested policies and scientists are unreliable. The petitioners disputed the FCC's assertion that not much has changed since 1996 and that the evidence is now clear, even though it may have been "controversial" 20 years ago.
The brief further demonstrated the FCC's illegal use of documents, misinterpretation of petitioners' proof, and misrepresentation of other government agencies' perspectives.The evidence was submitted by the petitioners in 11,000 pages. Scientists, medical groups, towns, and people who have been ill as a result of this technology filed over a thousand comments and copious proof of radiation harm much below the recommendations' permissible limits with the FCC. The FCC's inability to reply to them, according to the court, also makes the decision fishy.
On August 13, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit released its ruling. The FCC's determination that its 1996 radiofrequency (RF) emission guidelines adequately protected the public against the negative effects of exposure to radiation from 5G and wireless-based technologies unrelated to cancer was found to be capricious, arbitrary, and not based on evidence by the court, in violation of the Administrative Procedures Act.
The court also found that the FCC's determination was not supported by any evidence (APA). They cited evidence of radiation sickness, neurological consequences, oxidative stress, effects on sperm and prenatal exposure, and blood-brain barrier damage, basing their decision on the petitioner's brief. It stressed how the FCC had ignored evidence of the consequences on children, particularly regarding to cell phone testing practices.
Since well-controlled EMF experiments in children are practically difficult until the potential health effects of EMF are established, it is advised that scientific knowledge be evaluated objectively and that preventative measures be taken for children.
AIRES technology offers EMF-neutralizing devices for parents who want to shield their children from these radiation risks. The gadgets are the result of many years of investigation and study by radiation and medical experts. It is well known that EMF radiation has harmful consequences and that prolonged exposure in crowded areas exacerbates these effects. Therefore, it's important to take precautions to shield yourself from EMF radiation in busy areas.
Using this device from Airestech will protect you from the hundreds of potential adverse effects like cancer, migraine, or tumor you might likely receive, even when complete avoidance of busy locations appears unattainable.
For every member of the family, AIRES technology is available in a variety of forms; additionally, they have made sure that the gadgets are transportable and offer the best protection wherever and whenever they are carried.
Have you ever thought about how your brain works? We use it every day and sometimes take its functionality for grante...
Electromagnetic radiation is all around us - but they’re not all the same! They have different wavelengths and differ...
Summary Points Loopholes in existing EMF radiation safety regulations and the need for new regulations Radiofrequ...