In Historic Decision, Federal Court Orders FCC to Explain Why It Ignored Scientific Evidence Showing Harm from Wireless Radiation 

 
 Today, the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit ruled in the historic case EHT et al. v. the FCC that the December 2019 decision by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to retain its 1996 safety limits for human exposure to wireless radiation was “arbitrary and capricious.”  

The court held that the FCC failed to respond to “record evidence that exposure to RF radiation at levels below the Commission’s current limits may cause negative health effects unrelated to cancer.” Further, the agency demonstrated “a complete failure to respond to comments concerning environmental harm caused by RF radiation.” The court found the FCC ignored numerous organizations, scientists  and medical doctors who called on them to update limits and the court found the FCC failed to address these issues:

• impacts of long term wireless exposure
• impacts to children, 
• the testimony of people injured by wireless radiation, 
• impacts to wildlife and the environment 
• impacts to the developing brain and reproduction.
  

The court further noted that the FCC failed to respond to approximately 200 comments on the record by people who experienced illness or injury from electromagnetic radiation sickness. 

The court ordered the commission to:

(i) provide a reasoned explanation for its decision to retain its testing procedures for determining whether cell phones and other portable electronic devices comply with its guidelines,

(ii) address the impacts of RF radiation on children, the health implications of long-term exposure to RF radiation, the ubiquity of wireless devices, and other technological developments that have occurred since the Commission last updated its guidelines, and

(iii) address the impacts of RF radiation on the environment.”

The landmark case centers around the FCC’s decision not to update its 1996 exposure limits for wireless radiation from cell phones, cell towers, and wireless devices. Environmental Health Trust experts have long argued that the FCC’s outdated limits place Americans everywhere at risk, especially in the era of 5G.  

In response to the court’s historic ruling, Environmental Health Trust and petitioners released the additional following statements:

Devra Davis PhD, MPH, President Environmental Health Trust:

“If cell phones were a drug they would have been banned years ago. 5G would never have been allowed to market. An ever mounting body of published studies — ignored by the FCC — clearly indicates that exposure to wireless radiation can lead to numerous health effects, especially for children. Research indicates wireless radiation increases cancer risk, damages memory, alters brain development, impacts reproductive health, and much more. Furthermore, the way the FCC measures our daily exposure to cell phone and cell tower radiation is fatally flawed and provides a false sense of security.” 

“Environmental Health Trust submitted hundreds of pages of scientific evidence to the FCC over the last several years documenting the scientific data showing harm, the need for health agencies to create safety limits that protect against biological effects, and the urgency for infrastructure policy that prioritizes wired rather wireless communications to reduce public exposure. While there is a lot of work left to do, today’s ruling is an important step in protecting people against the harms caused by wireless radiation exposure. Unfortunately, the telecom industry is now pushing millions of new 5G wireless antennas into neighborhoods and billions of new wireless devices, putting more in harm’s way everyday. 

“While we celebrate today’s victory, we must look forward. Where do we go from here? We need a congressional hearing into how this agency operated above the law to ensure it never happens again. Committing to 5G merely ensures commercial success in selling new devices and cannot bridge the digital divide where many disadvantaged groups lack access to basic technologies. As we detail in EHT’s letter to President Biden, the priority for infrastructure should be for wired rather than wireless internet connections. The U.S. needs a federal action plan on the issue of wireless radiation that should be informed by the latest science showing that current levels of radiation can damage human health and the environment.”



Meer informatie over deze rechtszaak:
https://ehtrust.org/in-historic-decision-federal-court-finds-fcc-failed-to-explain-why-it-ignored-scientific-evidence-showing-harm-from-wireless-radiation/