The French Court Decision that Electro-Sensitivity is a Disability is Final

(Enlarge image to read text.)

UPDATE (26 November 2015)  – The French Court Decision that Electro-Sensitivity is a Disability is Final - A few months ago, a French court decided that a French woman, is indeed suffering from Electro-Sensitivity and is allergic to wireless and awarded her monthly disability payments. The French Government decided to appeal the decision, however, the Government did not submit the appeal on time and the Appellate Court therefore decided to on 3 November 2015 to reject the appeal. This means that the decision in Ms. Richard's case is now final and cannot be legally challenged again... A few weeks ago, a mistaken press release was circulating stating that the appellate court reviewed the case and upheld the lower court's decision on its merits. This was a mistake as the appellate court did not review the case at all and rejected the appeal purely because the French Government was late in submitting it's appeal. It is important that we all be aware of the accurate facts so we can reference the case with accuracy in the future, and I waited to get the actual final decision so there would be no confusion. Yesterday I got it and the appellate court final decision is [at right]. (Message from lawyer, Dafna Tachover.)

Gadget 'allergy': French woman wins disability grant
BBC News, 27 August 2015

A French woman has won a disability grant after telling a court she suffers from an allergy to electromagnetic radiation from gadgets.

United States: Case on Health Risk From Cellphones Is Back in Court

Case on Health Risk From Cellphones Is Back in Court

by Ryan Knutson, wsj.com, 22 November 2015

(Image at right): Murray v. Motorola faces another test Tuesday when the two sides argue over what legal standard to use
Motorola is a defendant in a lawsuit that alleges that one of its employees may have suffered from health issues as a result of cellphone use. Other cellphone and wireless companies face similar allegations in more than two dozen such cases. PHOTO: SPENCER PLATT/GETTY IMAGES

Alicia Mitchell was 15 years old when her father sued Motorola Inc., alleging the company’s cellphones caused his brain tumor. She’ll turn 30 in February and the lawsuit is still winding its way through court.

In the years since the lawsuit was filed, other plaintiffs have brought more than two dozen similar cases, the most recent one in October. Defendants include almost all the major cellphone and wireless companies, including AT&T Inc., Verizon Communications Inc., Apple Inc. and Samsung Electronics Co.

Risks, regulations and liability around exposing people and students to wireless technology EMF radiation – Part 2: Presentation by David Andersen

People are not all affected by radiation at the
same rate.

Risks, regulations and liability around exposing people and students to wireless technology EMF radiation – Part 2

David Andersen, partner at HWL Ebsworth Lawyers

Common Law Liability and EMF radiation exposure

David Andersen, partner at HWL Ebsworth Lawyers, who has experience with astbestos cases then spoke about Causation at Common Law. He commented that there are parallels between the asbestos litigation which has brought on difficult questions about scientific proof, causation, foreseeability, reasonable response to risk, and that these questions could arise in the context of radiation related legal battles also.

Risks, regulations and liability around exposing people and students to wireless technology EMF radiation – Part 2: Presentation by Jenne Tzavaras

Risks, regulations and liability around exposing other people to wireless technology EMF radiation – A review of the UNSW Sydney ‘faculty of law’ program – part 2

The world is changing at a rapid pace. Not surprisingly then, there has been a rampant proliferation of home and business cordless transmission technology (e.g. mobile phone towers, smart meters, wi-fi cordless phones) that has vastly increased our exposure to radiation. Recent legal developments are causing the producers of this radiation overload to sit up and take notice, as the issue of costly liability and lawsuits is fast becoming a reality.

The law: When is an employer or school liable for the health effects imposed on others from their wireless technology?

Jenne Tzavaras, Partner, HWL Ebsworth Lawyers and David Andersen, Partner, HWL Ebsworth Lawyers

After the undeniable facts presented by the medical experts (part 1), Jenne Tzavaras, partner at HWL Ebsworth Lawyers, took the audience through liability considerations. Stressing that a clear distinction must be drawn between Common Law negligence claims and statutory Workers Compensation claims. The important distinguishing feature here is the required causal nexus.

Risks, regulations and liability around exposing other people to wireless technology EMF radiation – Part 1: Presentation by Dr. Priyanka Bandara

Cancer cells associated to
RF-EMR exposure

Risks, regulations and liability around exposing other people to wireless technology EMF radiation – Part 1

Dr Priyanka Bandara – Health researcher/educator, former academic clinical researcher/molecular biologist, Advisor to Environmental Health Trust USA and Doctors for safer Schools

Biological and Health Effects of EMR with a summary of some key findings

Dr Priyanka Bandara spoke about the biological effects of ‘low-level’ microwaves. She commented that the Russians were the pioneers when it comes to documenting the biological effects of this type of radiation. When considering the bioeffect we must realise that we ourselves are bioelectrical beings in which the cells have delicate electrical functions. Also the brain has much electrical activity, so it is logical to expect that the exposure to electricity or radiation from outside sources can have an effect on these. Our cells have to do 1000s of chemical reactions and it is evident that these processes are affected by EMR.

Risks, regulations and liability around exposing other people to wireless technology EMF radiation – Part 1: Presentation by Dr. Mary Redmayne

Risks, regulations and liability around exposing other people to wireless technology EMF radiation – Part 1

Dr Mary Redmayne – Post-Doctoral Research Fellow, Centre for Population Health Research on Electromagnetic Energy, Monash University

Radio frequency radiation exposure of children and workers

Use of, and the EMF radiation exposure of wireless devices has increased dramatically over recent years.

Dr Mary Redmayne, addressed those gathered about children’s and workers’ exposure to radio frequency radiation (RF), in particular the international approaches to policy and advise. She identified that there are personal devices that emit the high frequency radiation over which we have a great deal of control but often are not aware that these devices are potentially harmful to ourselves and our children. In addition there are the device in our environment that the individual does not have control over and are effectively pushed upon us by others. It was noted that in recent years the use of wireless devices had significantly increased, especially amongst younger people, and that Wi-Fi and BYOD (Bring your own device) are now very common in schools.

America's New Normal: Chronically Ill Kids

"Over half of US children now suffer from a chronic condition, disability, or disease. Americans spend the least on food, the most on health care, have the most highly vaccinated kids, and have the sickest kids of any industrialized country. More kids than not are now chronically ill, developmentally delayed, and eating or injecting prescription medications from cradle to grave – which is going to be a quicker trip for them than it was for their parents..."

America's New Normal: Chronically Ill Kids
by Judy Converse, MPH RD LD, fearlessparent.org, 10 November 2015

When it comes to this topic of chronically ill kids, do you have moments that pierce the bubble of consciousness and take your breath away?

I was waiting to board an early flight to Denver recently, sipping a bracing hot cup of black tea, when I witnessed a scene that would’ve stopped parents from 1975 in their tracks.

WiFi in the Sky - Convenient and In-demand - Is It Safe?

On Wi-Fi-enabled aircraft, what are the levels of microwave
radiation; do these impact pilot performance and human
health?  And are there security issues?

Following is an extract from the document, "Wi-Fi in the Sky".  Click here for the full document.

Wi-Fi in the Sky

WiFi in the Sky - Convenient and In-demand - Is It Safe? Includes Sample Inflight Symptom SurveyRadio-frequency (RF)/Wireless Microwave Radiation Exposure from Inflight Mobile Devices and WiFi Connectivity

Is this technology a new security, safety or health risk? Who is monitoring this for potential adverse effects: pilots or passengers fainting, or suffering cardiac arrest mid-flight?

What are the insurance, liability and regulatory implications?

This Statement of Concern from pilots and medical, scientific, risk management and technical experts was submitted by Kerry Crofton, "As a consultant, I worked for many years with pilots and air traffic controllers in Canada and the US. They are highly skilled professionals. The safety and wellbeing of their crew and passengers are paramount for pilots and flight attendants. No question. We urge you to hear our concerns about this potential new risk factor and call for a review and monitoring." . . . .

Book Review: "No Family History" by Sabrina McCormick

Re-posted on 1st November 2015:  The book discusses the environmental links to breast cancer, with a personal testimony from a resident of Long Island, New York State, which has the second highest breast cancer rate in the United States.  The book is also an excellent resource for advocacy.

[For years, I have been living my life between Long Island and Geneva, Switzerland, which also has a very high rate of breast cancer.  I was treated for breast cancer in 2004.  The latest statistics from Switzerland are alarming:  one in 10 women diagnosed with breast cancer is under age 40.  The prognosis is less favorable for young women.]

“NO FAMILY HISTORY” by Sabrina McCormick (2009) (www.nofamilyhistory.org).

The author discusses the environmental links to breast cancer, focusing on Long Island in New York State, which has the second highest breast cancer rate in the United States after Marin County in California. She says we must rethink advocacy which is currently concerned with detection, treatment, research and support groups. Associations advocate better treatment options for women and raise more awareness about the disease. In fact, these actions generate more profits for the pharmaceutical and medical equipment industries instead of focusing on prevention.

For instance, AstraZeneca, a producer of drugs for chemo and hormonal therapies, created the National Cancer Awareness Month. As is often the case with these corporations, there is a conflict of interest, since on the one hand, they are helping to raise money for research through organizing “pink” events to generate awareness of breast cancer, while on the other, polluting the environment with very toxic chemicals which cause cancer. AstraZeneca, formerly the Imperial Chemical Industries, used to manufacture personal care products and food ingredients which have been found to be harmful to health.

Lower Doses of Common Product Ingredient Might Increase Breast Cancer Risk

(Image selected by the Editor of "Towards Better Health")

Lower doses of common product ingredient might increase breast cancer risk
Silent Spring Institute, Public Release:  

27 October 2015

Safety tests may be underestimating chemicals' potency

Estrogen-mimicking chemicals called parabens, which are commonly found in an array of personal care products, may be more dangerous at lower doses than previously thought, according to a new study. The findings, published online October 27 in Environmental Health Perspectives, could have implications for the development of breast cancer and other diseases that are influenced by estrogens. The study also raises questions about current safety testing methods that may not predict the true potency of parabens and their effects on human health.

Parabens are a class of preservatives widely-used in consumer products like shampoos, cosmetics, body lotions, and sunscreens. The chemicals are considered estrogenic because they activate the same estrogen receptor as the natural hormone estradiol. Studies have linked exposure to estradiol and related estrogens with an increased risk of breast cancer, as well as reproductive problems. As a result, the use of parabens in consumer products increasingly has become a public health concern.